ILNews

IndyBar: Straight Talk Straight from the Top

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Members of the current IndyBar Board of Directors discuss their roles, responsibilities and also offer advice to those considering serving on the board in 2015. Today’s edition features Magistrate Jason Reyome of Marion Superior Court and Thomas Barnard of Taft Stettinius & Hollister LLP, who both serve as At-Large board members.

Here’s what they had to say about their position on the board and what others considering nomination should expect.

“Wallflowers need not apply”

Magistrate Jason Reyome, Marion Superior Court

Board position: At-Large Member

Board member: 5 years

IndyBar member: 17 years

What does an At-Large member do?
 

reyome-jason-iba.jpg Reyome

I attend monthly board meetings, meetings of the members and I also try to attend as many section events as I can. As Board Liaison to the Criminal Justice Section and the ADR Section, I offer a direct line of communication to the board for the sections I serve. Generally, I work to further the IndyBar mission: to serve our members, promote justice and enhance the legal profession.

Describe the board in a few words: Extremely organized, efficient and effective.

What piece of advice would you give to those considering joining the board?

I would share a modified version of the advice I was given when first asked to serve: Wallflowers need not apply. The current board members are active and engaged. Service on the board can be a lot of work, but it is well worth it. IndyBar staff and our executive director are fantastic. Let them help you. If you have questions, ask. If you have ideas, develop and share them.

Why should someone want to be on the board?

The applicants selected will have the opportunity to collaborate and develop lifelong friendships with some of the most interesting and talented people in the Indianapolis legal community.



“Go for it!”
Thomas Barnard, Partner at Taft Stettinius & Hollister LLP

Board position: At-Large Member

Board member: Two years

IndyBar member: 34 years

What does an At-Large member do?


barnard-thomas-iba.jpg Barnard

Prepare for, attend and participate in monthly board meetings, as well as respond to interim issues involving board consideration (such as potential amicus briefs and legislative proposals).

What will you miss most about being on the board?

Witnessing and being a part of the collective intelligence and wisdom of the IndyBar staff and board members. All of us, as members of IndyBar and the Indiana Bar in general, should be proud of the diligence, sincerity and creative tenacity of this board. Without exception, I have departed each board meeting feeling enriched, having heard some of Indiana’s most respected judges, attorneys and executive staff share ideas and insights. I have been particularly impressed with the leadership and inclusiveness of the board, where difficult issues facing the legal profession, bar organizations and the general public are addressed with the benefit of experience, intelligence and compassion. Every board member’s viewpoint is respected and valued, and this culture encourages

iba-board-sidebar082714.jpg

 productive discussion. In addition, board members are constantly invited to think outside the box and consider cutting edge technologies, embrace new perspectives on service delivery and strive for new and increasing value for IndyBar members.

What piece of advice would you give to those considering joining the board?

Go for it! The board contains a unique combination of history, innovation and stability. You will value your time on the board, and the board will value your time.

Why should someone want to be on the board?

Where else can you witness a nationally renowned executive staff assist some of our state’s leading judges and attorneys discuss and take positions on some of the most pressing issues affecting our beloved profession? If you want to make a positive difference in your own practice while also enriching the lives of fellow attorneys, there is no better place to start.

Any other info you’d like to share about Board of Directors?

I am very fortunate to have fostered and deepened friendships through my board experience.•

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. The practitioners and judges who hail E-filing as the Saviour of the West need to contain their respective excitements. E-filing is federal court requires the practitioner to cram his motion practice into pigeonholes created by IT people. Compound motions or those seeking alternative relief are effectively barred, unless the practitioner wants to receive a tart note from some functionary admonishing about the "problem". E-filing is just another method by which courts and judges transfer their burden to practitioners, who are the really the only powerless components of the system. Of COURSE it is easier for the court to require all of its imput to conform to certain formats, but this imposition does NOT improve the quality of the practice of law and does NOT improve the ability of the practitioner to advocate for his client or to fashion pleadings that exactly conform to his client's best interests. And we should be very wary of the disingenuous pablum about the costs. The courts will find a way to stick it to the practitioner. Lake County is a VERY good example of this rapaciousness. Any one who does not believe this is invited to review the various special fees that system imposes upon practitioners- as practitioners- and upon each case ON TOP of the court costs normal in every case manually filed. Jurisprudence according to Aldous Huxley.

  2. Any attorneys who practice in federal court should be able to say the same as I can ... efiling is great. I have been doing it in fed court since it started way back. Pacer has its drawbacks, but the ability to hit an e-docket and pull up anything and everything onscreen is a huge plus for a litigator, eps the sole practitioner, who lacks a filing clerk and the paralegal support of large firms. Were I an Indiana attorney I would welcome this great step forward.

  3. Can we get full disclosure on lobbyist's payments to legislatures such as Mr Buck? AS long as there are idiots that are disrespectful of neighbors and intent on shooting fireworks every night, some kind of regulations are needed.

  4. I am the mother of the child in this case. My silence on the matter was due to the fact that I filed, both in Illinois and Indiana, child support cases. I even filed supporting documentation with the Indiana family law court. Not sure whether this information was provided to the court of appeals or not. Wish the case was done before moving to Indiana, because no matter what, there is NO WAY the state of Illinois would have allowed an appeal on a child support case!

  5. "No one is safe when the Legislature is in session."

ADVERTISEMENT