On The Move

On The Move - 10/23/13

October 23, 2013
IL Staff
See who's joined Indiana firms, been appointed to bar leadership positions, or recognized for their legal work.
More

On The Move 9/11/13

September 11, 2013
IL Staff
Read about attorneys who has recently joined Indiana firms, started new firms, received promotions or awards, and recent law firm recognitions.
More

On The Move 8/28/13

August 28, 2013
Read about attorneys who has recently joined Indiana firms, started new firms, received promotions or awards, and recent law firm recognitions.
More

On the Move - 8/14/2013

August 14, 2013
See who has recently joined Indiana firms, started new firms or reviewed promotions or awards, and recent law firm recognitions.
More

On the Move - 7/31/13

July 31, 2013
IBJ Staff
See who's recently joined Indiana firms or started new firms.
More

On the Move - 7/17/13

July 17, 2013
IL Staff
See who's recently joined Indiana firms or started new firms.
More

On the Move - 7/3/13

July 3, 2013
IL Staff
See what lawyers have joined new firms, been honored or relocated.
More

On the Move - 6/19/13

June 19, 2013
IL Staff
Learn what firms Indiana attorneys have joined and what new firms have started.
More

On The Move - 6/5/13

June 5, 2013
IL Staff
See who's recently joined Indiana firms and which Chicago-based firm is opening an office in Indianapolis.
More

On The Move - 5/22/13

May 22, 2013
IL Staff
See who's recently joined Indiana firms or been honored for their work.
More

On The Move - 5/8/13

May 8, 2013
IL Staff
Read about who's recently been honored, appointed to a board or joined an Indiana firm.
More

On The Move -4/24/13

April 24, 2013
IL Staff
Read about what awards Indiana Lawyers have recently received.
More

On The Move - 4/10/13

April 10, 2013
See who's recently joined Indiana firms, made partner or opened a new office.
More

On The Move - 3/27/13

March 27, 2013
IL Staff
Read who's joined Indiana law firms, made partner or received an award.
More

On The Move - 3/13/13

March 13, 2013
IL Staff
Read about recent employment moves and appointments of Indiana attorneys.
More

On The Move - 2/27/13

February 27, 2013
IL Staff
See who's joined Indiana firms, received promotions or opened a new law office.
More

On the Move - 2/13/13

February 13, 2013
IL Staff
Read who's joined Indiana firms and who's been promoted recently.
More

On the Move - 1/30/13

January 30, 2013
IL Staff
See who's joined Indiana firms, made partner or honored recently.
More

On the Move - 1/16/13

January 16, 2013
IL Staff
Read what attorneys have joined Indiana firms, become partner, or recently been honored.
More

ON THE MOVE - 1/2/13

January 2, 2013
Read who's joined Indiana law firms and been elected or honored recently.
More

On the Move - 12/7/12

December 5, 2012
IL Staff
Read who's joined Indiana firms, been appointed to boards and received awards.
More

On the Move - 11/9/12

November 7, 2012
IL Staff
Read who's been honored, elected, or joined a new firm.
More

On The Move- 10/12/12

October 10, 2012
See who's joined Indiana firms, won awards, or been elected officers.
More

On the Move - 9/14/12

September 12, 2012
IL Staff
Read about attorneys who have recently joined Indiana firms, been promoted or won awards.
More

On the Move - 8/3/12 - 8/16/12

August 1, 2012
IL Staff
See who's joined Indiana firms, been promoted, or received an award.
More
Page  << 1 2 3 4 >> pager
Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Actually, and most strikingly, the ruling failed to address the central issue to the whole case: Namely, Black Knight/LPS, who was NEVER a party to the State court litigation, and who is under a 2013 consent judgment in Indiana (where it has stipulated to the forgery of loan documents, the ones specifically at issue in my case)never disclosed itself in State court or remediated the forged loan documents as was REQUIRED of them by the CJ. In essence, what the court is willfully ignoring, is that it is setting a precedent that the supplier of a defective product, one whom is under a consent judgment stipulating to such, and under obligation to remediate said defective product, can: 1.) Ignore the CJ 2.) Allow counsel to commit fraud on the state court 3.) Then try to hide behind Rooker Feldman doctrine as a bar to being held culpable in federal court. The problem here is the court is in direct conflict with its own ruling(s) in Johnson v. Pushpin Holdings & Iqbal- 780 F.3d 728, at 730 “What Johnson adds - what the defendants in this suit have failed to appreciate—is that federal courts retain jurisdiction to award damages for fraud that imposes extrajudicial injury. The Supreme Court drew that very line in Exxon Mobil ... Iqbal alleges that the defendants conducted a racketeering enterprise that predates the state court’s judgments ...but Exxon Mobil shows that the Rooker Feldman doctrine asks what injury the plaintiff asks the federal court to redress, not whether the injury is “intertwined” with something else …Because Iqbal seeks damages for activity that (he alleges) predates the state litigation and caused injury independently of it, the Rooker-Feldman doctrine does not block this suit. It must be reinstated.” So, as I already noted to others, I now have the chance to bring my case to SCOTUS; the ruling by Wood & Posner is flawed on numerous levels,BUT most troubling is the fact that the authors KNOW it's a flawed ruling and choose to ignore the flaws for one simple reason: The courts have decided to agree with former AG Eric Holder that national banks "Are too big to fail" and must win at any cost-even that of due process, case precedent, & the truth....Let's see if SCOTUS wants a bite at the apple.

  2. I am in NJ & just found out that there is a judgment against me in an action by Driver's Solutions LLC in IN. I was never served with any Court pleadings, etc. and the only thing that I can find out is that they were using an old Staten Island NY address for me. I have been in NJ for over 20 years and cannot get any response from Drivers Solutions in IN. They have a different lawyer now. I need to get this vacated or stopped - it is now almost double & at 18%. Any help would be appreciated. Thank you.

  3. I am in NJ & just found out that there is a judgment against me in an action by Driver's Solutions LLC in IN. I was never served with any Court pleadings, etc. and the only thing that I can find out is that they were using an old Staten Island NY address for me. I have been in NJ for over 20 years and cannot get any response from Drivers Solutions in IN. They have a different lawyer now. I need to get this vacated or stopped - it is now almost double & at 18%. Any help would be appreciated. Thank you.

  4. Please I need help with my class action lawsuits, im currently in pro-se and im having hard time findiNG A LAWYER TO ASSIST ME

  5. Access to the court (judiciary branch of government) is the REAL problem, NOT necessarily lack of access to an attorney. Unfortunately, I've lived in a legal and financial hell for the past six years due to a divorce (where I was, supposedly, represented by an attorney) in which I was defrauded of settlement and the other party (and helpers) enriched through the fraud. When I attempted to introduce evidence and testify (pro se) in a foreclosure/eviction, I was silenced (apparently on procedural grounds, as research I've done since indicates). I was thrown out of a residence which was to be sold, by a judge who refused to allow me to speak in (the supposedly "informal") small claims court where the eviction proceeding (by ex-brother-in-law) was held. Six years and I can't even get back on solid or stable ground ... having bank account seized twice, unlawfully ... and now, for the past year, being dragged into court - again, contrary to law and appellate decisions - by former attorney, who is trying to force payment from exempt funds. Friday will mark fifth appearance. Hopefully, I'll be allowed to speak. The situation I find myself in shouldn't even be possible, much less dragging out with no end in sight, for years. I've done nothing wrong, but am watching a lot of wrong being accomplished under court jurisdiction; only because I was married to someone who wanted and was granted a divorce (but was not willing to assume the responsibilities that come with granting the divorce). In fact, the recalcitrant party was enriched by well over $100k, although it was necessarily split with other actors. Pro bono help? It's a nice dream ... but that's all it is, for too many. Meanwhile, injustice marches on.

ADVERTISEMENT