ILNews

Lawyers support motorcycle ride for charity

Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Indianapolis attorneys and a law firm are among the sponsors and participants in a scenic motorcycle ride Saturday to benefit the children of Christel House, based in Indianapolis with locations around the world.

The Braking the Cycle Ride, 105 miles from Indianapolis to Nashville and back, is open to all riders. It starts with a registration and breakfast at 9 a.m. at the Christel House Academy, 2717 S. East St., Indianapolis. Registrations are accepted the morning of the event, but organizers encourage riders to pre-register by calling (317) 464-2030. The ride will start at 10 a.m., and is expected to end back in Indianapolis around noon with a lunch for participants.

The title sponsor is Hensley Legal Group. Sponsor 317 Ryders Motorcycle Club, including its vice president, Indianapolis attorney Jimmie “Tic Tac” McMillian, and his wife Tamara McMillian, also an attorney, will be there and have asked the legal community to support and participate in the ride. Last year’s event raised $10,000.

Funds raised by the ride – $25 per rider and $40 per rider and passenger, which includes a t-shirt, breakfast, and lunch – will help Christel House Academy break the cycle of poverty while giving its students a chance to be self-sustaining, productive members of society.

“Worldwide, over 3,000 children, 279 graduates, 1,500 parents and countless community members are benefiting from Christel House Programs,” according to the organization’s website. In addition to the Indianapolis charter school, Christel House has programs in India, Mexico, South Africa, Venezuela, and Serbia.

More information about the ride is on the website, www.brakingthecycleride.org. The brochure can be found here.

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Indiana's seatbelt law is not punishable as a crime. It is an infraction. Apparently some of our Circuit judges have deemed settled law inapplicable if it fails to fit their litmus test of political correctness. Extrapolating to redefine terms of behavior in a violation of immigration law to the entire body of criminal law leaves a smorgasbord of opportunity for judicial mischief.

  2. I wonder if $10 diversions for failure to wear seat belts are considered moral turpitude in federal immigration law like they are under Indiana law? Anyone know?

  3. What a fine article, thank you! I can testify firsthand and by detailed legal reports (at end of this note) as to the dire consequences of rejecting this truth from the fine article above: "The inclusion and expansion of this right [to jury] in Indiana’s Constitution is a clear reflection of our state’s intention to emphasize the importance of every Hoosier’s right to make their case in front of a jury of their peers." Over $20? Every Hoosier? Well then how about when your very vocation is on the line? How about instead of a jury of peers, one faces a bevy of political appointees, mini-czars, who care less about due process of the law than the real czars did? Instead of trial by jury, trial by ideological ordeal run by Orwellian agents? Well that is built into more than a few administrative law committees of the Ind S.Ct., and it is now being weaponized, as is revealed in articles posted at this ezine, to root out post moderns heresies like refusal to stand and pledge allegiance to all things politically correct. My career was burned at the stake for not so saluting, but I think I was just one of the early logs. Due, at least in part, to the removal of the jury from bar admission and bar discipline cases, many more fires will soon be lit. Perhaps one awaits you, dear heretic? Oh, at that Ind. article 12 plank about a remedy at law for every damage done ... ah, well, the founders evidently meant only for those damages done not by the government itself, rabid statists that they were. (Yes, that was sarcasm.) My written reports available here: Denied petition for cert (this time around): http://tinyurl.com/zdmawmw Denied petition for cert (from the 2009 denial and five year banishment): http://tinyurl.com/zcypybh Related, not written by me: Amicus brief: http://tinyurl.com/hvh7qgp

  4. Justice has finally been served. So glad that Dr. Ley can finally sleep peacefully at night knowing the truth has finally come to the surface.

  5. While this right is guaranteed by our Constitution, it has in recent years been hampered by insurance companies, i.e.; the practice of the plaintiff's own insurance company intervening in an action and filing a lien against any proceeds paid to their insured. In essence, causing an additional financial hurdle for a plaintiff to overcome at trial in terms of overall award. In a very real sense an injured party in exercise of their right to trial by jury may be the only party in a cause that would end up with zero compensation.

ADVERTISEMENT