ILNews

Leadership in Law 2012: Andrew L. Campbell

Associate, Faegre Baker Daniels, Indianapolis Indiana University Robert H. McKinney School of Law

April 25, 2012
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share
Andrew Campbell (IL Photo/ Perry Reichanadter)

Andrew Campbell is an accomplished litigator in product liability and commercial matters, but his contributions extend beyond his litigation skills and work ethic. He has led and advanced pro bono services in Indianapolis and has been recognized for his commitment to serving those in need.

In 2012, I’d like to
continue to build a more independent practice.

The best advice I could give a recent law school graduate is
be imaginative about your employment prospects, the legal field is very broad.

My long-term career goal is
to be constantly challenged.

If I weren’t an attorney, I’d be
a (very) starving musician.

My escape from work is
my wife and best friend, Emily.

The three words that best describe me are
organized, responsive and committed.

My mentor has taught me
look for creative solutions; cooperation and compromise often lead to better solutions for your clients.

In the movie about my life,
Judge Reinhold – because he is my doppelganger, and I’m a bit of a close talker – would play me.
 

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsored by

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Indiana State Bar Association

Indianapolis Bar Association

Evansville Bar Association

Allen County Bar Association

Indiana Lawyer on Facebook

facebook
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. I need an experienced attorney to handle a breach of contract matter. Kindly respond for more details. Graham Young

  2. I thought the slurs were the least grave aspects of her misconduct, since they had nothing to do with her being on the bench. Why then do I suspect they were the focus? I find this a troubling trend. At least she was allowed to keep her law license.

  3. Section 6 of Article I of the Indiana Constitution is pretty clear and unequivocal: "Section 6. No money shall be drawn from the treasury for the benefit of any religious or theological institution."

  4. Video pen? Nice work, "JW"! Let this be a lesson and a caution to all disgruntled ex-spouses (or soon-to-be ex-spouses) . . . you may think that altercation is going to get you some satisfaction . . . it will not.

  5. First comment on this thread is a fitting final comment on this thread, as that the MCBA never answered Duncan's fine question, and now even Eric Holder agrees that the MCBA was in material error as to the facts: "I don't get it" from Duncan December 1, 2014 5:10 PM "The Grand Jury met for 25 days and heard 70 hours of testimony according to this article and they made a decision that no crime occurred. On what basis does the MCBA conclude that their decision was "unjust"? What special knowledge or evidence does the MCBA have that the Grand Jury hearing this matter was unaware of? The system that we as lawyers are sworn to uphold made a decision that there was insufficient proof that officer committed a crime. How can any of us say we know better what was right than the jury that actually heard all of the the evidence in this case."

ADVERTISEMENT