ILNews

Leadership in Law 2013: Ronald E. Elberger

Partner, Bose McKinney & Evans LLP, Indianapolis American University Law School

Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

 

ron-elberger02-15col.jpg (IL Photo/ Perry Reichanadter)

Ronald E. Elberger is one of the engines that drives his firm’s litigation, entertainment and sports, and professional responsibility practice areas. Over the years, he has served as attorney for David Letterman, as vice president and general counsel of Emmis Broadcasting Corp., and as counsel for many local television news employees.

His office houses several works of art dedicated to his children Seth and Becca, whose ongoing support, along with that of his wife, he credits as the force that got him where he is today. Ron is very active in the community, including the Indiana School for the Blind and Visually Impaired. He was instrumental in the building of several facilities on the school’s campus, including two independent living houses for older students.

What advice would you give your 25-year-old self?
Have fun but work hard and diligently while adhering to the highest standards of honesty and integrity.

You often represent famous people. What famous person would you most like to meet?
“John Doe,” as being “famous” does not create any desire to meet with someone merely because he or she bears the label.

If you could pick a theme song to describe your life, what would it be?
The theme from “Rocky.”

If you could take a sabbatical from the law for a year to work your fantasy job, what job would you choose?
I thought I have been on such a sabbatical for many years.

What civic cause is the most important to you?
The one that is then unmet. We establish funds and encourage support for specific causes to address issues and problems that have been overlooked.

If you could have one superpower, what would it be?
Healing others.

In life or law, what bugs you?
A liar.

What class in law school did you find the most difficult?
Tax. Need I say more?

If you could meet and spend a day with one lawyer from history, who would it be and why?
Abe Fortas, former associate justice of SCOTUS, to continue our numerous and varied discussions about the law and our society from which I learned much.

If a drink or sandwich were to be named after you, what would it be called and what would be in it?
I don’t know, but if such existed, it should be at the Carnegie Deli on 7th Avenue by 54th Street in NYC.

Numerous TV shows center around lawyers and their practices. Are any of them close to realistic?
I tend to avoid the circus of such programming as I don’t believe the shows depict reality but, rather, a fanciful writer’s embellishment geared toward generating ratings and revenue.

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Just an aside, but regardless of the outcome, I 'm proud of Judge William Hughes. He was the original magistrate on the Home place issue. He ruled for Home Place, and was primaried by Brainard for it. Their tool Poindexter failed to unseat Hughes, who won support for his honesty and courage throughout the county, and he was reelected Judge of Hamilton County's Superior Court. You can still stand for something and survive. Thanks, Judge Hughes!

  2. CCHP's real accomplishment is the 2015 law signed by Gov Pence that basically outlaws any annexation that is forced where a 65% majority of landowners in the affected area disagree. Regardless of whether HP wins or loses, the citizens of Indiana will not have another fiasco like this. The law Gov Pence signed is a direct result of this malgovernance.

  3. I gave tempparry guardship to a friend of my granddaughter in 2012. I went to prison. I had custody. My daughter went to prison to. We are out. My daughter gave me custody but can get her back. She was not order to give me custody . but now we want granddaughter back from friend. She's 14 now. What rights do we have

  4. This sure is not what most who value good governance consider the Rule of Law to entail: "In a letter dated March 2, which Brizzi forwarded to IBJ, the commission dismissed the grievance “on grounds that there is not reasonable cause to believe that you are guilty of misconduct.”" Yet two month later reasonable cause does exist? (Or is the commission forging ahead, the need for reasonable belief be damned? -- A seeming violation of the Rules of Profession Ethics on the part of the commission) Could the rule of law theory cause one to believe that an explanation is in order? Could it be that Hoosier attorneys live under Imperial Law (which is also a t-word that rhymes with infamy) in which the Platonic guardians can do no wrong and never owe the plebeian class any explanation for their powerful actions. (Might makes it right?) Could this be a case of politics directing the commission, as celebrated IU Mauer Professor (the late) Patrick Baude warned was happening 20 years ago in his controversial (whisteblowing) ethics lecture on a quite similar topic: http://www.repository.law.indiana.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1498&context=ilj

  5. I have a case presently pending cert review before the SCOTUS that reveals just how Indiana regulates the bar. I have been denied licensure for life for holding the wrong views and questioning the grand inquisitors as to their duties as to state and federal constitutional due process. True story: https://www.scribd.com/doc/299040839/2016Petitionforcert-to-SCOTUS Shorter, Amici brief serving to frame issue as misuse of govt licensure: https://www.scribd.com/doc/312841269/Thomas-More-Society-Amicus-Brown-v-Ind-Bd-of-Law-Examiners

ADVERTISEMENT