ILNews

Leadership in Law 2014: Carly A. Brandenburg

Income partner, Eichhorn & Eichhorn LLP, Hammond • Indiana University Maurer School of Law, 2007

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

 

15col-Brandenburg.jpg Carly A. Brandenburg (Photo/ Pete Doherty, Doherty Images LLC)

Because of her poise and easy nature, clients and other attorneys are quick to place their trust in Carly Brandenburg, whose practice areas include medical and legal malpractice defense. Licensed in Indiana and Illinois, Carly has gained substantial trial experience during her seven years in the law and has participated in numerous arbitration and mediation proceedings in both states. She is an advocate and willing adviser to young associates at the firm. Carly has led Eichhorn & Eichhorn’s food drive for the last two years as part of the March Against Hunger campaign, is a valued Junior Achievement volunteer, and has provided pro bono work for a local animal rescue group.

Why practice in the area of law that you do?

In law school I gravitated toward litigation and trial practice following wonderful experiences I had with the deputy prosecutor in Owen County, Bob Andree. Now that I’m practicing civil litigation, I don’t think I could get as excited about other work. I love the rush that comes from presenting arguments at a hearing or conducting voir dire to select a jury. I’ve been fortunate enough to get to try six jury trials and many bench and small claims trials, and I can’t imagine that it could ever get old.

What’s something about you not many people know?

I have been snow skiing since I was about 2 years old. This past winter my 2-year-old daughter, Fiona, skied for the first time on the very same set of skis! Thirty years later, and they were still perfect!

What was the worst or most memorable job you had prior to becoming an attorney?

My best job ever – perhaps not just prior to becoming a lawyer – was when I worked on air and behind the scenes at the “Good Morning Vail” television show in Vail, Colo. Though I was working for college credit at DePauw rather than for pay, my volunteer status earned me the right to ski for free. I must have skied my weight in gold.

What is the most important lesson you learned from your mentor?

Listen more than you speak, particularly with your clients. They are experts in their fields and areas of business. You can miss important details if you’re more focused on demonstrating your own acumen than you are about hearing and understanding someone else’s problems.

You’re licensed in Indiana and Illinois. Is there much of a difference between the tests?

While the tests are basically the same, the practice is very different. Having the chance to split my practice between the two states gives me better perspective and has definitely made me a better lawyer.

What civic cause is the most important to you?

My husband and I mentor a 14-year-old boy. We’ve known him since he was 9 and are proud of the young man he’s becoming. I would recommend mentorship programs or other organizations that can have a big impact for children, like Junior Achievement, to anyone interested. I’m also a big fan of the South Shore Arts Center in my community, Munster, as well. It brings so many great opportunities for theater, art, and music for people in Northwest Indiana.

You’re going to teach a course to a group of second graders though your work with Junior Achievement. Which is more intimidating: entering a courtroom before a trial or a classroom full of kids?

My experience with the second graders in Hammond has given me a better appreciation for what teachers do. I must be very prepared in order to keep them engaged for an hour each Friday. However, I have to say that the most intimidating experience I’ve encountered was walking up to the podium this past January to argue before the Court of Appeals. Once I started my argument though, I was amazed at how the stress melted away almost immediately.

If you could meet and spend the day with one lawyer from history, who would it be and why?

John Adams. I am reading his biography, and I find it amazing that he chose to risk his steadily increasing personal and political reputation as an ardent patriot when he agreed to represent the British soldiers accused of murder following the Boston massacre. Though on the opposite side of the political tide, he acted according to his conscience.

Who is your favorite fictional lawyer?

Vincent LaGuardia Gambini – better known as “My Cousin Vinny.”

What’s your guilty pleasure?

Thai food, cupcakes or watching bad romantic comedies (sometimes even for a second or third time).

Why do you think people often have negative stereotypes about lawyers?

I think it stems from a belief many people have that there can only be one right or wrong answer or position. For those of that mindset, they will have little respect for the skilled orator or writer who masterfully expresses her case and thereby makes it more likely for the position opposing their own to prevail. I believe if we are too quick to judge and decide questions, we’re in trouble. It’s rare anymore that a person approaches an important issue willing to have his or her mind changed. When there’s no risk of being convinced against your position, there’s little point in debate.  

If you couldn’t be a lawyer, what would you do for a living?

Own a small bistro that makes “slow food” and has a large wine list.    

Is there a moment in your career you wish you could do over?

The biggest mistakes have been great learning experiences, but sure, I’d fix a few hiccups along the way.

What class do you wish you could have skipped in law school?

Probably tax law – just not my area of interest. I took it because I liked the professor.
 

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. 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