On Friday and Saturday, at least 100 members of the legal community, including attorneys, professors, judges, court administrators,
deans, and representatives of the Indiana Judges and Lawyers Assistance Program, the Disciplinary Commission, the Board of
Law Examiners, and the Indiana Bar Foundation, among others, met for the Indiana State Bar Association’s fourth Legal
Education Conclave at Indiana University School of Law – Indianapolis.
Among the focuses for this year’s conclave, which takes place every few years, were diversity, ethics, and stress among
lawyers and law students. While all four Indiana law schools were represented, this year’s co-chairs were Gail G. Peshel,
assistant dean of career services at University of Notre Dame Law School, and Chasity Q. Thompson, assistant dean of professional
development for I.U. School of Law – Indianapolis.
Keynote speakers and breakout sessions addressed these topics, as well as the issues of educating lawyers in a changing economy,
a comparison of alternative and traditional fee arrangements, and how technology is a “friend and foe for the Indiana
practitioner.”
On Friday, University of Notre Dame Law School Dean Emeritus Father David T. Link opened the event with a discussion about
the role of ethics for lawyers and law students, including examples from his role as a dean and as a prison chaplain. Father
Link, who was dean of the law school 1975 to 1999, continues to teach ethics to first-year students.
On Saturday, Kim M. Boyle of the New Orleans firm Phelps Dunbar and the first African-American woman president of the Louisiana
State Bar Association opened that day’s activities with a keynote address about diversity. Boyle is also a former assistant
professor of law at Loyola University School of Law in New Orleans and spoke about how students view the troubled economy
and diversity in the practice.
Among the topics she discussed were that when firms focus more on lateral hires, they are less likely to improve their diversity,
even though law school graduating classes are more diverse in terms of gender, race, ethnicity, and other factors.
She also participated in a breakout session about the topic that took place shortly after her speech. That session included
a panel made up of Indianapolis solo employment attorney Michael Dalrymple; Lake Superior Judge Calvin D. Hawkins; Vanderburgh
Superior Magistrate Jill Marcrum; Camille Wiggins, a staff attorney of the Indiana Supreme Court and member of the Commission
on Race and Gender Fairness; and G. Michael Witte, a former Dearborn Superior judge and current Indiana Disciplinary Commission
executive secretary. Merrillville attorney Michael Tolbert, past president of the James Kimbrough Bar Association, a minority
bar association based in northwest Indiana, moderated the discussion.
Among the topics were how to define diversity; what has been done to address diversity; and what the legal community still
needs to do to address a lack of diversity, especially in communities that aren’t very diverse. Another topic was why
Latinos were left off of the panel, which was brought up by Marion Superior Judge Jose Salinas, which, in a round about way,
led to Judge Hawkins discussion on how what one sees isn’t always what’s there.
Judge Hawkins then shared an experience of working in Washington, D.C., when he thought one of his colleagues ignored him
in the hallways because the judge is African-American and his colleague was white. The judge later learned that his colleague
was legally blind, and likely didn’t see him when they passed in the hall. That discussion is available on the ISBA’s
Facebook page.
Following two rounds of breakout sessions and lunch, Chief Justice Randall T. Shepard, an active participant in the conclave,
concluded the event with a call to action regarding various issues discussed at the conclave. That video is also on the ISBA’s Facebook
page.
The next step for conclave members is to compile information from the breakout sessions and discussions of participants,
which will be compiled into a report, and action items from that report will be implemented.
A more in-depth article about the conclave will be reported in a future issue of Indiana Lawyer.














Judge Roger B. Cosbey is unethical and bias toward African American who seeks justice in Title VII claims. He disrespected and used his authority to attempt to intimidate me into taking an unfair settlement and when I refused he proceeded to get my case dismissed and to deny me my Constitutional and Civil Rights. He disobeying several rules of law; specifically, by ruling on summary judgment motions against the Fed. R. Civ. P., without authority of Judge William C. Lee, without consent of the attorneys, and with conspiracy to commit “fraud on the court,” as he conspired with my former attorney. He proved to me that he is bias, unethical, unfair and unfit to be reappointed. In my opinion, he should be disbarred in 2013, for committing fraud on the court, which would make him ineligible for reinstatement in 2014. See docket 3:07 cv 629 where he rules on dispositive motions, knowing magistrates are not vested with that power (especially without consent), grants the defendant an unconscionable number of extensions, accepts my former attorney request for extension for dispositive motion knowing he was working with the opposition, and unbelievably grants the defendant another extension after he requested an extension after he missed the deadline. I know another attorney filed charges against him for bias in race discrimination case(s). I know what he did in my case before he voluntarily recused himself, I just do not know how many other innocent people have been stripped of their rights because of him. I say shame on him and no more of the same.
they are pushing these cases against lawyers too far. thought-crime.
vagueness cannot challenged, so let's write all laws vaguely and throw the constitution out the window.Even if the court is operating under a particular law, if they don't it they will change it to their liking. What a joke!!!
Two convictions becomes one conviction with exactly the same sentence, only it is not clear wheter or not that sentence will be 18 months, 120 months or 138 months. Actually if the guns were in a home, whether or not they were his, he is protected under the 2nd amendment. Jurors need to learn the law and the constitution before judging others. The cour5ts need to do this as well.
With all due respect, Rick, I think you probably would be making a mistake by going to law school. The job market for attorneys is so saturated, you may well find yourself unemployed and with a lot of debt. You mention law would be a good supplement to your skills. True. But employers unfortunately don't value that. You will find that a law degree may well pigeonhole you into an attorney slot and limit career options. If you have a good job now I would hold onto that. As an attorney, you may well end up making less with the aforementioned debt.