ILNews

Longtime northern Indiana attorney dies

Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Nick J. Thiros, who practiced law in northwest Indiana for more than 50 years, died Oct. 14.

Thiros, 78, grew up in Gary, where he began his legal career in 1957 after graduating from Valparaiso University School of Law. He and Max Cohen formed the law firm Cohen & Thiros in 1971, where he practiced in criminal law. Two of Thiros’ children, Mark and Jim, joined the firm in the late 1980s. The two sons recently formed a partnership with Paul Stracci, and the firm is now named Thiros & Stracci. Thiros continued to work there as a senior partner until his death.

He belonged to many legal organizations, including the National Association of Criminal Defense Attorneys and was a Fellow of the American Board of Criminal Lawyers. Thiros helped create and implement the public defender systems for Lake Superior Court and the District Court in Hammond. His cross examinations were described as “legendarily feared” and he was highly respected by fellow attorneys and judges.

Thiros is survived by his wife, Helen; children Louis (Mary), Connie, Jim (Anne), and Mark (Yvette); two brothers-in-law; many nieces and nephews; and five grandchildren. Visitation is today from 2 to 8 p.m. at Kish Funeral Home, 10000 Calumet Ave., Munster, with a Trisagian Prayer Service at 5 p.m. Funeral service is 10 a.m. Tuesday at St. Constantine and Helen Greek Orthodox Cathedral, 8000 Madison Ave., Merrillville. In lieu of flowers, memorial contributions may be made to the church or Cerebral Palsy of NW Indiana Inc.

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