ILNews

Lucas: Nominations for 2013 Leadership in Law awards being accepted

Kelly Lucas
October 10, 2012
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

EidtPerspLucas-sigWe’ve all experienced that feeling of awe as we watch another lawyer make his case in a courtroom or meeting. There is a moment when you realize “this guy is really good,” and your brain begins to analyze what he is doing to make his argument so effective and how you can put some of those strategies to work in your legal career. Whether it is the attention to detail that grabs you or the passion conveyed when making the case, some lawyers clearly lead by example.

Each year, the Indiana Lawyer recognizes and honors members of the legal profession who have demonstrated leadership in the practice of law. Because success is achieved in stages, Leadership in Law awards are categorized by years of practice.

The Up-and-Coming Lawyer award takes notice of young attorneys who have been practicing seven years or less. While their careers are still developing, these are professionals whose work has made their peers, law firm partners or even legal adversaries take notice of their dedication, talent and skills. Successful nominations in past years have showcased work ethic, involvement in professional organizations, unique approaches to problem-solving or community involvement.

The Distinguished Barrister award honors lawyers who have practiced law 15 years or more. As the name implies, these are lawyers whose work the community respects and who young lawyers aspire to emulate. As with the up-and-coming category, the reason for nominating a person can vary – the person is a skilled legal strategist, she is a dedicated mentor to young lawyers, he is a leader in civic or bar association efforts, or the attorney’s storied career in government or social service shows society the best of what the profession offers.

I encourage you to nominate an up-and-coming lawyer or distinguished barrister who you admire. Time is limited, and I realize that when it comes to discretionary projects like completing a nomination form, while our intentions are good, our follow-through can fall short. But there is something about the feeling derived from taking the time – or making the time – to do something like this that is so satisfying. It has been my experience with the Leadership in Law awards that the nomination process is sometimes as rewarding to the person submitting the nomination as receiving the award is to the honoree.

More information about the Leadership in Law nomination process can be found at www.theindianalawyer.com/submit-leadership-in-law. You will be asked to complete a nomination form that includes providing a narrative explaining why you believe this lawyer deserves to be recognized. We hope that the online format will make this process efficient and effective. A form can be printed from the IL website and nominations mailed or delivered to the IL offices as well. The nominee’s résumé and letters from others in the legal community supporting your nomination are welcomed. This, as well as any other anecdotal information you wish to share, assists the awards committee in its decision making.

The deadline for submitting Leadership in Law nominations is Jan. 15, 2013. If you have questions or would like additional information, please contact me at 317-472-5233 or klucas@ibj.com. The Indiana Lawyer looks forward to honoring another group of up-and-coming lawyers and distinguished barristers in 2013!•
 

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

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. Family court judges never fail to surprise me with their irrational thinking. First of all any man who abuses his wife is not fit to be a parent. A man who can't control his anger should not be allowed around his child unsupervised period. Just because he's never been convicted of abusing his child doesn't mean he won't and maybe he hasn't but a man that has such poor judgement and control is not fit to parent without oversight - only a moron would think otherwise. Secondly, why should the mother have to pay? He's the one who made the poor decisions to abuse and he should be the one to pay the price - monetarily and otherwise. Yes it's sad that the little girl may be deprived of her father, but really what kind of father is he - the one that abuses her mother the one that can't even step up and do what's necessary on his own instead the abused mother is to pay for him???? What is this Judge thinking? Another example of how this world rewards bad behavior and punishes those who do right. Way to go Judge - NOT.

  2. Right on. Legalize it. We can take billions away from the drug cartels and help reduce violence in central America and more unwanted illegal immigration all in one fell swoop. cut taxes on the savings from needless incarcerations. On and stop eroding our fourth amendment freedom or whatever's left of it.

  3. "...a switch from crop production to hog production "does not constitute a significant change."??? REALLY?!?! Any judge that cannot see a significant difference between a plant and an animal needs to find another line of work.

  4. Why do so many lawyers get away with lying in court, Jamie Yoak?

  5. Future generations will be amazed that we prosecuted people for possessing a harmless plant. The New York Times came out in favor of legalization in Saturday's edition of the newspaper.

ADVERTISEMENT