ILNews

On The Move - 12/22/10

December 22, 2010
Keywords
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

On The Move: Information must be submitted at least 11 days before the Wednesday issue in which it is to appear. Digital images should be 200 dpi and saved as eps, tiff or jpeg; Color images are preferred. For more information or to submit an announcement, contact managing editor Kelly Lucas at klucas@ibj.com

New Associations
Ryan Gibson accepted the position of GCO-Insurance Law Counsel in the general counsel’s office of Fireman’s Fund Insurance Company in Novato, Calif.

Judge Russ Sanders will join The Mediation Group in January 2011. Judge Sanders will leave his 14-year tenure with Shelby Superior Court effective Dec. 31, 2010.

Stephen M. Koers joined Lewis & Wilkins as of counsel. He will be located in the firm’s Fishers office.

Kathryn Morgan Cimera and Terren Magid joined Bingham McHale. The lawyers will practice with the firm’s Pensions and Fiduciary Industry Team.

Elections and Appointments
Roselyn Hazzard, human resources director at Bingham McHale, was elected to the Association of Legal Administrators board of directors. She will serve as a regional director.

Phillip L. Bayt was elected managing partner of Ice Miller effective Jan. 1, 2011. The partnership also selected Robert Gauss and Brenda Horn to serve as deputy managing partners. Steven K. Humke was re-elected by the partnership as chair of the strategic planning committee.

Awards and Honors
Steven D. DeBrota, an attorney in the U.S. Attorney’s Office in Indianapolis, received The Assistant Attorney General’s Award for Distinguished Service from the U.S. Department of Justice for his leadership and work on “Operation Nest Egg,” a national child exploitation prosecution project.

Nicholas C. Pappas, a partner in Frost Brown Todd’s Indianapolis office, was named “Indiana Defense Lawyer of the Year” by the Defense Trial Counsel of Indiana.

Promotions
Jeffrey L. Carmichael, Mark J. Swearingen, Regan E. Tankersley, and John F. Williams III were named shareholders with Hall Render Killian Heath & Lyman.•

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. The practitioners and judges who hail E-filing as the Saviour of the West need to contain their respective excitements. E-filing is federal court requires the practitioner to cram his motion practice into pigeonholes created by IT people. Compound motions or those seeking alternative relief are effectively barred, unless the practitioner wants to receive a tart note from some functionary admonishing about the "problem". E-filing is just another method by which courts and judges transfer their burden to practitioners, who are the really the only powerless components of the system. Of COURSE it is easier for the court to require all of its imput to conform to certain formats, but this imposition does NOT improve the quality of the practice of law and does NOT improve the ability of the practitioner to advocate for his client or to fashion pleadings that exactly conform to his client's best interests. And we should be very wary of the disingenuous pablum about the costs. The courts will find a way to stick it to the practitioner. Lake County is a VERY good example of this rapaciousness. Any one who does not believe this is invited to review the various special fees that system imposes upon practitioners- as practitioners- and upon each case ON TOP of the court costs normal in every case manually filed. Jurisprudence according to Aldous Huxley.

  2. Any attorneys who practice in federal court should be able to say the same as I can ... efiling is great. I have been doing it in fed court since it started way back. Pacer has its drawbacks, but the ability to hit an e-docket and pull up anything and everything onscreen is a huge plus for a litigator, eps the sole practitioner, who lacks a filing clerk and the paralegal support of large firms. Were I an Indiana attorney I would welcome this great step forward.

  3. Can we get full disclosure on lobbyist's payments to legislatures such as Mr Buck? AS long as there are idiots that are disrespectful of neighbors and intent on shooting fireworks every night, some kind of regulations are needed.

  4. I am the mother of the child in this case. My silence on the matter was due to the fact that I filed, both in Illinois and Indiana, child support cases. I even filed supporting documentation with the Indiana family law court. Not sure whether this information was provided to the court of appeals or not. Wish the case was done before moving to Indiana, because no matter what, there is NO WAY the state of Illinois would have allowed an appeal on a child support case!

  5. "No one is safe when the Legislature is in session."

ADVERTISEMENT