ILNews

On the Move - 7/6/11

IL Staff
July 6, 2011
Keywords
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share
On The Move

On The Move: Information must be submitted at least 11 days prior to the Wednesday issue in which the announcement will 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
Diane Gianos has joined Ice Miller as a partner in the firm’s Chicago and DuPage office. She is a member of the firm’s labor and employment practice group.

Jason D. Schultz and Kurt M. Eaton have joined Krieg DeVault as associates in the firm’s Indianapolis office. Schultz is a member of the firm’s health care practice, and Eaton is in the firm’s intellectual property and technology practice, focusing on patent law. Jude Anne Carluccio has joined Krieg DeVault in an of-counsel capacity in the firm’s employee benefits and executive compensation and employee stock ownership plans practice groups. She will establish the firm’s legal presence in Minneapolis, Minn.

J. Eric Davis and J.R. Hensley have joined Indianapolis firm Alerding Castor Hewitt in an of-counsel capacity, serving as advisers to start-up businesses and sports organizations.

Jessica Benson Cox has joined Baker & Daniels as an associate in the firm’s downtown Indianapolis office. She is a member of the product liability group, focusing her practice on defense of pharmaceutical companies, device manufacturers, and others in litigation.

Jordan L. Tandy and M. Josh Petruniw have joined Wabash firm Tiede Metz & Downs as associates.

Angela L. Gidley has joined Indianapolis and Lebanon law firm Parr Richey Obremskey Frandsen & Patterson as an associate. She will concentrate her practice in utility law and business and employment law.

Rebekah E. Pierson has joined Indianapolis law firm Wooden & McLaughlin as a paralegal in the firm’s real estate and business practice areas.

ELECTIONS & APPOINTMENTS
Anne M. Hamilton, an Indianapolis estate planning attorney with Kroger Gardis & Regas, has been appointed to the board of directors for the Central Indiana affiliate of Susan G. Komen for the Cure.

Trent A. McCain, a litigator with Merrillville firm McCain Law Offices, has been admitted to practice before the Supreme Court of the United States.

AWARDS & HONORS
Michael O. Nelson has been recognized by the National Association of Environmental Professionals. Nelson, an Indianapolis attorney with Hunsucker Goodstein & Nelson, represented the Evansville Greenway & Remediation Trust and General Waste Products in two lawsuits that generated proceeds later used to fund creation of a greenway near downtown Evansville. The NAEP named the newly opened section of greenway, built on a remediated scrap yard owned by GWP, as winner of its 2011 National Environmental Excellence Award in the category of environmental stewardship.

Sharon B. Hearn, a partner with Indianapolis firm Krieg DeVault, was recently presented the national 2011 Membership Recruitment Award for a Professional Member by the ESOP Association.

Andrew Buroker, a partner with Indianapolis firm Krieg DeVault, received the Gold Heart Award from the American Heart Association. This is the AHA’s highest award for volunteers who have supported the association’s mission at the national level.•

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. It's a big fat black mark against the US that they radicalized a lot of these Afghan jihadis in the 80s to fight the soviets and then when they predictably got around to biting the hand that fed them, the US had to invade their homelands, install a bunch of corrupt drug kingpins and kleptocrats, take these guys and torture the hell out of them. Why for example did the US have to sodomize them? Dubya said "they hate us for our freedoms!" Here, try some of that freedom whether you like it or not!!! Now they got even more reasons to hate us-- lets just keep bombing the crap out of their populations, installing more puppet regimes, arming one faction against another, etc etc etc.... the US is becoming a monster. No wonder they hate us. Here's my modest recommendation. How about we follow "Just War" theory in the future. St Augustine had it right. How about we treat these obvious prisoners of war according to the Geneva convention instead of torturing them in sadistic and perverted ways.

  2. As usual, John is "spot-on." The subtle but poignant points he makes are numerous and warrant reflection by mediators and users. Oh but were it so simple.

  3. ACLU. Way to step up against the police state. I see a lot of things from the ACLU I don't like but this one is a gold star in its column.... instead of fighting it the authorities should apologize and back off.

  4. Duncan, It's called the RIGHT OF ASSOCIATION and in the old days people believed it did apply to contracts and employment. Then along came title vii.....that aside, I believe that I am free to work or not work for whomever I like regardless: I don't need a law to tell me I'm free. The day I really am compelled to ignore all the facts of social reality in my associations and I blithely go along with it, I'll be a slave of the state. That day is not today......... in the meantime this proposed bill would probably be violative of 18 usc sec 1981 that prohibits discrimination in contracts... a law violated regularly because who could ever really expect to enforce it along the millions of contracts made in the marketplace daily? Some of these so-called civil rights laws are unenforceable and unjust Utopian Social Engineering. Forcing people to love each other will never work.

  5. I am the father of a sweet little one-year-old named girl, who happens to have Down Syndrome. To anyone who reads this who may be considering the decision to terminate, please know that your child will absolutely light up your life as my daughter has the lives of everyone around her. There is no part of me that condones abortion of a child on the basis that he/she has or might have Down Syndrome. From an intellectual standpoint, however, I question the enforceability of this potential law. As it stands now, the bill reads in relevant part as follows: "A person may not intentionally perform or attempt to perform an abortion . . . if the person knows that the pregnant woman is seeking the abortion solely because the fetus has been diagnosed with Down syndrome or a potential diagnosis of Down syndrome." It includes similarly worded provisions abortion on "any other disability" or based on sex selection. It goes so far as to make the medical provider at least potentially liable for wrongful death. First, how does a medical provider "know" that "the pregnant woman is seeking the abortion SOLELY" because of anything? What if the woman says she just doesn't want the baby - not because of the diagnosis - she just doesn't want him/her? Further, how can the doctor be liable for wrongful death, when a Child Wrongful Death claim belongs to the parents? Is there any circumstance in which the mother's comparative fault will not exceed the doctor's alleged comparative fault, thereby barring the claim? If the State wants to discourage women from aborting their children because of a Down Syndrome diagnosis, I'm all for that. Purporting to ban it with an unenforceable law, however, is not the way to effectuate this policy.

ADVERTISEMENT