ILNews

Protective order project moves to Center for Victim and Human Rights

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

The Indiana Coalition Against Domestic Violence and the Center for Victim and Human Rights announced Tuesday that the ICADV’s Protective Order Pro Bono Project is being taken over by the CVHR.

The project was created in 2001 and offers free legal services to victims of domestic violence who need protective orders or need to enforce the order. The project merged with the ICADV in 2007.

“The Project’s move is absolute win-win for our client survivors, the pro bono attorneys and law students who have volunteered to help them” said Kerry Blomquist, legal counsel at ICADV. “The Center for Victim and Human Rights has provided a growing number of free legal services to victims of domestic violence, many with multiple legal needs, so this is an excellent fit for the project.”

The Pro Bono Project is partially funded through the Indiana Supreme Court’s Civil Legal Aid Funding. The ICADV will train the center’s staff and volunteers as to how to work with victims of domestic violence.

The CVHR, founded in 2008, is a nonprofit legal services organization whose mission is to make the victim as whole as possible. The organization provides low-cost or no-cost legal services to crime and human rights abuse victims and engages in policy development and educational outreach.

“We are honored to be the next stewards of this project and advance the legacy of the ICADV Protective Order Pro Bono Project of providing safety for victims of domestic violence. Our objective is to provide access to justice for victims who wouldn’t otherwise be able to procure legal assistance in obtaining and enforcing protective orders,” said Raio Krishnayya, executive director of CVHR.

 

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. KUDOS to the Indiana Supreme Court for realizing that some bureacracies need to go to the stake. Recall what RWR said: "No government ever voluntarily reduces itself in size. Government programs, once launched, never disappear. Actually, a government bureau is the nearest thing to eternal life we'll ever see on this earth!" NOW ... what next to this rare and inspiring chopping block? Well, the Commission on Gender and Race (but not religion!?!) is way overdue. And some other Board's could be cut with a positive for State and the reputation of the Indiana judiciary.

  2. During a visit where an informant with police wears audio and video, does the video necessary have to show hand to hand transaction of money and narcotics?

  3. I will agree with that as soon as law schools stop lying to prospective students about salaries and employment opportunities in the legal profession. There is no defense to the fraudulent numbers first year salaries they post to mislead people into going to law school.

  4. The sad thing is that no fish were thrown overboard The "greenhorn" who had never fished before those 5 days was interrogated for over 4 hours by 5 officers until his statement was illicited, "I don't want to go to prison....." The truth is that these fish were measured frozen off shore and thawed on shore. The FWC (state) officer did not know fish shrink, so the only reason that these fish could be bigger was a swap. There is no difference between a 19 1/2 fish or 19 3/4 fish, short fish is short fish, the ticket was written. In addition the FWC officer testified at trial, he does not measure fish in accordance with federal law. There was a document prepared by the FWC expert that said yes, fish shrink and if these had been measured correctly they averaged over 20 inches (offshore frozen). This was a smoke and mirror prosecution.

  5. I love this, Dave! Many congrats to you! We've come a long way from studying for the bar together! :)

ADVERTISEMENT