ILNews

Talk to a Lawyer Today event seeks volunteers

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

The annual Talk to a Lawyer Today event will take place on Jan. 17 at locations around the state. While the free CLE opportunities took place in late 2010, volunteers who want to participate may do so if they didn’t attend the CLE.

Those who participate in the event will have access to “Commonly Asked Questions about Indiana Law,” which they will be able to reference during their TTALT volunteer experience. The Indianapolis Bar Association has partnered with event organizers since the statewide program started in 2002 to provide this book at no cost to volunteers.

Various local bar associations have also helped offset the cost of CLE and the  event itself. The St. Joseph County Bar Association has helped promote this and other Ask a Lawyer events that Pro Bono District 2 has organized; the Evansville Bar Association has consistently supported the Volunteer Lawyer Program of Southwestern Indiana, that has a monthly Ask a Lawyer event and will have volunteers help with its Wills Project on Jan. 17; the Allen County Bar hosted the CLE for the Volunteer Lawyer Project of Northeast Indiana and has supported the Talk to a Lawyer Today event in Pro Bono District 3; and the Lake County Bar Association has supported Northwest Indiana Volunteer Lawyers Inc. with donations and promotion of the event in Pro Bono District 1.

While there is a waiting list for volunteers for the call center at the Indiana State Bar Association offices, which is overseen by the plan administrator for the Heartland Pro Bono Council, interested attorneys in other districts can still call their local pro bono district plan administrators for more information or to sign up to volunteer. Contact information is available at http://www.in.gov/judiciary/probono under “Information for attorneys.”

Last year, programs around the state helped more than 900 people who had legal questions, many of which were resolved within 15 minutes. The most common questions regarded family law, criminal law, estate and probate, real estate, and landlord/tenant issues.

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. 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."

  2. wow is this a bunch of bs! i know the facts!

  3. MCBA .... time for a new release about your entire membership (or is it just the alter ego) being "saddened and disappointed" in the failure to lynch a police officer protecting himself in the line of duty. But this time against Eric Holder and the Federal Bureau of Investigation: "WASHINGTON — Justice Department lawyers will recommend that no civil rights charges be brought against the police officer who fatally shot an unarmed teenager in Ferguson, Mo., after an F.B.I. investigation found no evidence to support charges, law enforcement officials said Wednesday." http://www.nytimes.com/2015/01/22/us/justice-department-ferguson-civil-rights-darren-wilson.html?ref=us&_r=0

  4. Dr wail asfour lives 3 hours from the hospital,where if he gets an emergency at least he needs three hours,while even if he is on call he should be in a location where it gives him max 10 minutes to be beside the patient,they get paid double on their on call days ,where look how they handle it,so if the death of the patient occurs on weekend and these doctors still repeat same pattern such issue should be raised,they should be closer to the patient.on other hand if all the death occured on the absence of the Dr and the nurses handle it,the nurses should get trained how to function appearntly they not that good,if the Dr lives 3 hours far from the hospital on his call days he should sleep in the hospital

  5. It's a capital offense...one for you Latin scholars..

ADVERTISEMENT