ILNews

Trust created for children of attorney killed by her husband, arrangements set

Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

A trust has been created for the children of an attorney who was killed by her husband last week.

Mary Jane Frisby, 44, a former Barnes & Thornburg partner, was found dead in her Brownsburg home by police Aug. 26 hours after her husband, David, climbed atop a downtown Indianapolis parking garage and committed suicide.

The trust for Sam Frisby and Cassandra (Casey) Frisby, has been set up at The National Bank of Indianapolis, 107 N. Pennsylvania St., Indianapolis, IN 46204. All donations should be made payable to "Trust for the Children of Mary Jane Vincent Frisby."

A first-generation American of British parents, Mary Jane Frisby graduated summa cum laude from Indiana University School of Law – Indianapolis in 2000. She started that same year at Barnes & Thornburg, where she worked in the intellectual property group. She left the law firm Aug. 20 to start a new position as an IP-focused general counsel at Cummins.

In addition to her two children, Frisby is survived by her parents Geoffrey and Adele Vincent; sister, Wendy Stoll; nephew, Ben Stoll; niece, Lucy Stoll; and several relatives in England, Scotland, Canada, and New Zealand. She was preceded in death by her brother, Christopher Vincent.

A private service will be Sept. 2, 2010, followed by a graveside service Sept. 4, 2010, at Pleasant Hill Cemetery near Murphysboro, IL. Arrangements were handled by Leppert Mortuary, Nora Chapel.
 

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Paul Ogden doing a fine job of remembering his peer Gary Welsh with the post below and a call for an Indy gettogether to celebrate Gary .... http://www.ogdenonpolitics.com/2016/05/indiana-loses-citizen-journalist-giant.html Castaways of Indiana, unite!

  2. It's unfortunate that someone has attempted to hijack the comments to promote his own business. This is not an article discussing the means of preserving the record; no matter how it's accomplished, ethics and impartiality are paramount concerns. When a party to litigation contracts directly with a reporting firm, it creates, at the very least, the appearance of a conflict of interest. Court reporters, attorneys and judges are officers of the court and must abide by court rules as well as state and federal laws. Parties to litigation have no such ethical responsibilities. Would we accept insurance companies contracting with judges? This practice effectively shifts costs to the party who can least afford it while reducing costs for the party with the most resources. The success of our justice system depends on equal access for all, not just for those who have the deepest pockets.

  3. As a licensed court reporter in California, I have to say that I'm sure that at some point we will be replaced by speech recognition. However, from what I've seen of it so far, it's a lot farther away than three years. It doesn't sound like Mr. Hubbard has ever sat in a courtroom or a deposition room where testimony is being given. Not all procedures are the same, and often they become quite heated with the ends of question and beginning of answers overlapping. The human mind can discern the words to a certain extent in those cases, but I doubt very much that a computer can yet. There is also the issue of very heavy accents and mumbling. People speak very fast nowadays, and in order to do that, they generally slur everything together, they drop or swallow words like "the" and "and." Voice recognition might be able to produce some form of a transcript, but I'd be very surprised if it produces an accurate or verbatim transcript, as is required in the legal world.

  4. Really enjoyed the profile. Congratulations to Craig on living the dream, and kudos to the pros who got involved to help him realize the vision.

  5. Why in the world would someone need a person to correct a transcript when a realtime court reporter could provide them with a transcript (rough draft) immediately?

ADVERTISEMENT