ILNews

Why Join DTCI?

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

First-hand Insight. Learn about judges, juries and cases in every Indiana county by contacting DTCI colleagues.

Source of Business. Carriers, your DTCI colleagues and other sources of referrals will see your name on the DTCI website.

Discounted Dues for Young Lawyers. Lawyers in practice for three years or less are entitled to a substantial discount on annual dues.

Expert Witness Information and Research Assistance. DTCI members can email and query their colleagues through the DTCI website.

Impact on the State Legislature. Have a voice in civil justice reform. DTCI has been active and successful in influencing legislation of interest to the Indiana civil defense attorney.

Free DRI Membership. If you join the DTCI now, you will receive a free membership in the DRI, the national organization of civil defense attorneys.

Substantive Law Sections. Members learn practical “how to” pointers in any or all of DTCI’s substantive law sections: Insurance Coverage, Health Law Litigation, Product Liability, Worker’s Compensation, Employment Law, Construction Law, Defense Trial Tactics, Business Litigation and Paralegals.

Hundreds of Members Statewide. DTCI provides collective strength to deal with issues affecting its members.

Author! Author! Members can publish their views in the Indiana Lawyer or the annual journal the Indiana Civil Litigation Review. Let people know who you are and introduce your new associates to the Indiana legal community.

Call the DTCI offices at 317-580-1233 and let the DTCI help you become a more effective defense attorney!•

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. I need an experienced attorney to handle a breach of contract matter. Kindly respond for more details. Graham Young

  2. I thought the slurs were the least grave aspects of her misconduct, since they had nothing to do with her being on the bench. Why then do I suspect they were the focus? I find this a troubling trend. At least she was allowed to keep her law license.

  3. Section 6 of Article I of the Indiana Constitution is pretty clear and unequivocal: "Section 6. No money shall be drawn from the treasury for the benefit of any religious or theological institution."

  4. Video pen? Nice work, "JW"! Let this be a lesson and a caution to all disgruntled ex-spouses (or soon-to-be ex-spouses) . . . you may think that altercation is going to get you some satisfaction . . . it will not.

  5. 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."

ADVERTISEMENT