We know you have opinions – thoughtful, reasonable ones that would make for great discourse in the newspaper. But getting
you to share them is more difficult than we would like.
Here at the newspaper, we’re big fans of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution. But we understand the
need for and exuberance some individuals feel for the Second Amendment: “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to
the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”
The other day as I was reading through the March 17-30, 2010 issue of Indiana Lawyer, my attention was called to David Temple’s
article “Be smart: Don’t use cell phone while driving!”
You can imagine my surprise upon reading articles in the Indiana Lawyer, The Indianapolis Star, and the Indianapolis Business
Journal falsely impugning my integrity and the integrity of our law firm.
We’ve all been there. Driving the same route day-in and day-out, a hundred times before, with little to differentiate one
trip from another. Then there’s that one moment when something unforeseen occurs requiring you to instantly maneuver your
vehicle and test how good your reflexes and anti-lock brakes really are – making this all-too-routine trip very different
from the rest.
Dawn Johnsen deserved the nomination, and definitely was the right woman for the job, but unfortunately partisan vitriol appears to
be worth more in Washington, D.C., than doing the right thing.
One of the problems with upgrading to a new computer every few years is that you often must upgrade to a new version of Windows.
This time around, it’s Windows 7.
In the March 17-30, 2010, issue of Indiana Lawyer, my colleague David A. Temple authored an informative article on cellular
phone use while driving. In closing his article, he posed the question, “[w]ho will care for, raise and play with your family
when you are disabled or dead?”
Like it or not, we live in a time where, for some people at least, it’s become acceptable to speak about “reloading” when
doing battle against political opponents and to mark their political districts with gun sites, and where members of a Midwestern
church believe it’s their duty to travel the nation and spew hate-laced messages in places where people are mourning tragedy.
After April 22, 2010, an act mandates that no person or company may perform, offer,
or claim to perform renovations without first being certified by the Environmental Protection Agency where such renovations
occur in structures that were, inter alia, constructed before 1978 and visited regularly or occupied by a child under the
age of 6 or by a pregnant woman in which such structures are shown to have a high enough level of lead-based paint after testing.
Now it’s time to get serious. During the past couple of years writing this column Jenny and I have had a great deal of fun.
If you readers enjoy our contribution to the Indiana Lawyer only half as much as we do then this article serves its intended
purpose – a break from the hard-nosed realities of practicing law.
Indiana Supreme Court Justice Frank Sullivan certainly spoke for us when he asked this question a couple of weeks ago: “Wouldn’t
we feel better about all of this if it hadn’t been enacted on partyline votes, though?”
Now that Sen. Evan Bayh has apparently adopted the "Bill Polian" approach to political football (rest now for a later challenge), the term "gridlock" is becoming more common than "gridiron."
At first glance, the legislation seems like the sort that no one could possibly have an objection to.
It sounded too good be true, so we weren't surprised when we found out it was not to be.
Last spring, after the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals denied USA Funds' petition for rehearing en banc in an important student loan bankruptcy case, my colleagues Joni Anderson and Julie Ragsdale recommended that USA Funds file a petition for certiorari with the Supreme Court of the United States.
After languishing in the U.S. Senate for about 10 months, the nomination of Dawn Johnsen to lead the Office of Legal Counsel finally got some action.
We’d like to see the average voter know more about our appellate courts.