Buying booze at 18? August 20, 2008
Posted by jmehalik , add a commentCollege presidents around the country have come together to unite against binge drinking on campuses. They aren’t working together to develop and implement programs to educate high school and college students about the dangers of binge drinking. They aren’t going to the students’ parents asking them to talk to their kids about drinking.
The higher-ups at the universities want lawmakers to fix the problem.
College leaders have signed a letter asking lawmakers to make it legal for 18-year-olds to drink.
The problem isn’t the age of the students; it’s the attitudes of the students and their parents. Lawmakers could lower the drinking age to 16 or raise it to 30, and teens who want to drink will still find a way to do it. Does it make it right? No, of course not, but it’s a reality that everyone who has ever been to high school and college is aware of.
Instead of curbing the problem of binge drinking in college, it will magnify the issue even more in high school. Eighteen-year-old seniors will be able to buy booze and get it to their younger classmates even easier than finding an older sibling or adult to buy the alcohol for them. Some high school students drink. Some parents even let their kids drink at home.
And that’s the problem.
If colleges and university want to curb binge drinking, reach out to high school parents. Parents can talk to their kids before and while they are in high school and let them know it’s not OK to drink right now and it’s never OK to drink and drive. Being observant of your kids and knowing who they hang out with and what they do on the weekends can help tackle the problem more than lowering the legal drinking age.
Teens love the freedom college gives them – they can stay out late, eat whatever they want, hang out with whomever they want, and they don’t have to come home to mom and dad’s house. But if mom and dad taught Junior the dangers of drinking – especially binge drinking – maybe he will think twice before he bongs his fifth beer. Educating kids at an earlier age and expecting more parental responsibility will help curb binge drinking more so than lowering the legal drinking age.
Indianapolis, Illinois? August 19, 2008
Posted by jmehalik , add a commentAccording to one 7th Circuit Court of Appeals opinion today, Indianapolis is now a part of our neighboring state to the west. I opened Angela Tyson v. Gannett Co. Inc., aware this would be an Indiana case. Lo and behold, I was right – sort of.
The Indianapolis Division of the U.S. District Court is in the Southern District of Indiana, as we all know, but just for today, the division has temporarily relocated to Illinois. According to the opinion, the Indianapolis Division is now in the Southern District of Illinois.
I don’t see too many slipups by the federal appellate court, and this is the first time I’ve ever seen them attribute a division to the wrong state. Was it oversight by the court clerk or is this a sign that Sens. Barack Obama and Evan Bayh have fostered a deal that not only will they be running mates in 2008, but they have unified their two home states? Maybe the 7th Circuit knows something we don’t know.
Chances are, a corrected opinion will be on the court’s Web site by the end of the day or tomorrow, but for now, it’s just funny to see Indianapolis, Illinois.
Loans and the public sector August 18, 2008
Posted by jmehalik , add a commentPresident Bush signed the Higher Education Opportunity Act, H.R. 4137, into law last week, which provides loan forgiveness for students entering public services jobs, including public defenders, prosecutors, and legal aid attorneys.
In exchange for committing to work for at least three years as an attorney in one of the above fields, the attorney general will have the obligation to repay up to $10,000 a calendar year in student loans for those attorneys. The law limits the amount of money a graduate can have repaid by the attorney general and who will receive priority in having repayment benefits.
This is a great idea and it’s about time the government stepped up and helped out college graduates who choose to help the public instead of getting a high-paying salary in a nice office. Smothered under a mountain of law school debt after three years, many students look to private practice and law firms to earn bigger salaries than what public defenders and prosecutors’ offices can offer. I guarantee you there will be more law students looking more closely at entering a public service job as opposed to joining a law firm because of this program.
Turnover is high in public defenders and prosecutors’ offices because attorneys earn low pay for the amount of work they do as compared to private practice attorneys. Does this law have its limitations? Sure. Will this mean there will be a huge rush in applications to the public defender’s office? Probably not, but I bet there will be more interest from students who were debating whether to go that route.
This new law is a step in the right direction in ensuring more quality attorneys will choose to enter the public service sector, not only because they want to, but now they can more easily afford to.
A blog about blogging August 18, 2008
Posted by jmehalik , add a commentI attended BlogIndiana this weekend - a conference about blogging as the name would suggest - to learn how to make sure Indiana Lawyer is putting out the best blog we can. While many of the sessions were geared toward personal blogs, I picked up a few tips that will be applicable to First Impressions.
We want First Impressions to be added to your favorites list or a place you check out when you have a spare minute to get legal tidbits or our take on what’s happening in the legal community.
Even though we haven’t had many comments, we know people are reading the blog. Send me an e-mail at jmehalik@ibj.com to let me know what you like about the blog and what you wish we would do differently. I know attorneys have opinions, so don’t be shy about telling me what you think about First Impressions.
Accident breaks firm’s windows August 14, 2008
Posted by jmehalik , add a commentAn accident in downtown Indianapolis this afternoon involving three men installing a sign on the M&I Building damaged two windows at law firm Bose McKinney and Evans.
One window each on the 27th and 23rd floors were damaged when a cable on scaffolding holding the three men snapped, said Bose McKinney Evans Chief Marketing Officer Jennifer Walker. The accident caused the scaffolding to give way on one side, sending the scaffolding and men plunging several stories. The three men, who were wearing safety harnesses, were rescued and taken to area hospitals.
The two attorneys whose office windows were damaged in the accident were relocated to other offices, Walker said. The window on the 27th floor was originally broken in the accident, but rescue workers later broke out more of the window. The window on the 23rd floor is cracked, but not broken, she said.
No one was hurt in the firm. Bose occupies floors 16, 23, and 25-27 of the 31-story building. Walker said the firm was still waiting to hear from building management as to when the windows will be repaired.
Appellate court delays, blame August 14, 2008
Posted by jmehalik , add a commentFrom IL reporter Michael Hoskins, who attended today’s arguments:
The Indiana Supreme Court is delving into interesting issues that hit on speedy criminal trials and how appellate court delays have a role in that process. Of course, a comment made during arguments Thursday morning touches on appellate court efficiency and how that does, or doesn’t, impact the system.
Arguments can be viewed online here by clicking on the name of the case, Robert J. Pelley v. State. It is a South Bend case in which justices are being asked to reinstate four murder convictions against a Lakeville man accused of killing his family as a teenager two decades ago. At issue is how the local prosecutors, when filing charges in 2002, filed an interlocutory appeal based on a motion from a third party that sought to stop counseling records from being released to the state for use at trial. The appellate court stopped the trial from happening but held onto the appeal for two years, putting a wrench in the prosecutor’s plan to take it to trial within one year as Criminal Rule 4 spells out. Exceptions are if the defendant somehow caused the delay, or if an “emergency” or “court congestion” occurred. Those terms are being dissected and examined, as well as whether the one-year clock could have been stopped or should get some blanket rule as it relates to interlocutory appeals. The state says it’s not at fault for the delay. So does the defendant.
Toward the end of the arguments, Justice Ted Boehm made an interesting observation when the deputy attorney general was at the podium. He pointed out that the state could have asked for an expedited appeal from the COA, even though interlocutory appeals are already supposed to get that rushed attention. He then pressed the state for not directly calling the appellate court or clerk’s office to bring the timetable and Criminal Rule 4 running clock to the court’s attention. The deputy attorney general said the appellate court knew nothing was happening because of the stay and should have known the Criminal Rule 4 timetable based on the fact that this was an interlocutory appeal
Justice Boehm’s response: “You give us too much credit. You have to spell things out for us. We have a lot of paper to read up here.”
Interesting point, Your Honor. Particularly at a time when there’s discussion about new judges being added to the state’s intermediate appellate court. We’ve seen footnotes in some appellate rulings during the past year that highlight a handful of cases being delayed, specifically between the clerk’s office transmitting a case to the court. Later this month, lawmakers will be discussing whether a new panel should be added to the COA. This case aside, those discussions should be interesting.
Budget cuts, slower courts? August 13, 2008
Posted by jmehalik , 1 comment so farIt’s budget season in Indiana, and counties across the state are preparing their 2009 budgets. The tough economic times are leading counties to ask departments to find even more ways to cut spending.
The courts, too, are being asked to find ways to reduce spending. Lake County courts may be asked to cut 10 to 20 percent from its budget – an across-the-board recommendation from the Lake County Council for all government departments. After initial cuts, Carroll County judges questioned its county council’s request that they reduce their budgets even further and go back to budgets from 2003. They reached an agreement with the council in June regarding their budget.
Cutting courts’ budgets is an issue counties are facing statewide. While it’s reasonable to expect every department to find ways to trim spending, how far is too far? When the ability to properly function is compromised as a result of reduced staff, it may be time to re-evaluate the budget. When courts are forced to cut support services or add or increase fees, it affects how the court operates. If courts are unable to keep up with the increasing caseloads, it will lead to an even greater backlog of cases waiting to be heard. Defendants will sit in jail longer, leading to possible overcrowding and potential lawsuits (which will take even longer to hear because of the backlog.)
Should courts be subject to the same percentage of budget cuts being asked of other departments or should county councils make exceptions for the courts? How can courts that have no other choice but to drastically reduce spending cope?
Buying booze on Sunday August 11, 2008
Posted by jmehalik , 2commentsOne organization in Indiana is looking to end one of our state’s last remaining “blue laws” – buying alcohol from a store on Sundays. As an adult of legal drinking age, I am all for changing this state law. I know Indiana is a conservative state with deep-seated religious values, but not everyone in the state is religiously or morally opposed to drinking on Sunday. And those who don’t want to drink on Sunday can continue not to if the law is amended to allow alcohol sales on Sunday.
Although lawmakers will say this isn’t a religious issue, in some ways it is. The reason for prohibiting Sunday alcohol sales started with other shops and retailers being closed Sunday because it was most people’s day of worship. My parents have mentioned how when they were growing up in the 1950s and ’60s, a lot of shops were closed Sunday. Now, almost every retailer is open Sunday, with one other notable holdover from the blue laws – car dealerships.
I’ve lived here for more than 20 years and know that I can’t buy alcohol on Sunday from a store. But what I’ve never understood is why I can get in my car, drive to my local tavern and drink? To me, that would increase the chances of drunk-driving accidents more so than selling beer or wine in a grocery store, which is an argument some have for keeping the Sunday restrictions.
I can recall several times during the past few years this issue coming up for proposal or debate for our General Assembly. Each time, supporters of changing the law hoped it was finally the year Indiana changes it and those in opposition bring up drinking and driving and religion. This year, Hoosiers for Beverage Choices has started a Web site residents a petition to sign showing legislators people want to be able to buy alcohol on Sunday.
But with all of the other major issues Hoosiers are facing right now – property taxes, the economy, education, higher prices on commodities, health care – will the General Assembly 1) have someone sponsor a bill to change the alcohol laws here, and 2) will the bill even get through our legislature?
A jet-set chief justice August 7, 2008
Posted by jmehalik , add a commentFrom IL reporter Michael Hoskins:
Every so often, you’ll see an Indiana Supreme Court order signed by an acting chief justice. Some recent court orders have Justice Brent Dickson filling in for Chief Justice Randall Shepard. Nothing out of the ordinary, just interesting to always keep tabs on what our state’s highest jurists are up to when not putting signatures on orders with their colleagues.
This time, our chief justice spent most of a week in July in Anchorage, Alaska, at a chief justices conference. He was there July 19-23, and his first full day back to work in Indiana was July 28.
Our esteemed high judge noted two topics particularly worth mentioning from this annual meeting: civics education and public information. He sees Indiana doing as well as most states, sometimes better than others. Another topic focused on globalization of law firms and how the chief justices have been working with international bar associations in the past three years about having more American lawyers practice overseas with temporary licenses and having attorneys from other nations do the same here. Sharing thoughts about the conference recently, Chief Justice Shepard said: “I have a pretty good collection of materials and so many ideas to share.”
Of course, he has some additional time to read those materials, and Indiana’s legal community may now see some more acting chief justice lines on orders, as our high jurist has set off for a vacation in Maine; he returns to the court office Aug 13. Word is he may not have even taken his laptop with him. Happy journeys, Mr. Chief Justice.
NAACP to prep voters August 7, 2008
Posted by jmehalik , add a commentThe NAACP Legal Defense and Education Fund is sending attorneys to 10 states before the fall election to address voting barriers, according to the National Law Journal. Surprise, surprise, Indiana is one of those 10 states.
I’d wager the NAACP’s interest in our state has something to do with our recently upheld voter ID law and the confusion that still surrounds it. The U.S. Supreme Court upheld our voter ID law this spring, which requires voters produce photo identification before casting a ballot. Some people argued they were denied their right to vote in the May primary because even though they didn’t have the proper identification, they weren’t allowed to cast a provisional ballot.
The “Prepared to Vote” program will raise voter awareness of obstacles in the electoral process that may affect their right to vote. The non-partisan program wants to ensure everyone who is eligible to vote will be able to in the election. The group’s set up a Web site, http://www.preparedtovote.org, detailing more about the group’s work and state-specific information.
In Indiana, the group is working with the Indiana NAACP, Marion County Bar Association, and the James R. Kimbrough Bar Association in northern Indiana to educate Hoosier voters.
Turnout could be higher than normal with this presidential election. Even though Indiana’s voter ID law has been in place for three years, some people still don’t understand they need to have government-issued photo identification with them to vote. This group’s goal is a welcome step to making sure all Indiana residents who are eligible to vote know what they need to do in order to vote this fall. Who knows, Indiana may play an important role in determining who wins this year’s presidential election.