Probate & Trust Litigation – Aug. 22

• Planning in Anticipation of a Contest, Controversy, or if There is a Difficult Asset

• Closely Held Businesses in Probate: Enforcing Redemption Agreements of Deceased Shareholders

• Structuring & Obtaining Court Approval of Settlement Agreements Under IC 29-1-9 & IC 30-4-7

• Fiduciary & Attorney Conflicts in Trust & Estate Litigation

• Will & Trust Contests

• Enforcing Beneficiary Designations (Life Insurance, IRAs, etc.)

• Species of Probate Claims: Defense, Prosecution, & Preemptive Planning

• Trustee Protection Issues & Techniques

• Contested Guardianships

• Estates & Mediation

• Common Evidentiary Mistakes in Probate Litigation

John A. Cremer – Chair
Cremer & Cremer, Indianapolis

Michael P. Bishop
Cohen Garelick & Glazier, Indianapolis

Jeffrey S. Dible
Frost Brown Todd LLC, Indianapolis

Gregg S. Gordon
Dale & Eke, PC, McCordsville

Jarrell B. Hammond
Lewis Wagner, LLP, Indianapolis

Brian C. Hewitt
Alerding Castor Hewitt LLP, Indianapolis

Jonathan E. Lamb
Cremer & Cremer, Indianapolis

Gregory L. Padgett
Padgett Law, Indianapolis

Rodney S. Retzner
Krieg DeVault LLP, Carmel

Curtis E. Shirley
The Law Office of Curtis E. Shirley, Indianapolis

Nathan S. J. Williams
Shambaugh Kast Beck & Williams, LLP, Fort Wayne

Robert W. York
Robert W. York & Associates, Indianapolis

6 CLE / .5 E – Tuesday, August 22; 9:00 A.M. – 4:30 P.M.

– ICLEF Conference Facility, Indianapolis

– May Oberfell Lorber, Mishawaka
– DeFur Voran, Muncie
– Ice Miller, Indianapolis

– From your home or office computer

– Available after Live Seminar date

ICLEF • Indiana Continuing Legal Education Forum, Indianapolis, IN

Posted in News0 Comments

The Indiana Court of Appeals Clarifies Requirements for Changing Name and Gender Markers on Birth Certificates Involving Transgender People

In re the Name Change of A.L. and In re the Name Change of L.S., 79A02-1703-MI-473 involved two (2) people A.L. and L.S. who wanted to legally change their name as well as their gender markers (i.e. the gender designation) on their respective birth certificates. Both had been living as men and working with medical and counseling personnel as they transitioned. Per Indiana law, the intent to change one’s name must be published in a newspaper. This enables creditors and other parties to locate the new name.

A.L. filed for a name change and gender marker change in May 2016. The trial court denied his petition to change his gender marker because he did not publish his intent to do so. The court was following the logic that if publication was not required, many people would change their gender markers to avoid creditors and “other aggrieved parties,” and should thus follow the same publication requirements of a name change.

L.S. filed a petition for a name change and a gender marker change in September 2016, but requested a waiver of publication and a sealed record. He also requested an exclusion of confidential information under Administrative Rule 9. Administrative Rule 9 “governs public access to, and confidentiality of, Court Records.” This rule “attempts to balance competing interests and recognizes that unrestricted access to certain information in Court Records could result in an unwarranted invasion of personal privacy or unduly increase the risk of injury to individuals and businesses.” L.S. submitted evidence that transgender individuals were unduly subjected to violence and homicide, LGBT people are the most likely minority to experience hate crimes in the US, personal hate crime experiences and beliefs, and submitted statistics on the harassment, mistreatment, and murder of transgenders in 2016.

However, the trial court denied his petition and ordered L.S. to publish his intent to change his name and gender. The trial court acknowledged that transgenders did experience a disproportionate amount of violence; however, it also found that it did not establish that he had been subjected to specific threats or violence that a public case would make worse.

L.S. filed for interlocutory appeal and A.L. filed for appeal, and the cases were consolidated into one case. The Indiana Court of Appeals noted that there is no statute requiring publication of an intent to change a gender marker and that the trial court applied the wrong standard. Judge Baker stated, “Unless and until the General Assembly crafts specific requirements regarding either gender marker changes, this Court’s common sense standard in Birth Certificate is the bar that must be met.” The standard applied in Birth Certificate is that a name change and gender marker change must be made in good faith and not to commit fraud. Both A.L. and L.S. met this standard, and the trial courts were reversed and the cases remanded with instructions to grant both petitions and to amend their birth certificates with their new genders.

The Court of Appeals reversed the trial court and L.S. was also granted a sealed record under Administrative Rule 9 because he established that publishing his intent placed him at a greater risk by pointing to transgender violence in his community, state, and nation. The appellate court found that not granting this petition would be to essentially “out” a man as transgender. After considering all the evidence L.S. had provided, the court stated:

Publication of his birth name and new name would enable members of the general public to seek him out, placing him at a significant risk of harm. And in today’s day and age, information that is published in a newspaper is likely to be published on the Internet, where it will remain in perpetuity, leaving L.S. at risk for the rest of his life. There was no evidence in opposition to L.S.’s evidence. Under these circumstances, we find that L.S. established that publication of notice of his petition for a name change would create a significant risk of substantial harm to him. As a result, the trial court should have granted his requests to seal the record and waive publication pursuant to Administrative Rule 9. At page 14 of slip opinion.


Prepared by Richard A. Mann and Paralegal Molly E. Hendricks

Richard A. Mann has been practicing Family Law for more than 37 years in the Indianapolis area and throughout the State of Indiana. He is a Certified Family Law Specialist as certified by the Family Law Certification Committee, a Registered Family Law and Civil Law Mediator and Guardian ad Litem and Parenting Coordinator. Mr. Mann and his firm, Mann Law, P.C. Attorneys at Law, are proud to have been one of the firms who represented Same-Sex couples who were successful in overturning Indiana’s ban on Same-Sex marriage. He continues to fight discrimination in the law.

While a large portion of Mr. Mann’s practice is in the Family Law area he also represents several corporations on contract, personnel and other matters. He also has a varied General Practice in wills, estates, juvenile matters, collections, probate throughout the state of Indiana. Mr. Mann has tried murder cases as well as a death penalty case.

Mr. Mann has been selected for inclusion in Super Lawyers SuperLawyers Edition consecutively from 2009 – 2017.

Follow Richard Mann on FacebookTwitter, or read more blogs by him here.

Posted in Law Blogs0 Comments


Legal Writing in a Smartphone Age – Sept. 15

A National Speaker Seminar

Living in an electronic world – where short, condensed writing is the norm – has negatively impacted communication in today’s litigation and contract drafting.

Writing is an essential tool for you as an attorney. You work with words every day – in your memos, pleadings, client letters, emails – and the words that you choose
in those documents convey your ability and confidence.

Are you sending the right message? This course focuses on learning to write effectively using a combination
of lectures, class exercises and discussions. There will be a special emphasis on drafting and the rules of construction.

You can expect to find out:
• How to write and edit more efficiently in the e-age
• How to apply storytelling to your writing of statements of fact
• How studying advertisements can help your arguments
• Ethical issues relevant to legal writing – RPC1.1 (Competence); 1.3 (Diligence); 1.4 (Communication); 3.1 (Meritorious Claims and Contentions)

Topics covered:
• Organizing your ideas: proper style, paragraph structure
• Convincing leads and conclusion: avoiding legalese
• The ethics of legal writing including citing to adverse authority, attributing sources, and use of metadata regarding electronic communication.
• How the internet changes the rules of privilege
• Writing for courts
• The process of editing (yourself and others)


National Speaker:
Steven Stark
A graduate of Harvard College and Yale Law School, Steven Stark has taught hundreds of writing and speaking courses to law firms, corporations, and government agencies. Steven is also the author of four books and one e-book. He has been a commentator for CNN, National Public Radio, and the Voice of America, as well as a columnist for the Boston Globe and Montreal Gazette.

A former Lecturer on Law at Harvard Law School, he has a vast background in the fields of legal writing, communication, & inter-cultural studies.


Legal Writing in a Smartphone Age
3 CLE / .5 E – Friday Morning, September 15; 9:00 A.M. – 12:15 P.M.

– ICLEF Conference Facility, Indianapolis


Stay for the Steven’s Afternoon Seminar!
Writing to Win: Results-Oriented Writing for Busy Litigators
3 CLE / .5 E – Friday Afternoon, September 15; 1:15 P.M. – 4:30 P.M.

– ICLEF Conf. Facility, Indianapolis

ICLEF • Indiana Continuing Legal Education Forum, Indianapolis, IN

Posted in Law Blogs0 Comments


DUI: Pre-Trial & Post-Trial – Aug. 23

• BMV Issues

• Case Law & Statutory Update

• Investigation of a Blood Case

• Pre-Trial Motions

• Anatomy of Evidence Based Sentencing & Alternative Sentencing Options

Mark A. Foster – Chair
Foster O’Daniel, Hambidge & Lynch LLP, Evansville

Hon. Wayne S. Trockman
Vanderburgh Superior Court, Evansville

Kyle J. Bonick
Indiana Bureau of Motor Vehicles, Indianapolis

Shaunda Lynch
Foster O’Daniel, Hambidge & Lynch LLP, Evansville

L. Scott Pejic
Pejic & DiMartino, P.C., Michigan City

Lori Schein
Indiana Bureau of Motor Vehicles, Indianapolis

Jodi L. Uebelhack
Vanderburgh County Treatment Court, Evansville

John R. Watkins
Arata Watkins, Fort Wayne

6 CLE – Wednesday, August 23;  9:00 A.M. – 4:30 P.M.

– ICLEF Conference Facility, Indianapolis

– From your home or office computer

– Available after Live Seminar date


ICLEF • Indiana Continuing Legal Education Forum, Indianapolis, IN

Posted in News0 Comments