Rob is now in his 27th year as a practicing attorney in Indiana. At this stage of his career, Rob’s focus is on providing compassionate and caring representation to his clients while aggressively pursuing justice for them.
In 1992, Rob graduated summa cum laude from Boston College’s Honor Program. He thereafter earned a Master’s degree from Utah State University prior to obtaining his J.D. from Indiana’s Maurer School of Law in Bloomington in 1998.
In addition to his many trial victories, Rob has argued before the Indiana Supreme Court, Indiana Court of Appeals and 7th Circuit Federal Court of Appeals. In many of these cases, Rob has “made law” to expand the rights of Hoosiers. Rob now dedicates the bulk of his practice to representing those seriously harmed by the wrongful conduct of others in tort and medical malpractice.
Most recently, in Hurley v. State, 56 N.E.3d 127 (Ind. 2016) the Indiana Supreme Court adopted Rob’s argument that police offers may not cherry-pick regulations when offering chemical tests to Hoosiers suspected of drunk driving. The Hurley case represents a trait in Rob that he prides himself on: never giving up. In the Hurley case, Rob lost at the trial and appellate court levels before winning at the Indiana Supreme Court.
In Alldredge v. Good Samarartin Home, Inc., 9 N.E.3d 1257 (Ind. 2014), Rob’s arguments persuaded the Indiana Supreme Court to establish a new precedent that the wrongful death statute of limitations should be tolled when the death in issue has been fraudulently concealed. (Previous Indiana law had suggested that Indiana’s wrongful death statute was never subject to tolling).
The same year, in Front Row Motors v. Jones, 5 N.E.3d 753 (Ind. 2014) Rob won another Indiana Supreme Court case, this time over a technical but important legal issue concerning when a litigant has a right to an appeal.
Again, Rob’s winning argument expanded the rights of Hoosiers, making it easier for them to appeal certain types of cases and also requiring lawyers to provide adequate legal notifications to pro se litigants.
In Willis v. State, 888 N.E.2d 177 (Ind. 2008) Rob represented a single mom who was criminally prosecuted for using physical force to discipline her 11-year son. Rob again “made law” by getting the Indiana Supreme Court to recognize a “parental privilege” for child discipline.
In Woods v. State, 892 N.E.2d 637 (Ind. 2008) Rob again made it to the Indiana Supreme Court and established that probationers are denied due process when they are not allowed by judges to explain why they violated their probation.
On the federal level, Rob’s advocacy in Van Gilder v. Baker, 435 F.3d 689 (7th Cir. 2006), established that police officers should not be immunized from civil liability when their arrestees who allege police misconduct have been convicted of certain crimes.
And finally, Rob “made law” in Indiana in 2005 with his Indiana Court of Appeals case Fowler v. Perry 830 N.E.2d 97 (Ind. Ct. App. 2005) which held, in a matter of the first impression, that when an engagement ring is purchased in contemplation of marriage and such engagement does not result in marriage, the person who purchased the engagement ring is entitled to its return or, if the return of the ring is impossible, to the monetary amount contributed toward the purchase of the ring.
“Call me, and I will personally review and analyze your situation. I’ll fight to help you and I won’t stop until we get the best results possible. ” – Rob King