ILNews

1.8M cases filed in Indiana in 2010

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share
Nearly two million new cases were filed in Indiana courts in 2010, a 3 percent increase as compared to 2001, according to the annual Indiana Judicial Service Report released Tuesday.

While the number of new cases filed has increased over the last decade, 2010 saw a decrease in new cases filed as compared to 2009. That year, 1,956,749 cases were filed around the state; in 2010, that number dropped to 1,859,870. Last year’s 205 murder cases filed were 20 fewer as compared to 2009, and there has been a 25 percent decrease in murder filings from 2002 to 2010.

Revenue generated by court costs, fines and fees has increased by more than $2 million as compared to 2009, and the money spent to operate the courts decreased by more than $6 million. The number of people representing themselves in cases dropped in 2010 as compared to 2009 by more than 20,000.

Other highlights from the report include:
-    The Supreme Court awarded more than $1.19 million in grants for interpreter services in more than 160,000 cases as of 2010. Interpreters were used in nearly 15,000 trial court cases in 2010.
-    There were more than 41,000 mortgage foreclosure filings in the state in 2010, and those filings have increased 39 percent from 2002 to last year.
-    More than 12,000 Child in Need of Services cases were filed in 2010, and there has been a 126 percent increase in termination of parental rights cases since 2001.

The 1,782 page report is available online at http://courts.in.gov/admin.


 

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
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. I gave tempparry guardship to a friend of my granddaughter in 2012. I went to prison. I had custody. My daughter went to prison to. We are out. My daughter gave me custody but can get her back. She was not order to give me custody . but now we want granddaughter back from friend. She's 14 now. What rights do we have

  2. This sure is not what most who value good governance consider the Rule of Law to entail: "In a letter dated March 2, which Brizzi forwarded to IBJ, the commission dismissed the grievance “on grounds that there is not reasonable cause to believe that you are guilty of misconduct.”" Yet two month later reasonable cause does exist? (Or is the commission forging ahead, the need for reasonable belief be damned? -- A seeming violation of the Rules of Profession Ethics on the part of the commission) Could the rule of law theory cause one to believe that an explanation is in order? Could it be that Hoosier attorneys live under Imperial Law (which is also a t-word that rhymes with infamy) in which the Platonic guardians can do no wrong and never owe the plebeian class any explanation for their powerful actions. (Might makes it right?) Could this be a case of politics directing the commission, as celebrated IU Mauer Professor (the late) Patrick Baude warned was happening 20 years ago in his controversial (whisteblowing) ethics lecture on a quite similar topic: http://www.repository.law.indiana.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1498&context=ilj

  3. I have a case presently pending cert review before the SCOTUS that reveals just how Indiana regulates the bar. I have been denied licensure for life for holding the wrong views and questioning the grand inquisitors as to their duties as to state and federal constitutional due process. True story: https://www.scribd.com/doc/299040839/2016Petitionforcert-to-SCOTUS Shorter, Amici brief serving to frame issue as misuse of govt licensure: https://www.scribd.com/doc/312841269/Thomas-More-Society-Amicus-Brown-v-Ind-Bd-of-Law-Examiners

  4. Here's an idea...how about we MORE heavily regulate the law schools to reduce the surplus of graduates, driving starting salaries up for those new grads, so that we can all pay our insane amount of student loans off in a reasonable amount of time and then be able to afford to do pro bono & low-fee work? I've got friends in other industries, radiology for example, and their schools accept a very limited number of students so there will never be a glut of new grads and everyone's pay stays high. For example, my radiologist friend's school accepted just six new students per year.

  5. I totally agree with John Smith.

ADVERTISEMENT