ILNews

34 apply to become next Indiana justice

Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

There are a lot of people in Indiana who want to become the state’s next Supreme Court Justice.  A record 34 people applied for the seat being vacated by Justice Theodore Boehm. Justice Boehm will retire in September. More than half the applicants are women and nearly half are currently judges.

Hon. Cynthia J. Ayers, Marion Superior Court, Civil Division 4
Hon. Mary Beth Bonaventura, Lake Superior Court, Juvenile Division
Ellen E. Boshkoff, Indianapolis
Hon. Elaine B. Brown, Indiana Court of Appeals
Sean M. Clapp, Fishers
Hon. Vicki L. Carmichael, Clark Superior Court 1
Hon. Jane Spencer Craney, Morgan Superior Court 3
Hon. Steven H. David, Boone Circuit Court
Kiply S. Drew, Bloomington
Hon. Cynthia S. Emkes, Johnson Superior Court 2
Thomas M. Fisher, Indianapolis
Monica Foster, Indianapolis
Hon. Frances C. Gull, Allen Superior Court
Lyle R. Hardman, Granger
Christine Talley Haseman, Bloomington
Hon. Susan Orr Henderson, Fountain Circuit Court
Hon. William J. Hughes, Hamilton Superior Court 3
Abigail Lawlis Kuzma, Indianapolis
Christine M. Marcuccilli, Fort Wayne
Hon. William C. Menges Jr., Howard Superior Court 1
Hon. Robyn L. Moberly, Marion Superior Court, Civil Division 5
Karl L. Mulvaney, Indianapolis
Hon. Steven R. Nation, Hamilton Superior Court 1
Clare Kraegel Nuechterlein, South Bend
Bryce D. Owens, Pendleton
Curtis E. Shirley, Indianapolis
Geoffrey G. Slaughter, Indianapolis
Hon. Robert A. Spahr, Miami Circuit Court
Sen. Brent E. Steele, Bedford
Yasmin L. Stump, Zionsville
Donald J. Tribbett, Logansport
Hon. Allen N. Wheat, Steuben Circuit Court
Hon. Mary G. Willis, Henry Circuit Court  
Judy L. Woods, Indianapolis

The Judicial Nominating Commission will interview the applicants at the Statehouse July 6 and 7. The commission will interview the semi-finalists July 30, with a public vote on the finalists that day.

Check www.theindianalawyer.com and future issues of Indiana Lawyer for coverage on the interviews and votes.
 

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. CCHP's real accomplishment is the 2015 law signed by Gov Pence that basically outlaws any annexation that is forced where a 65% majority of landowners in the affected area disagree. Regardless of whether HP wins or loses, the citizens of Indiana will not have another fiasco like this. The law Gov Pence signed is a direct result of this malgovernance.

  2. 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

  3. 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

  4. 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

  5. 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.

ADVERTISEMENT