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. Wishing Mary Willis only God's best, and superhuman strength, as she attempts to right a ship that too often strays far off course. May she never suffer this personal affect, as some do who attempt to change a broken system: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QojajMsd2nE

  2. Indiana's seatbelt law is not punishable as a crime. It is an infraction. Apparently some of our Circuit judges have deemed settled law inapplicable if it fails to fit their litmus test of political correctness. Extrapolating to redefine terms of behavior in a violation of immigration law to the entire body of criminal law leaves a smorgasbord of opportunity for judicial mischief.

  3. I wonder if $10 diversions for failure to wear seat belts are considered moral turpitude in federal immigration law like they are under Indiana law? Anyone know?

  4. What a fine article, thank you! I can testify firsthand and by detailed legal reports (at end of this note) as to the dire consequences of rejecting this truth from the fine article above: "The inclusion and expansion of this right [to jury] in Indiana’s Constitution is a clear reflection of our state’s intention to emphasize the importance of every Hoosier’s right to make their case in front of a jury of their peers." Over $20? Every Hoosier? Well then how about when your very vocation is on the line? How about instead of a jury of peers, one faces a bevy of political appointees, mini-czars, who care less about due process of the law than the real czars did? Instead of trial by jury, trial by ideological ordeal run by Orwellian agents? Well that is built into more than a few administrative law committees of the Ind S.Ct., and it is now being weaponized, as is revealed in articles posted at this ezine, to root out post moderns heresies like refusal to stand and pledge allegiance to all things politically correct. My career was burned at the stake for not so saluting, but I think I was just one of the early logs. Due, at least in part, to the removal of the jury from bar admission and bar discipline cases, many more fires will soon be lit. Perhaps one awaits you, dear heretic? Oh, at that Ind. article 12 plank about a remedy at law for every damage done ... ah, well, the founders evidently meant only for those damages done not by the government itself, rabid statists that they were. (Yes, that was sarcasm.) My written reports available here: Denied petition for cert (this time around): http://tinyurl.com/zdmawmw Denied petition for cert (from the 2009 denial and five year banishment): http://tinyurl.com/zcypybh Related, not written by me: Amicus brief: http://tinyurl.com/hvh7qgp

  5. Justice has finally been served. So glad that Dr. Ley can finally sleep peacefully at night knowing the truth has finally come to the surface.

ADVERTISEMENT