ILNews

5 make first cut for Court of Appeals vacancy

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

A consumer protection official, a public defender, two judges and a law professor are semifinalists for a position on the Indiana Court of Appeals.

The Indiana Judicial Nominating Commission on May 16 selected Abigail Lawlis Kuzma, of Indianapolis; Patricia Caress McMath, of Indianapolis; Madison Circuit Judge Rudolph R. Pyle III, of Anderson; Joel M. Schumm, of Indianapolis; and Marion Superior Judge Robert R. Altice Jr., of Indianapolis. The five were chosen from a field of 14 applicants vying to fill the vacancy that will be created when appellate Judge Carr Darden retires in July.

Each of the semifinalists will be interviewed a second time June 4 or 5. The commission then will select three finalists whose names will be sent to Gov. Mitch Daniels, who will make the appointment.

The commission, chaired by Chief Justice Brent Dickson, asked candidates what they most admired about the Court of Appeals and what qualities they would bring, if selected.  
 

kuzma-bigaillawlis-mug.jpg Kuzma

Kuzma, who leads the Office of the Indiana Attorney General’s consumer protection division, said she appreciated the court’s efforts to reach out to Hoosiers through its website, plain language jury instructions, and “appeals on wheels,” in which appellate panels travel the state for oral arguments.

Kuzma stressed her organizational leadership and prior charitable work as co-founder of the Neighborhood Christian Legal Clinic in Indianapolis. At the consumer protection division, she oversees a staff of about 100 people, including 35 attorneys, who focus on fraud prevention, foreclosure prevention and other consumer issues. “It’s very rewarding but also a very diverse experience of helping people,” she said. “I am a high-energy person.”


McMath McMath

McMath is one of three former Court of Appeals law clerks who made the cut. She handles appeals for the Marion County Public Defender Agency.

She said she admired the court for making “a written appeal in every case, so Hoosiers know” why the case was decided as it was. “It’s a remarkable thing considering that kind of caseload.”

McMath said her familiarity with appeals was a strong suit. “I have vast experience with appellate law,” she said, citing seven years as a clerk for two judges and 15 years as a public defender working exclusively in the appeals court.


Pyle Pyle

Pyle, a Madison Circuit judge, also clerked at the Court of Appeals for the man he hopes to succeed – Darden. He said he was impressed by the court’s emphasis on civility and recalled when writing as a law clerk being impressed by the respectful tone of dissents.

“I’m committed to that process,” Pyle said.

He stressed his diversity of experience that includes being an Indiana state trooper, deputy prosecutor, defense attorney, running a private practice, and being appointed and elected to the bench.

“I’ve had the opportunity to see the law on almost every level,” he said.


altice-robert-mug Altice

Altice, a longtime Marion Superior judge, said he knows the judges on the appeals court through his years on the bench.

“Probably the biggest skill I bring is experience,” he said, including trying more than 270 criminal cases, including 40 murder cases; and bringing more than 100 cases as a prosecutor.

“I try to build consensus wherever I can,” Altice said. “It’s just the nature of my personality.”

Indiana University Robert H. McKinney School of Law professor Joel Schumm is among those who have experience as an appeals court clerk. He stressed his academic background and said he admired “the way the Court of Appeals guarantees an absolute right to one appeal.”


Joel Schumm mug Schumm

Schumm said that he would bring a fitting work ethic to a court that generates more than 2,000 opinions per year.

Of his attributes, he said, “the biggest one is writing and analytical ability. … Writing excellent opinions.”

Other applicants were: Marion Superior Judge Cynthia J. Ayers, of Indianapolis; Jeffrey D. Wehmueller, of Fishers; Carol Nemeth Joven, of Indianapolis; Bryce D. Owens, of Pendleton; Brenda A. Roper, of Indianapolis; Rebecca A. Trent, of West Lafayette; Howard Superior Judge William C. Menges Jr., of Kokomo; Chris M. Teagle, of Albany; and Kari Evans Bennett, of Noblesville.•

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

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Indiana State Bar Association

Indianapolis Bar Association

Evansville Bar Association

Allen County Bar Association

Indiana Lawyer on Facebook

facebook
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Poor Judge Brown probably thought that by slavishly serving the godz of the age her violations of 18th century concepts like due process and the rule of law would be overlooked. Mayhaps she was merely a Judge ahead of her time?

  2. in a lawyer discipline case Judge Brown, now removed, was presiding over a hearing about a lawyer accused of the supposedly heinous ethical violation of saying the words "Illegal immigrant." (IN re Barker) http://www.in.gov/judiciary/files/order-discipline-2013-55S00-1008-DI-429.pdf .... I wonder if when we compare the egregious violations of due process by Judge Brown, to her chiding of another lawyer for politically incorrectness, if there are any conclusions to be drawn about what kind of person, what kind of judge, what kind of apparatchik, is busy implementing the agenda of political correctness and making off-limits legit advocacy about an adverse party in a suit whose illegal alien status is relevant? I am just asking the question, the reader can make own conclsuion. Oh wait-- did I use the wrong adjective-- let me rephrase that, um undocumented alien?

  3. of course the bigger questions of whether or not the people want to pay for ANY bussing is off limits, due to the Supreme Court protecting the people from DEMOCRACY. Several decades hence from desegregation and bussing plans and we STILL need to be taking all this taxpayer money to combat mostly-imagined "discrimination" in the most obviously failed social program of the postwar period.

  4. You can put your photos anywhere you like... When someone steals it they know it doesn't belong to them. And, a man getting a divorce is automatically not a nice guy...? That's ridiculous. Since when is need of money a conflict of interest? That would mean that no one should have a job unless they are already financially solvent without a job... A photographer is also under no obligation to use a watermark (again, people know when a photo doesn't belong to them) or provide contact information. Hey, he didn't make it easy for me to pay him so I'll just take it! Well heck, might as well walk out of the grocery store with a cart full of food because the lines are too long and you don't find that convenient. "Only in Indiana." Oh, now you're passing judgement on an entire state... What state do you live in? I need to characterize everyone in your state as ignorant and opinionated. And the final bit of ignorance; assuming a photo anyone would want is lucky and then how much does your camera have to cost to make it a good photo, in your obviously relevant opinion?

  5. Seventh Circuit Court Judge Diane Wood has stated in “The Rule of Law in Times of Stress” (2003), “that neither laws nor the procedures used to create or implement them should be secret; and . . . the laws must not be arbitrary.” According to the American Bar Association, Wood’s quote drives home this point: The rule of law also requires that people can expect predictable results from the legal system; this is what Judge Wood implies when she says that “the laws must not be arbitrary.” Predictable results mean that people who act in the same way can expect the law to treat them in the same way. If similar actions do not produce similar legal outcomes, people cannot use the law to guide their actions, and a “rule of law” does not exist.

ADVERTISEMENT