ILNews

7 interview for COA; 3 finalists to be chosen

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

The Judicial Nominating Commission interviewed seven semi-finalists today for an opening on the Indiana Court of Appeals.

Now, the seven-member commission is deciding which three will be recommended to Gov. Mitch Daniels as finalists to succeed Judge John T. Sharpnack on the state's second highest appellate court.

Commission members conducted a second round of interviews with the seven semi-finalists, who were chosen in mid-November from an original 15 applicants.

Facing interviews today were: Dubois Superior Judge Elaine B. Brown, Morgan Superior Judge Jane Spencer Craney, Wayne Superior Judge P. Thomas Snow, Dearborn Superior Judge G. Michael Witte, Sen. Brent E. Steele of Bedford firm Steele & Steele, Leslie C. Shively of Shively & Associates in Evansville, and Stephen J. Johnson, executive director of the Indiana Prosecuting Attorneys Council.

Each focused their 20- to 30-minute interviews on what they consider their two finest career accomplishments and what two items most need improving at the court.

As far as proudest accomplishments, candidates' responses ranged from specific cases or projects they've handled to various relationships they've nurtured throughout their legal careers.

Judge Snow gave a humbling response after telling the commission about his work on the Judicial Administration Commission and developing the state's weighted caseload system in the 1990s.

"I don't mean to be flippant when I say this, but this is," he said about one of his finest accomplishments. "It's truly an honor to be among the seven highly qualified candidates, and it feels like I'm carrying the ball for the entire east side of the state."

Every candidate spoke about their interest in seeing a new, sixth judicial district added to the court to help keep up with growing caseloads, as well as a push for utilizing technology and e-filing, and making the appellate court more visible to Indiana residents.

One idea that some of the candidates touched on was the need for appellate mediation, specifically post-trial court judgment. Judge Brown mentioned the idea first, noting that it could be used in civil cases by delaying appeal filing by 45 days to get a 25 or 30 percent settlement rate, as seen in other states using the method.

In addition, Judge Brown also brought up several points that expanded on or added new points to what her fellow candidates mentioned. She suggested that appellate attorneys go through a certification process to make sure they have adequate experience and continuing legal education, as well as stationing some appellate judges in their respective judicial districts rather than Indianapolis to help the court's outreach.

Judge Craney noted that it could be time to revisit the court's policy on written opinions and whether more summary affirmations could be made.

At the end of his interview, Judge Witte described his one-time dream of being an Indiana High School Athletic Association referee and used a basketball analogy to describe how he would address competing parties' interests in appeals.

"One thing I learned is you don't care who wins, but by golly you make sure there's a level playing field," he said.

Only Steele and Shively came to the interviews as private practitioners currently representing clients, a point that commissioners focused on and at least one member pointed to as an important issue when considering finalists.

"We're looking at that hard and seriously," said commissioner Sherrill Colvin, an attorney from Fort Wayne.

Once the commission officially submits its recommendations, the governor has 60 days to make a decision. That person will replace Judge Sharpnack when he retires in May.

See the Indiana Lawyer Web site for updates.

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. First comment on this thread is a fitting final comment on this thread, as that the MCBA never answered Duncan's fine question, and now even Eric Holder agrees that the MCBA was in material error as to the facts: "I don't get it" from Duncan December 1, 2014 5:10 PM "The Grand Jury met for 25 days and heard 70 hours of testimony according to this article and they made a decision that no crime occurred. On what basis does the MCBA conclude that their decision was "unjust"? What special knowledge or evidence does the MCBA have that the Grand Jury hearing this matter was unaware of? The system that we as lawyers are sworn to uphold made a decision that there was insufficient proof that officer committed a crime. How can any of us say we know better what was right than the jury that actually heard all of the the evidence in this case."

  2. wow is this a bunch of bs! i know the facts!

  3. MCBA .... time for a new release about your entire membership (or is it just the alter ego) being "saddened and disappointed" in the failure to lynch a police officer protecting himself in the line of duty. But this time against Eric Holder and the Federal Bureau of Investigation: "WASHINGTON — Justice Department lawyers will recommend that no civil rights charges be brought against the police officer who fatally shot an unarmed teenager in Ferguson, Mo., after an F.B.I. investigation found no evidence to support charges, law enforcement officials said Wednesday." http://www.nytimes.com/2015/01/22/us/justice-department-ferguson-civil-rights-darren-wilson.html?ref=us&_r=0

  4. Dr wail asfour lives 3 hours from the hospital,where if he gets an emergency at least he needs three hours,while even if he is on call he should be in a location where it gives him max 10 minutes to be beside the patient,they get paid double on their on call days ,where look how they handle it,so if the death of the patient occurs on weekend and these doctors still repeat same pattern such issue should be raised,they should be closer to the patient.on other hand if all the death occured on the absence of the Dr and the nurses handle it,the nurses should get trained how to function appearntly they not that good,if the Dr lives 3 hours far from the hospital on his call days he should sleep in the hospital

  5. It's a capital offense...one for you Latin scholars..

ADVERTISEMENT