ILNews

A decade of court data is revealed

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Hoosier trial court judges don’t need a 1,782-page multi-volume report to tell them caseloads have increased in the past decade or that in recent years, Indiana has seen a sharp increase in cases involving abused or neglected children and parental rights terminations.

They recognize that trend by seeing the faces that appear before them in courtrooms throughout Indiana each week. And the number-filled report only confirms what they’ve suspected is true – many judicial officers are working at maximum capacity.

But what the annual Judicial Service Report, released in December 2011 by the Indiana Supreme Court’s Division of State Court Administration, provides individual judges is proof that they are not alone. The statistics reveal that similar trends are playing out throughout the state.

“The work of the courts cannot be summed up in numbers, but the 2010 statistics report does offer a snapshot of the volume, breadth, challenges and success stories in each of the courthouses in Indiana’s 92 counties,” Indiana Chief Justice Randall T. Shepard said.

One clear piece of data offered from the report: the state needs more judges.

Weighted caseload statistics show that Indiana needs nearly 600 judicial officers but only has 441, meaning that judges are working at 135 percent based on the number of people handling the caseload statewide.

The comprehensive report shows a dip in the number of new criminal and civil case filings in 2010 as compared to 2009. The report covers the final year of a decade that saw a steady increase in criminal and civil cases in the state’s courts. While Indiana’s population grew by 6 percent from 2000 to 2010, the number of criminal cases increased by nearly three times that amount.

Ten years ago, the courts were seeing about the same number of cases filed each year until a gradual dip began in 2003 that lasted three years. Filings rose again starting in 2006 and hit a record level of more than 2 million filings in 2008. But in the past year, the small decrease from about 1.9 million new cases in 2009 to about 1.8 million in 2010 may reflect more accurate record keeping rather than a slowdown in court activity.

The report also shows a 27 percent decrease in murder filings from 2002 to 2010. Mortgage foreclosure filings are down but remain well-above where they were a decade ago.

“If you dig down deep enough, almost everything is still at record levels except for traffic violations,” Shepard said.

Traffic violation numbers are a bit suspect, the chief justice said. In the past, local courts were erroneously recording the same infraction multiple times. That’s getting corrected with the use of the Odyssey case management system that’s being implemented in local courts.courts

In reviewing the annual court numbers, Shepard pointed to the statistics on neglected and abused children as one of the areas that stands out the most to him. In 2010, Indiana saw 12,160 filings that were Child In Need of Services cases. That’s up from about 9,000 cases filed in 2000.

Shepard said the near-record number of CHINS cases likely reflects a more aggressive approach by the state’s child-protection services, and the spikes follow with times when the state hired more child welfare workers to manage those cases. There aren’t necessarily more instances of abuse or neglect happening, but rather the situations are being recognized and addressed more frequently, he said.

That more aggressive approach may also explain the 126 percent increase during the past decade in the number of cases involving parental rights terminations, the report shows.

“It keeps those children from getting lost in the system,” Shepard said, referring to the state’s more aggressive approach on these types of cases.

He also noted the rise in the number of court-appointed special advocates for children, which was at 3,268 volunteers in 2010, but could rise even higher because of the record 1,010 new CASA volunteers trained in 2011.

“That’s a good thing,” Shepard said. “It means a couple thousand more children who didn’t have advocates before now will.”

In dealing with increased caseloads but fewer resources to add new courts and judicial officers, state court officials said the judiciary has had to become more creative and efficient in how they’re administering justice. David Remondini, chief deputy executive director of the Division of State Court Administration, said the chief justice’s leadership in asking judges to volunteer their time and effort on specific projects and tasks in order to work more efficiently has been a positive move that has helped the state handle the caseload changes. When people volunteer for projects and tasks, it is typically because they know the chief justice believes in it and is passionate about the topic, and that it’s not something that will be a passing fad or a quick headline.

“That leadership creates efficiency for our court system,” Remondini said.

In Marion County, Superior Judge Robyn Moberly said the county system has worked creatively and efficiently for years despite the disproportionate share of workload that judges face.

That means utilizing an e-filing system for mortgage foreclosure and collection cases and assigning the judges a narrow range of case types to establish areas of expertise they can use to better move cases along.

“Thanks to many initiatives that steer cases away from courtroom conflict, we’re able to handle the volume very well, in my opinion,” she said. “We’re able to maintain a high level of job satisfaction for our judges.  In fact, in my court, our number of pending cases has dropped significantly in the past four years while the new filings have increased, and I think that’s partly because of the growth of mediation and because we take advantage of all of the alternatives to courtroom conflict that our county offers.”

The multi-volume 2010 Indiana Judicial Service Report can be found at the Supreme Court’s website at www.courts.in.gov.•

ADVERTISEMENT

  • Fewer judges
    I disagree that Indiana needs more judges. I do realize that there are likely things I don't know, but having been under Court jurisdiction for the past 15 years for no other reason than having been married and having children ... I just don't believe that statement is true. I think that PEOPLE need to be more informed about marriage and similar relationships ... I can guarantee (as I prefer to learn negative lessons vicariously, when possible)that had I KNOWN ANYTHING about "the Family Court system", I would certainly have thought long and hard before marrying. Any system that allows children to be torn away from parents ONLY because one spouse and, from what I am now told was an unethical attorney, who was fine sending intimidating letters to me threatening felony charges (for trying to get a protective order when child exchanges were always yelling, threat filled experiences that terrorized our children) or totally blowing off my request to have my car returned so that I could resume visitation ... instead, I received threats of conversion to be filed against me if I didn't return paperwork (relating to spouse's trade in of a jointly titled vehicle during marriage and purchase of one solely titled in his). I am of the opinion that many divorces are made because people lack skills and they lack an appreciation of reality. However, there is now a huge industry built on the failure of parents and the failure of marriages. Since strong, healthy families supposedly are the bedrock of a strong, healthy nation, I can only surmise that something is totally awry ... we need less judges ... we need more wisdom, guidance and good sense ... and to leave jurisprudence as a course of last resort for truly hopeless cases.

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 have been on this program while on parole from 2011-2013. No person should be forced mentally to share private details of their personal life with total strangers. Also giving permission for a mental therapist to report to your parole agent that your not participating in group therapy because you don't have the financial mean to be in the group therapy. I was personally singled out and sent back three times for not having money and also sent back within the six month when you aren't to be sent according to state law. I will work to het this INSOMM's removed from this state. I also had twelve or thirteen parole agents with a fifteen month period. Thanks for your time.

  2. Our nation produces very few jurists of the caliber of Justice DOUGLAS and his peers these days. Here is that great civil libertarian, who recognized government as both a blessing and, when corrupted by ideological interests, a curse: "Once the investigator has only the conscience of government as a guide, the conscience can become ‘ravenous,’ as Cromwell, bent on destroying Thomas More, said in Bolt, A Man For All Seasons (1960), p. 120. The First Amendment mirrors many episodes where men, harried and harassed by government, sought refuge in their conscience, as these lines of Thomas More show: ‘MORE: And when we stand before God, and you are sent to Paradise for doing according to your conscience, *575 and I am damned for not doing according to mine, will you come with me, for fellowship? ‘CRANMER: So those of us whose names are there are damned, Sir Thomas? ‘MORE: I don't know, Your Grace. I have no window to look into another man's conscience. I condemn no one. ‘CRANMER: Then the matter is capable of question? ‘MORE: Certainly. ‘CRANMER: But that you owe obedience to your King is not capable of question. So weigh a doubt against a certainty—and sign. ‘MORE: Some men think the Earth is round, others think it flat; it is a matter capable of question. But if it is flat, will the King's command make it round? And if it is round, will the King's command flatten it? No, I will not sign.’ Id., pp. 132—133. DOUGLAS THEN WROTE: Where government is the Big Brother,11 privacy gives way to surveillance. **909 But our commitment is otherwise. *576 By the First Amendment we have staked our security on freedom to promote a multiplicity of ideas, to associate at will with kindred spirits, and to defy governmental intrusion into these precincts" Gibson v. Florida Legislative Investigation Comm., 372 U.S. 539, 574-76, 83 S. Ct. 889, 908-09, 9 L. Ed. 2d 929 (1963) Mr. Justice DOUGLAS, concurring. I write: Happy Memorial Day to all -- God please bless our fallen who lived and died to preserve constitutional governance in our wonderful series of Republics. And God open the eyes of those government officials who denounce the constitutions of these Republics by arbitrary actions arising out capricious motives.

  3. From back in the day before secularism got a stranglehold on Hoosier jurists comes this great excerpt via Indiana federal court judge Allan Sharp, dedicated to those many Indiana government attorneys (with whom I have dealt) who count the law as a mere tool, an optional tool that is not to be used when political correctness compels a more acceptable result than merely following the path that the law directs: ALLEN SHARP, District Judge. I. In a scene following a visit by Henry VIII to the home of Sir Thomas More, playwriter Robert Bolt puts the following words into the mouths of his characters: Margaret: Father, that man's bad. MORE: There is no law against that. ROPER: There is! God's law! MORE: Then God can arrest him. ROPER: Sophistication upon sophistication! MORE: No, sheer simplicity. The law, Roper, the law. I know what's legal not what's right. And I'll stick to what's legal. ROPER: Then you set man's law above God's! MORE: No, far below; but let me draw your attention to a fact I'm not God. The currents and eddies of right and wrong, which you find such plain sailing, I can't navigate. I'm no voyager. But in the thickets of law, oh, there I'm a forester. I doubt if there's a man alive who could follow me there, thank God... ALICE: (Exasperated, pointing after Rich) While you talk, he's gone! MORE: And go he should, if he was the Devil himself, until he broke the law! ROPER: So now you'd give the Devil benefit of law! MORE: Yes. What would you do? Cut a great road through the law to get after the Devil? ROPER: I'd cut down every law in England to do that! MORE: (Roused and excited) Oh? (Advances on Roper) And when the last law was down, and the Devil turned round on you where would you hide, Roper, the laws being flat? (He leaves *1257 him) This country's planted thick with laws from coast to coast man's laws, not God's and if you cut them down and you're just the man to do it d'you really think you would stand upright in the winds that would blow then? (Quietly) Yes, I'd give the Devil benefit of law, for my own safety's sake. ROPER: I have long suspected this; this is the golden calf; the law's your god. MORE: (Wearily) Oh, Roper, you're a fool, God's my god... (Rather bitterly) But I find him rather too (Very bitterly) subtle... I don't know where he is nor what he wants. ROPER: My God wants service, to the end and unremitting; nothing else! MORE: (Dryly) Are you sure that's God! He sounds like Moloch. But indeed it may be God And whoever hunts for me, Roper, God or Devil, will find me hiding in the thickets of the law! And I'll hide my daughter with me! Not hoist her up the mainmast of your seagoing principles! They put about too nimbly! (Exit More. They all look after him). Pgs. 65-67, A MAN FOR ALL SEASONS A Play in Two Acts, Robert Bolt, Random House, New York, 1960. Linley E. Pearson, Atty. Gen. of Indiana, Indianapolis, for defendants. Childs v. Duckworth, 509 F. Supp. 1254, 1256 (N.D. Ind. 1981) aff'd, 705 F.2d 915 (7th Cir. 1983)

  4. "Meanwhile small- and mid-size firms are getting squeezed and likely will not survive unless they become a boutique firm." I've been a business attorney in small, and now mid-size firm for over 30 years, and for over 30 years legal consultants have been preaching this exact same mantra of impending doom for small and mid-sized firms -- verbatim. This claim apparently helps them gin up merger opportunities from smaller firms who become convinced that they need to become larger overnight. The claim that large corporations are interested in cost-saving and efficiency has likewise been preached for decades, and is likewise bunk. If large corporations had any real interest in saving money they wouldn't use large law firms whose rates are substantially higher than those of high-quality mid-sized firms.

  5. The family is the foundation of all human government. That is the Grand Design. Modern governments throw off this Design and make bureaucratic war against the family, as does Hollywood and cultural elitists such as third wave feminists. Since WWII we have been on a ship of fools that way, with both the elite and government and their social engineering hacks relentlessly attacking the very foundation of social order. And their success? See it in the streets of Fergusson, on the food stamp doles (mostly broken families)and in the above article. Reject the Grand Design for true social function, enter the Glorious State to manage social dysfunction. Our Brave New World will be a prison camp, and we will welcome it as the only way to manage given the anarchy without it.

ADVERTISEMENT