ILNews

Appeals on Wheels continues to enjoy the open road

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

The Indiana Court of Appeals will hit a milestone this week when it convenes at Trine University in Angola.

The court’s traveling program, dubbed Appeals on Wheels, will conduct its 400th oral argument June 19 before an audience of high school juniors attending Hoosier Boys State. Judges John Baker, Melissa May and Cale Bradford will constitute the panel hearing Dodson v. Seven Corners, Inc., a civil case on appeal from Marion Superior Court.

Launched during the Court of Appeals’ centennial in 2000-2001, Appeals on Wheels has traveled across Indiana to high schools, colleges, law schools and other venues to give state residents a close-up look at the court in action.

“The entire court can be proud of this milestone,” said Chief Judge Nancy Vaidik. “We appreciate the tremendous interest of audiences across the state and the excellent advocacy of so many attorneys who’ve participated through the years.”

Appeals on Wheels is not a moot court program. All the arguments involve pending civil or criminal appeals from Indiana trial courts. Individuals who attend receive a study guide about the Court of Appeals and the case along with copies of the case briefs, if requested. The court also provides a preparation checklist to the host site, sends a news release to area media and notifies the host site after the opinion is issued.

“Traveling oral arguments are just as focused on the case and the law as the rest of our caseload,” Vaidik said. “But they involve an added dimension of public outreach and education that benefits the court, the law and our audiences.”

 

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. Such things are no more elections than those in the late, unlamented Soviet Union.

  2. It appears the police and prosecutors are allowed to change the rules halfway through the game to suit themselves. I am surprised that the congress has not yet eliminated the right to a trial in cases involving any type of forensic evidence. That would suit their foolish law and order police state views. I say we eliminate the statute of limitations for crimes committed by members of congress and other government employees. Of course they would never do that. They are all corrupt cowards!!!

  3. 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?

  4. 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?

  5. 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.

ADVERTISEMENT