ILNews

Judiciary announces court reforms

Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

The Indiana Judicial Conference unveiled its "roadmap for the future" today for the Indiana courts, which included consolidating courts and creating a uniform system to select trial judges. At the Indiana Judicial Conference, Indiana Chief Justice Randall T. Shepard discussed the long-term strategic plan's goals to improve the professionalism, efficiency, and effectiveness of the state's judiciary.

After 15 meetings across Indiana beginning in December 2008, the Strategic Planning Committee produced the 27-page document as a blueprint detailing the judiciary's vision for the future. The document isn't intended to be a detailed implementation plan ready for adoption by the legislature, but is an aspiration and vision for the future.

Some areas identified for improvement include increasing CLE requirements for judges and developing minimum standards for court staff; incorporating city, town, and township small claims courts into the trial courts; providing state funding for courts and court-related services; and reducing the seven different methods of selecting trial court judges in the state to a uniform system.

The plan calls for state funding of the trial courts in order to allocate resources fairly. Currently, the state pays for some salaries and court programs and county councils pay for other salaries and programs. Figures aren't yet available on the impact of funding changes.

Elkhart Circuit Judge Terry Shewmaker and Marion Superior Judge Mark Stoner are co-chairs of the Strategic Planning Committee. They say Indiana's complex court system needs to be changed so that it's clear and easy for citizens to understand. Duplication of efforts and inefficiencies that cost taxpayers money should be streamlined or eliminated.

Some aspects of the plan are ready to be implemented, including those dealing with education and training.

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Don't we have bigger issues to concern ourselves with?

  2. Anyone who takes the time to study disciplinary and bar admission cases in Indiana ... much of which is, as a matter of course and by intent, off the record, would have a very difficult time drawing lines that did not take into account things which are not supposed to matter, such as affiliations, associations, associates and the like. Justice Hoosier style is a far departure than what issues in most other parts of North America. (More like Central America, in fact.) See, e.g., http://www.theindianalawyer.com/indiana-attorney-illegally-practicing-in-florida-suspended-for-18-months/PARAMS/article/42200 When while the Indiana court system end the cruel practice of killing prophets of due process and those advocating for blind justice?

  3. Wouldn't this call for an investigation of Government corruption? Chief Justice Loretta Rush, wrote that the case warranted the high court’s review because the method the Indiana Court of Appeals used to reach its decision was “a significant departure from the law.” Specifically, David wrote that the appellate panel ruled after reweighing of the evidence, which is NOT permissible at the appellate level. **But yet, they look the other way while an innocent child was taken by a loving mother who did nothing wrong"

  4. Different rules for different folks....

  5. I would strongly suggest anyone seeking mediation check the experience of the mediator. There are retired judges who decide to become mediators. Their training and experience is in making rulings which is not the point of mediation.

ADVERTISEMENT