ILNews

Indiana chief justice getting national award

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Indiana Supreme Court Chief Justice Randall T. Shepard will receive a prestigious award from the American Judicature Society, recognizing his judicial excellence in the state.

On Wednesday, the chief justice will receive the sixth annual award named for Dwight D. Opperman, former chairman and chief executive officer of West Publishing Co. The national judicial organization announced in December that Chief Justice Shepard would receive the award, which honors state-level trial and appellate jurists for what's described as distinguished service on the bench.

A seventh-generation Hoosier and graduate of Princeton University and Yale Law School, Chief Justice Shepard started his judicial career in 1980 on the Vanderburgh Superior Court in Evansville. He joined the state Supreme Court in 1985, and then took the chief justice role 1987. He's authored more than 850 majority opinions in his time on the court and is recognized as a national authority on judicial ethics and legal professionalism, and has held leadership roles as president of the Conference of Chief Justices and the National Center for State Courts.

Indiana Court of Appeals Chief Judge John Baker nominated him, writing in his nomination letter that Chief Justice Shepard "makes those of us from Indiana proud to be Hoosiers."

Selecting the Indiana chief justice was a three-member panel including the Hon. Judith S. Kaye, former chief judge of the New York Court of Appeals; California Court of Appeal Justice Ronald Robie for the Third Appellate District; and Judge Frederic Rodgers of the Gilpin Combined Courts in Colorado.

The chief justice receives his award at a lunchtime reception on the first day of the three-day spring judicial education conference that brings judges from across the state to Indianapolis.

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
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. I gave tempparry guardship to a friend of my granddaughter in 2012. I went to prison. I had custody. My daughter went to prison to. We are out. My daughter gave me custody but can get her back. She was not order to give me custody . but now we want granddaughter back from friend. She's 14 now. What rights do we have

  2. This sure is not what most who value good governance consider the Rule of Law to entail: "In a letter dated March 2, which Brizzi forwarded to IBJ, the commission dismissed the grievance “on grounds that there is not reasonable cause to believe that you are guilty of misconduct.”" Yet two month later reasonable cause does exist? (Or is the commission forging ahead, the need for reasonable belief be damned? -- A seeming violation of the Rules of Profession Ethics on the part of the commission) Could the rule of law theory cause one to believe that an explanation is in order? Could it be that Hoosier attorneys live under Imperial Law (which is also a t-word that rhymes with infamy) in which the Platonic guardians can do no wrong and never owe the plebeian class any explanation for their powerful actions. (Might makes it right?) Could this be a case of politics directing the commission, as celebrated IU Mauer Professor (the late) Patrick Baude warned was happening 20 years ago in his controversial (whisteblowing) ethics lecture on a quite similar topic: http://www.repository.law.indiana.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1498&context=ilj

  3. I have a case presently pending cert review before the SCOTUS that reveals just how Indiana regulates the bar. I have been denied licensure for life for holding the wrong views and questioning the grand inquisitors as to their duties as to state and federal constitutional due process. True story: https://www.scribd.com/doc/299040839/2016Petitionforcert-to-SCOTUS Shorter, Amici brief serving to frame issue as misuse of govt licensure: https://www.scribd.com/doc/312841269/Thomas-More-Society-Amicus-Brown-v-Ind-Bd-of-Law-Examiners

  4. Here's an idea...how about we MORE heavily regulate the law schools to reduce the surplus of graduates, driving starting salaries up for those new grads, so that we can all pay our insane amount of student loans off in a reasonable amount of time and then be able to afford to do pro bono & low-fee work? I've got friends in other industries, radiology for example, and their schools accept a very limited number of students so there will never be a glut of new grads and everyone's pay stays high. For example, my radiologist friend's school accepted just six new students per year.

  5. I totally agree with John Smith.

ADVERTISEMENT