ILNews

9 remain in running for Indiana Supreme Court

Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Nearly three-quarters of the 34 attorneys who’d applied for an Indiana Supreme Court opening won’t get a second interview.

After two days of interviewing all the candidates, the Judicial Nominating Commission narrowed the full list of applicants to nine people after about two hours of deliberation behind closed doors on Wednesday. Those semi-finalists will return for second interviews July 30 before the seven-member commission chooses three names to forward on to Gov. Mitch Daniels to make the final appointment.

Whoever is chosen will succeed Justice Theodore R. Boehm, who announced earlier this year his plans to retire Sept. 30.

The semi-finalist group is made up of four women and five men, who in their professional legal roles offer a variety of experiences: four are trial judges, two are big firm private practitioners, one is a law school general counsel, one is a state senator, and one is the state’s solicitor general. Semi-finalists are:

Indianapolis attorney Ellen E. Boshkoff, a partner at law firm Baker & Daniels for more than a decade and who’s been in practice for more than 20 years.

Boone Circuit Judge Steve David, who’s been on the bench since 1995 and has had an active career with the Army Reserves.

Bloomington attorney Kiply S. Drew, who has served as associate general counsel at Indiana University in Bloomington since 1994.

Johnson Superior Judge Cynthia S. Emkes, who’s been on the bench since 1987 after serving as a magistrate and working in private practice.

Thomas M. Fisher, who has been Indiana's solicitor general since the office’s creation in 2005 and has worked in the Attorney General’s Office. Before joining the AG, he worked at Baker & Daniels in Indianapolis and also Jones Day in Washington, D.C., following a clerkship at the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals.

Marion Superior Judge Robyn L. Moberly, who’s been on the bench since 1997 and had worked as a commissioner after being in private practice.

Indianapolis attorney Karl L. Mulvaney, who’s been practicing since 1977 and is an appellate attorney with Bingham McHale. He previously served as Indiana Supreme Court administrator from 1984 to 1991.

Hamilton Superior Judge Steven R. Nation, who has been on the bench since 1995 and previously served as Hamilton County prosecutor.

State Sen. Brent E. Steele, R-Bedford, who’s served in both the House and Senate and works an attorney with the law office of Steele & Steele.

Following a unanimous public vote on the semi-finalists, Chief Justice Randall T. Shepard, who chairs the commission, said that he initially expected fewer semi-finalists than the number chosen, but it was a direct result of having so many highly qualified applicants to draw from.
 

ADVERTISEMENT

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