ILNews

IBA: Court to Conduct Magistrate, Commissioner Evaluation

Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

The Marion Circuit and Superior Courts have announced they will be conducting a performance evaluation of all current Magistrates and Commissioners now serving those courts. The online survey will be produced by the Indianapolis Bar Association and will be available for completion beginning September 1.

“As supervisors, the judges of the Circuit and Superior Court felt it was important to seek the feedback of attorneys practicing in our courts in order to fully evaluate performance,” said Judge Bob Altice, Marion County Superior Court Presiding Judge. “Part of our responsibility as judges is to continuously work to improve the delivery of legal services and the performance of the people serving in these important positions directly impacts our ability to effectively operate our courts. The survey is important and timely.”

The survey link will be sent by email to all attorneys in the Marion County Prosecutor’s Office and the Marion County Public Defender Agency, those entering an appearance in Marion Circuit Court or any of the county’s superior courts in the past three years, and all current attorney members of the Indianapolis Bar Association. Only those for whom an email address could not be located would be omitted.

Those receiving the survey are asked to only respond in regard to those judicial officers with whom they have had direct professional contact. Forty-four judicial officers are listed.

The courts sought to also include the members of the Marion County Bar Association; however, the MCBA’s leadership did not have an updated membership list available.

The survey will remain open to participants until September 15. Once closed, only the Indianapolis Bar Association’s Executive Director will have access to the confidential results which will be delivered directly to the court’s human resources director. It is the court’s plan to deliver each magistrate and commissioner’s results to their supervising judge(s) for review.

Anyone believing they should be in the survey group and not receiving the email notice is encouraged to contact Julie Armstrong, Indianapolis Bar Association Executive Director for assistance at jarmstrong@indybar.org or call 317.269.2000.•

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Indiana's seatbelt law is not punishable as a crime. It is an infraction. Apparently some of our Circuit judges have deemed settled law inapplicable if it fails to fit their litmus test of political correctness. Extrapolating to redefine terms of behavior in a violation of immigration law to the entire body of criminal law leaves a smorgasbord of opportunity for judicial mischief.

  2. I wonder if $10 diversions for failure to wear seat belts are considered moral turpitude in federal immigration law like they are under Indiana law? Anyone know?

  3. What a fine article, thank you! I can testify firsthand and by detailed legal reports (at end of this note) as to the dire consequences of rejecting this truth from the fine article above: "The inclusion and expansion of this right [to jury] in Indiana’s Constitution is a clear reflection of our state’s intention to emphasize the importance of every Hoosier’s right to make their case in front of a jury of their peers." Over $20? Every Hoosier? Well then how about when your very vocation is on the line? How about instead of a jury of peers, one faces a bevy of political appointees, mini-czars, who care less about due process of the law than the real czars did? Instead of trial by jury, trial by ideological ordeal run by Orwellian agents? Well that is built into more than a few administrative law committees of the Ind S.Ct., and it is now being weaponized, as is revealed in articles posted at this ezine, to root out post moderns heresies like refusal to stand and pledge allegiance to all things politically correct. My career was burned at the stake for not so saluting, but I think I was just one of the early logs. Due, at least in part, to the removal of the jury from bar admission and bar discipline cases, many more fires will soon be lit. Perhaps one awaits you, dear heretic? Oh, at that Ind. article 12 plank about a remedy at law for every damage done ... ah, well, the founders evidently meant only for those damages done not by the government itself, rabid statists that they were. (Yes, that was sarcasm.) My written reports available here: Denied petition for cert (this time around): http://tinyurl.com/zdmawmw Denied petition for cert (from the 2009 denial and five year banishment): http://tinyurl.com/zcypybh Related, not written by me: Amicus brief: http://tinyurl.com/hvh7qgp

  4. Justice has finally been served. So glad that Dr. Ley can finally sleep peacefully at night knowing the truth has finally come to the surface.

  5. While this right is guaranteed by our Constitution, it has in recent years been hampered by insurance companies, i.e.; the practice of the plaintiff's own insurance company intervening in an action and filing a lien against any proceeds paid to their insured. In essence, causing an additional financial hurdle for a plaintiff to overcome at trial in terms of overall award. In a very real sense an injured party in exercise of their right to trial by jury may be the only party in a cause that would end up with zero compensation.

ADVERTISEMENT