ILNews

Judge sues to prevent local court closure

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

If one east-central Indiana prosecutor had a time machine, he might travel back to the start of the year and reconsider whether it truly matters if the judge on the Knightstown Court is not an attorney.

He might not have transferred all misdemeanor cases from the town court because of concern about non-attorneys handling those types of criminal matters. That, in turn, might have prevented a drop in revenue that caused local officials to pursue the court’s closure by Oct. 31.

But all of that happened, and now Town Judge Bart Whitesitt – a non-attorney who’s been on the bench since February – has filed a lawsuit against Knightstown in an attempt to keep the court open, at least temporarily. Henry County Prosecutor Kit Crane is also trying to save the court while adapting to the changing criminal justice landscape.

“Our court has worked for decades,” he said. “But I get it. It’s the 21st century and we are moving on to make sure we have the most qualified people on the bench. I was pretty stubborn about that being the way to go – having lay judges. But it’s hard for me as a prosecutor to argue against the benefit to litigants in having someone trained and educated in that formal discipline able to hear their case.”
 

consolidation-15col.jpg Knightstown Court Judge Bart Whitesitt and his attorney Tony Saunders have filed a lawsuit challenging the closure of the local court by Oct. 31. (IL Photo/ Perry Reichanadter)

This is an example where Indiana’s most local of courts are experiencing the trickle-down effect of state judiciary efforts to consolidate courts, unify jurisdictions, and require all individuals serving on the bench to have a law license. Some localities have passed ordinances and considered rules requiring law licenses for its city and town judges, and the issue centers on whether non-attorneys are knowledgeable in legal issues that apply even in traffic, infraction, and low-level criminal cases.

Statewide discussion at the start of the year didn’t specifically impact Knightstown Court, which has existed since the 1950s and about a decade ago was one of the highest-grossing courts in the state. But Crane knew the court reform issues were surfacing more frequently throughout Indiana and he expected it would present itself locally at some point.

That happened in January, when longtime Knightstown attorney and Town Judge Hayden Butler announced he was resigning from the court. The Indiana Supreme Court appointed attorney Joseph Lansinger to fill that spot temporarily.

Although the town council soon after passed an ordinance requiring the judge be a Knightstown resident and that any appointee be an attorney, the Henry County Republican Party chair wasn’t obligated to follow that ordinance and appointed Whitesitt, a precinct committeeman, in a caucus.

The county prosecutor saw a potential problem if Judge Whitesitt’s jurisdiction and ability to handle criminal cases ever came under scrutiny because of his lack of a law license. Crane took action, seeing a way to save the local court.

The solution: stop filing misdemeanors in town court, and instead only file civil infractions there. The rest would go to Henry Circuit Court.

“It would be better to have a court in Knightstown that could hear infractions than to have a court that couldn’t hear anything,” Crane said.

But without the misdemeanor cases, the court began to see less revenue as the year went on. The county clerk reported the court’s annual revenue had decreased by about $80,000 from 2009 to 2011 to half of what it had been. The court hours were cut by half in April, with Thursday from 6 to 10 p.m. being the only set time for court. Then, in the summer, local officials voted to close the court at year’s end. The closure timetable was later moved to the end of October. The ordinance that implemented the closure stated it wasn’t in the town’s best interest to supplement the court’s operations with property tax revenue.

If and when the town court closes, thousands of infraction filings, mostly speeding tickets, will follow the misdemeanors that have been transferred to Henry Circuit Judge Bob Witham’s courtroom.

Crane doesn’t want to see the town court’s closure, because of the impact it will have on the county judges who will have less time to devote to felony and other cases before them. It will also impact residents who will have to travel to county court rather than the local courthouse.

Judge Whitesitt filed his suit Sept. 6 to prevent that closure from happening, and New Castle attorney Tony Saunders is representing him.

Specifically, the lawsuit challenges the court’s abolishment on the grounds that Indiana Code 33-35-1-1(a) only allows a town court to be abolished in 2006 and every fourth year – meaning the next possible closure year would be 2014. But Knightstown’s attorney Gregg Morelock reads another provision in that state law to give the council the right to close the court whenever it wants to take that action. He points to I.C. 33-25-1-1(d) that states, “A city or town court in existence on Jan. 1, 1986, may continue in operation until it is abolished by ordinance.”

What happens in Knights-town could influence other local decisions statewide as officials consider court consolidation in the future. Judge Whitesitt hopes for a compromise that would allow the court to stay open for a year to see whether it can be profitable. As of now, he is running unopposed in the Nov. 8 general election for the Knightstown Town Court – which may be a moot point if the court ceases to exist Oct. 31.

No matter the fate of the Knightstown Court, the debate continues about whether all city and town judges should be lawyers.

The state’s Judicial Conference contends local judges are on the front lines and litigants must have the best possible legal representation from everyone at that level. But the Indiana Association of Cities and Towns, as well as many lawyers and lay persons who serve as judges, disagree and say this falls under the home rule umbrella and it’s not right to force an area with few attorneys to have to pick one of those to be a judge.

At the end of last year, 37 of the 75 city and town court judges statewide were non-attorneys. Nineteen of the jurisdictions required by law or ordinance that judges have a law license.

Although the Indiana General Assembly considered a bill that would have required those judges to be attorneys, lawmakers failed to pass legislation this past year that would’ve required the change.

Even if the Knightstown Court stays open, Crane predicts that the necessity of town courts will eventually be debated in light of state judiciary actions. He might have done things differently earlier this year, but he knows it probably wouldn’t change the eventual fate of the local court.

“I believed the likelihood of scrutiny on our town court would be eliminated or reduced,” he said about his decision. “But I did not anticipate the increased financial burden to the town or the town council’s decision to abolish the court. Still, I suspect that it’s correct to say that regardless of local events, we would still be where we are now – eventually. We have a military phrase that you have to adjust fire … and that’s what we’re doing. Adjusting to the way things are.”•
 

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 have been on this program while on parole from 2011-2013. No person should be forced mentally to share private details of their personal life with total strangers. Also giving permission for a mental therapist to report to your parole agent that your not participating in group therapy because you don't have the financial mean to be in the group therapy. I was personally singled out and sent back three times for not having money and also sent back within the six month when you aren't to be sent according to state law. I will work to het this INSOMM's removed from this state. I also had twelve or thirteen parole agents with a fifteen month period. Thanks for your time.

  2. Our nation produces very few jurists of the caliber of Justice DOUGLAS and his peers these days. Here is that great civil libertarian, who recognized government as both a blessing and, when corrupted by ideological interests, a curse: "Once the investigator has only the conscience of government as a guide, the conscience can become ‘ravenous,’ as Cromwell, bent on destroying Thomas More, said in Bolt, A Man For All Seasons (1960), p. 120. The First Amendment mirrors many episodes where men, harried and harassed by government, sought refuge in their conscience, as these lines of Thomas More show: ‘MORE: And when we stand before God, and you are sent to Paradise for doing according to your conscience, *575 and I am damned for not doing according to mine, will you come with me, for fellowship? ‘CRANMER: So those of us whose names are there are damned, Sir Thomas? ‘MORE: I don't know, Your Grace. I have no window to look into another man's conscience. I condemn no one. ‘CRANMER: Then the matter is capable of question? ‘MORE: Certainly. ‘CRANMER: But that you owe obedience to your King is not capable of question. So weigh a doubt against a certainty—and sign. ‘MORE: Some men think the Earth is round, others think it flat; it is a matter capable of question. But if it is flat, will the King's command make it round? And if it is round, will the King's command flatten it? No, I will not sign.’ Id., pp. 132—133. DOUGLAS THEN WROTE: Where government is the Big Brother,11 privacy gives way to surveillance. **909 But our commitment is otherwise. *576 By the First Amendment we have staked our security on freedom to promote a multiplicity of ideas, to associate at will with kindred spirits, and to defy governmental intrusion into these precincts" Gibson v. Florida Legislative Investigation Comm., 372 U.S. 539, 574-76, 83 S. Ct. 889, 908-09, 9 L. Ed. 2d 929 (1963) Mr. Justice DOUGLAS, concurring. I write: Happy Memorial Day to all -- God please bless our fallen who lived and died to preserve constitutional governance in our wonderful series of Republics. And God open the eyes of those government officials who denounce the constitutions of these Republics by arbitrary actions arising out capricious motives.

  3. From back in the day before secularism got a stranglehold on Hoosier jurists comes this great excerpt via Indiana federal court judge Allan Sharp, dedicated to those many Indiana government attorneys (with whom I have dealt) who count the law as a mere tool, an optional tool that is not to be used when political correctness compels a more acceptable result than merely following the path that the law directs: ALLEN SHARP, District Judge. I. In a scene following a visit by Henry VIII to the home of Sir Thomas More, playwriter Robert Bolt puts the following words into the mouths of his characters: Margaret: Father, that man's bad. MORE: There is no law against that. ROPER: There is! God's law! MORE: Then God can arrest him. ROPER: Sophistication upon sophistication! MORE: No, sheer simplicity. The law, Roper, the law. I know what's legal not what's right. And I'll stick to what's legal. ROPER: Then you set man's law above God's! MORE: No, far below; but let me draw your attention to a fact I'm not God. The currents and eddies of right and wrong, which you find such plain sailing, I can't navigate. I'm no voyager. But in the thickets of law, oh, there I'm a forester. I doubt if there's a man alive who could follow me there, thank God... ALICE: (Exasperated, pointing after Rich) While you talk, he's gone! MORE: And go he should, if he was the Devil himself, until he broke the law! ROPER: So now you'd give the Devil benefit of law! MORE: Yes. What would you do? Cut a great road through the law to get after the Devil? ROPER: I'd cut down every law in England to do that! MORE: (Roused and excited) Oh? (Advances on Roper) And when the last law was down, and the Devil turned round on you where would you hide, Roper, the laws being flat? (He leaves *1257 him) This country's planted thick with laws from coast to coast man's laws, not God's and if you cut them down and you're just the man to do it d'you really think you would stand upright in the winds that would blow then? (Quietly) Yes, I'd give the Devil benefit of law, for my own safety's sake. ROPER: I have long suspected this; this is the golden calf; the law's your god. MORE: (Wearily) Oh, Roper, you're a fool, God's my god... (Rather bitterly) But I find him rather too (Very bitterly) subtle... I don't know where he is nor what he wants. ROPER: My God wants service, to the end and unremitting; nothing else! MORE: (Dryly) Are you sure that's God! He sounds like Moloch. But indeed it may be God And whoever hunts for me, Roper, God or Devil, will find me hiding in the thickets of the law! And I'll hide my daughter with me! Not hoist her up the mainmast of your seagoing principles! They put about too nimbly! (Exit More. They all look after him). Pgs. 65-67, A MAN FOR ALL SEASONS A Play in Two Acts, Robert Bolt, Random House, New York, 1960. Linley E. Pearson, Atty. Gen. of Indiana, Indianapolis, for defendants. Childs v. Duckworth, 509 F. Supp. 1254, 1256 (N.D. Ind. 1981) aff'd, 705 F.2d 915 (7th Cir. 1983)

  4. "Meanwhile small- and mid-size firms are getting squeezed and likely will not survive unless they become a boutique firm." I've been a business attorney in small, and now mid-size firm for over 30 years, and for over 30 years legal consultants have been preaching this exact same mantra of impending doom for small and mid-sized firms -- verbatim. This claim apparently helps them gin up merger opportunities from smaller firms who become convinced that they need to become larger overnight. The claim that large corporations are interested in cost-saving and efficiency has likewise been preached for decades, and is likewise bunk. If large corporations had any real interest in saving money they wouldn't use large law firms whose rates are substantially higher than those of high-quality mid-sized firms.

  5. The family is the foundation of all human government. That is the Grand Design. Modern governments throw off this Design and make bureaucratic war against the family, as does Hollywood and cultural elitists such as third wave feminists. Since WWII we have been on a ship of fools that way, with both the elite and government and their social engineering hacks relentlessly attacking the very foundation of social order. And their success? See it in the streets of Fergusson, on the food stamp doles (mostly broken families)and in the above article. Reject the Grand Design for true social function, enter the Glorious State to manage social dysfunction. Our Brave New World will be a prison camp, and we will welcome it as the only way to manage given the anarchy without it.

ADVERTISEMENT