ILNews

Leadership in Law 2014: Hon. Timothy W. Oakes

Judge, Marion Superior Court, Civil 13, Indianapolis • Indiana University Robert H. McKinney School of Law, 1991

April 23, 2014
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share
15col-Oakes.jpg Hon. Timothy W. Oakes (IL photo/Eric Learned)

Hon. Timothy W. Oakes is known for his willingness to work on administrative matters that affect the court and find ways to improve the judicial system. He created a program whereby he and a fellow judge host and mentor law students, and as part of that program developed a curriculum that provides the students exposure to the practical aspects of the practice of law. He has worked on several successful court projects, including gaining additional funding for guardians ad litem in child in need of services cases. Tim understands the importance of being a civil servant and the responsibility that comes with it. He is driven not by accolades but by a desire to serve the judicial system.

What was the biggest surprise going from attorney to judge?

Everyone tells you and it is true: Being a judge is extremely isolating. Even my best friends and wife stopped calling me for lunch. My parents don’t even drive up from Kentucky to visit me anymore, and I’m an only child with their only four grandchildren.

You created a program to provide mentoring to law students. Why is it important to work with the students?

Mentoring matters – it can define and direct careers and lives. I’ve benefited from truly exceptional mentors and friendships. To have just a piece of that positive influence on someone else’s life and career would be exceptionally rewarding.

You’re currently working to expand e-filing in the county’s civil courts. What’s one way technology has made it easier to be a judge and one way it’s made it more difficult?

Access to files, documents, exhibits has been made easier not just for judges, but for everyone. The transition phase which we, as a legal profession, are just beginning is, and will be, the most difficult. Some folks, including me, have to adjust some old habits and comforts.

What was the worst or most memorable job you had prior to becoming an attorney?

The most painful one was working for a federal bureaucracy with some very talented people. However, despite the talent, the bureaucracy favored form over outcomes. My supervisor literally told me once during a performance evaluation that I had to stop working late. I thought I was living in a sequel to Kafka.

Why do you think people have negative stereotypes about lawyers?

Lawyers, by design, make it look easy. People don’t like seeing others make significant money for something they do for free – give advice. They don’t see the time and training that goes into making that lawyer’s advice solid and correct, not just a hunch.

Is there a moment in your career you wish you could do over?

In life, yes; in my career, no. My career mistakes usually resulted in me learning something about life, myself or others. The experience of those mistakes can’t be duplicated in a classroom or a lecture, and they can’t be bought other than with time and trying.

What class do you wish you could have skipped in law school?

All of them … except legal writing and except for the classes I took with Professors Papke, Dean Harvey, Jegen and Kinney – great professors who made being in the classroom enjoyable and intellectually stimulating.

What’s something you’ve learned over the years that you wish you could go back in time and tell your younger self?

Not much because experience is earned, not taught.  I wouldn’t have listened to me anyway, except for maybe this: I would tell my younger self, “Go hangout with Grandpa Oakes even more than you do because one day he will be gone and there will no longer be ‘next weekends.’”

What are some tips for achieving a work/life balance?

Imagine your funeral; imagine who you would want there and what you would want them to be saying about you. Now, work back from there, and let that be your guide for today and every day.

What’s been the biggest change in the practice of law you’ve seen since you began?

Socialization among the lawyers has declined, which is not good, and the increase of technology as tools of the trade has changed the business model for lawyers forever.

If you couldn’t be a lawyer, what would you do for a living?

Lobby the Legislature or teach adolescents probably. Insert your own joke here, but both are worthy professions that don’t get the recognition, treatment or place in our society each deserve.

What civic cause is the most important to you?

Generally anything to do with abused, neglected or disadvantaged children or anything that helps military veterans.

We hear a lot about civility. Have you noticed a change in how attorneys treat each other since you began practicing?

Not really. I know there is that perception of increased incivility, but I also see a good number of quality lawyers practicing with civility every day. I suspect the ratio has always been about the same, but because there are so many more lawyers, the ill-tempered ones perhaps garner a disproportionate share of our memories.

Who is your favorite fictional lawyer?

Atticus Finch – strong, loyal, well-educated, principled, a dedicated advocate and perhaps most importantly, southern.

What’s something about you not many people know?

Probably nothing – I’m such an open book. I can keep everyone’s secrets but my own.


 

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

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Indiana State Bar Association

Indianapolis Bar Association

Evansville Bar Association

Allen County Bar Association

Indiana Lawyer on Facebook

facebook
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. It's a big fat black mark against the US that they radicalized a lot of these Afghan jihadis in the 80s to fight the soviets and then when they predictably got around to biting the hand that fed them, the US had to invade their homelands, install a bunch of corrupt drug kingpins and kleptocrats, take these guys and torture the hell out of them. Why for example did the US have to sodomize them? Dubya said "they hate us for our freedoms!" Here, try some of that freedom whether you like it or not!!! Now they got even more reasons to hate us-- lets just keep bombing the crap out of their populations, installing more puppet regimes, arming one faction against another, etc etc etc.... the US is becoming a monster. No wonder they hate us. Here's my modest recommendation. How about we follow "Just War" theory in the future. St Augustine had it right. How about we treat these obvious prisoners of war according to the Geneva convention instead of torturing them in sadistic and perverted ways.

  2. As usual, John is "spot-on." The subtle but poignant points he makes are numerous and warrant reflection by mediators and users. Oh but were it so simple.

  3. ACLU. Way to step up against the police state. I see a lot of things from the ACLU I don't like but this one is a gold star in its column.... instead of fighting it the authorities should apologize and back off.

  4. Duncan, It's called the RIGHT OF ASSOCIATION and in the old days people believed it did apply to contracts and employment. Then along came title vii.....that aside, I believe that I am free to work or not work for whomever I like regardless: I don't need a law to tell me I'm free. The day I really am compelled to ignore all the facts of social reality in my associations and I blithely go along with it, I'll be a slave of the state. That day is not today......... in the meantime this proposed bill would probably be violative of 18 usc sec 1981 that prohibits discrimination in contracts... a law violated regularly because who could ever really expect to enforce it along the millions of contracts made in the marketplace daily? Some of these so-called civil rights laws are unenforceable and unjust Utopian Social Engineering. Forcing people to love each other will never work.

  5. I am the father of a sweet little one-year-old named girl, who happens to have Down Syndrome. To anyone who reads this who may be considering the decision to terminate, please know that your child will absolutely light up your life as my daughter has the lives of everyone around her. There is no part of me that condones abortion of a child on the basis that he/she has or might have Down Syndrome. From an intellectual standpoint, however, I question the enforceability of this potential law. As it stands now, the bill reads in relevant part as follows: "A person may not intentionally perform or attempt to perform an abortion . . . if the person knows that the pregnant woman is seeking the abortion solely because the fetus has been diagnosed with Down syndrome or a potential diagnosis of Down syndrome." It includes similarly worded provisions abortion on "any other disability" or based on sex selection. It goes so far as to make the medical provider at least potentially liable for wrongful death. First, how does a medical provider "know" that "the pregnant woman is seeking the abortion SOLELY" because of anything? What if the woman says she just doesn't want the baby - not because of the diagnosis - she just doesn't want him/her? Further, how can the doctor be liable for wrongful death, when a Child Wrongful Death claim belongs to the parents? Is there any circumstance in which the mother's comparative fault will not exceed the doctor's alleged comparative fault, thereby barring the claim? If the State wants to discourage women from aborting their children because of a Down Syndrome diagnosis, I'm all for that. Purporting to ban it with an unenforceable law, however, is not the way to effectuate this policy.

ADVERTISEMENT