ILNews

Remembering former Indiana Justice Dixon W. Prentice

August 13, 2014
Keywords
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share
Indiana Lawyer Commentary

In early 1971 I went to work for the Honorable Dixon W. Prentice, Justice of the Indiana Supreme Court. Although I left a higher-paying job to make the move, it was one of the smartest and most gratifying things I ever did. Justice Prentice was a somewhat quiet man, stern in appearance, and a stickler for Court protocol and the propriety of public office. Over the next two years I would learn that he was a man of principle determined to serve the people of the State of Indiana to the best of his abilities. He was also a kind man and a friend and I mourn his passing in Tucson on July 20th.
 

prentice Prentice

I was the first law clerk he hired after being elected to his seat on the Court. That election was the last in which the justices would face an opponent on the ballot. The law was changed so that they would face a yes-no vote instead, every ten years. As his law clerk I was required to review incoming appeals, research the law, and prepare a proposed opinion. I did my job as thoroughly as I could and didn’t submit anything to the judge until I was satisfied I hadn’t overlooked anything. Given his demeanor and belief in detail and accuracy, I knew nothing short of my best would suffice.

I loved the job and really admired the Judge, who became a friend as well as my superior. I worked hard and he always showed his appreciation, like giving me tickets to ball games he didn’t plan to attend. Although I did extensive research on every case, many times he did additional on his own. He was a stickler for detail and accuracy and wouldn’t settle for anything unless he was sure. Many times he would stay late after everyone was gone and literally burn the “midnight oil.” He had to be absolutely sure that something was right before he signed off on it. He was a truly dedicated public official, as others in the office such as Bea Dickson, his secretary, and Rick Mouser, a law clerk he hired later, would readily attest. Both Bea, a former secretary to Governor Welsh, and Rick, who graduated first in his class, had great respect for Justice Prentice. He deserved every bit of it.

He felt that he and everyone else that worked in his office were servants of the people, and his conduct and office rules reflected it. He insisted that the office not be closed for any reason during normal working hours. He was a good man and a great Judge, who would be perfect as a model for what elected officials should do and how they should conduct themselves.

I had and have the greatest respect for Justice Dixon W. Prentice. After I left the court and was practicing law I represented him in a lawsuit. On another occasion he offered to appoint me as Circuit judge in a southern county where the bench was vacant. I declined but was flattered that he asked me. I saw him and toasted him at his retirement party and stayed in touch after he moved to Tucson. He lived a good full life but now he is gone. I am sad. He and all that he stands for will be sorely missed.•

Rest in peace Your Honor,
Your loyal law clerk, George (Cottrell)
 

ADVERTISEMENT

  • Kind words
    Thank you, George, for your kindness in writing about my father Dixon Prentice. He was, as you note, a gentleman who followed the highest ethical principles. We were blessed that he lived such a long full life. He continued to lead by his courageous and loving example untilnthecend of his life.
  • Thank You
    That's my grandpa you speak so highly of. Thanks so much for taking the time to write and post such kind words. I'm also an attorney -- in private practice (Estate & Elder Law) down here in Melbourne, FL. Cheers Mate!! :)

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. Living in South Bend, I travel to Michigan a lot. Virtually every gas station sells cold beer there. Many sell the hard stuff too. Doesn't seem to be a big deal there.

  2. Mr. Ricker, how foolish of you to think that by complying with the law you would be ok. Don't you know that Indiana is a state that welcomes monopolies, and that Indiana's legislature is the one entity in this state that believes monopolistic practices (such as those engaged in by Indiana Association of Beverage Retailers) make Indiana a "business-friendly" state? How can you not see this????

  3. Actually, and most strikingly, the ruling failed to address the central issue to the whole case: Namely, Black Knight/LPS, who was NEVER a party to the State court litigation, and who is under a 2013 consent judgment in Indiana (where it has stipulated to the forgery of loan documents, the ones specifically at issue in my case)never disclosed itself in State court or remediated the forged loan documents as was REQUIRED of them by the CJ. In essence, what the court is willfully ignoring, is that it is setting a precedent that the supplier of a defective product, one whom is under a consent judgment stipulating to such, and under obligation to remediate said defective product, can: 1.) Ignore the CJ 2.) Allow counsel to commit fraud on the state court 3.) Then try to hide behind Rooker Feldman doctrine as a bar to being held culpable in federal court. The problem here is the court is in direct conflict with its own ruling(s) in Johnson v. Pushpin Holdings & Iqbal- 780 F.3d 728, at 730 “What Johnson adds - what the defendants in this suit have failed to appreciate—is that federal courts retain jurisdiction to award damages for fraud that imposes extrajudicial injury. The Supreme Court drew that very line in Exxon Mobil ... Iqbal alleges that the defendants conducted a racketeering enterprise that predates the state court’s judgments ...but Exxon Mobil shows that the Rooker Feldman doctrine asks what injury the plaintiff asks the federal court to redress, not whether the injury is “intertwined” with something else …Because Iqbal seeks damages for activity that (he alleges) predates the state litigation and caused injury independently of it, the Rooker-Feldman doctrine does not block this suit. It must be reinstated.” So, as I already noted to others, I now have the chance to bring my case to SCOTUS; the ruling by Wood & Posner is flawed on numerous levels,BUT most troubling is the fact that the authors KNOW it's a flawed ruling and choose to ignore the flaws for one simple reason: The courts have decided to agree with former AG Eric Holder that national banks "Are too big to fail" and must win at any cost-even that of due process, case precedent, & the truth....Let's see if SCOTUS wants a bite at the apple.

  4. I am in NJ & just found out that there is a judgment against me in an action by Driver's Solutions LLC in IN. I was never served with any Court pleadings, etc. and the only thing that I can find out is that they were using an old Staten Island NY address for me. I have been in NJ for over 20 years and cannot get any response from Drivers Solutions in IN. They have a different lawyer now. I need to get this vacated or stopped - it is now almost double & at 18%. Any help would be appreciated. Thank you.

  5. I am in NJ & just found out that there is a judgment against me in an action by Driver's Solutions LLC in IN. I was never served with any Court pleadings, etc. and the only thing that I can find out is that they were using an old Staten Island NY address for me. I have been in NJ for over 20 years and cannot get any response from Drivers Solutions in IN. They have a different lawyer now. I need to get this vacated or stopped - it is now almost double & at 18%. Any help would be appreciated. Thank you.

ADVERTISEMENT