ILNews

Bills would make changes to pro bono funding, court costs, early voting

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Indiana’s 2012 legislative session promises to be a busy one, with hundreds of bills already filed and a short session deadline of March 14. Following are some of the bills Indiana Lawyer is watching:

The Senate Committee on Judiciary is expected to hear a bill that would create additional funding for pro bono districts. Senate Bill 235, introduced by Sen. Ron Grooms, R-Jeffersonville, would distribute $1 from certain small claims and civil court filing fees to the Indiana Bar Foundation for the purpose of supplementing funding to Indiana’s pro bono districts. Charles Dunlap, executive director of the bar foundation, said the bill could result in about $500,000 in annual funding for the pro bono districts, which have struggled with budget shortfalls resulting from a decrease in interest on lawyer trust accounts.

House Bill 1049, authored by Rep. Eric Koch, R-Bedford, would remove a $400 cap on fees for participation in problem-solving courts. Under the revisions made by the bill, reasonable fees for education or treatment and rehabilitative services would not be included in the participation fee. The bill is slated to be heard by the House Committee on Judiciary.

Democratic Sens. Jean Breaux of Indianapolis, Jim Arnold of LaPorte, and John Broden of South Bend have introduced a bill that would allow county election boards to establish early satellite voting centers with only a majority vote. Currently, a unanimous vote is required to establish early satellite voting centers. The legislation – Senate Bill 6 – has been referred to the Senate Committee on Elections. If passed, the law would be effective before November’s presidential election.

 

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. Bob Leonard killed two people named Jennifer and Dion Longworth. There were no Smiths involved.

  2. Being on this journey from the beginning has convinced me the justice system really doesn't care about the welfare of the child. The trial court judge knew the child belonged with the mother. The father having total disregard for the rules of the court. Not only did this cost the mother and child valuable time together but thousands in legal fees. When the child was with the father the mother paid her child support. When the child was finally with the right parent somehow the father got away without having to pay one penny of child support. He had to be in control. Since he withheld all information regarding the child's welfare he put her in harms way. Mother took the child to the doctor when she got sick and was totally embarrassed she knew nothing regarding the medical information especially the allergies, The mother texted the father (from the doctors office) and he replied call his attorney. To me this doesn't seem like a concerned father. Seeing the child upset when she had to go back to the father. What upset me the most was finding out the child sleeps with him. Sometimes in the nude. Maybe I don't understand all the rules of the law but I thought this was also morally wrong. A concerned parent would allow the child to finish the school year. Say goodbye to her friends. It saddens me to know the child will not have contact with the sisters, aunts, uncles and the 87 year old grandfather. He didn't allow it before. Only the mother is allowed to talk to the child. I don't think now will be any different. I hope the decision the courts made would've been the same one if this was a member of their family. Someday this child will end up in therapy if allowed to remain with the father.

  3. Ok attorney Straw ... if that be a good idea ... And I am not saying it is ... but if it were ... would that be ripe prior to her suffering an embarrassing remand from the Seventh? Seems more than a tad premature here soldier. One putting on the armor should not boast liked one taking it off.

  4. The judge thinks that she is so cute to deny jurisdiction, but without jurisdiction, she loses her immunity. She did not give me any due process hearing or any discovery, like the Middlesex case provided for that lawyer. Because she has refused to protect me and she has no immunity because she rejected jurisdiction, I am now suing her in her district.

  5. Sam Bradbury was never a resident of Lafayette he lived in rural Tippecanoe County, Thats an error.

ADVERTISEMENT