ILNews

Building named in honor of retiring judge

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Taking the bench on Jan. 1, 1975, Montgomery Circuit Judge Thomas K. Milligan is the second-longest serving trial judge in the state.

But as this year comes to a close, Judge Milligan is officially hanging up his robe and marking the end of his 36-year judicial career. He is one of 18 trial and appellate judges leaving the bench this year, and one of only two trial judges in the state who are now finding their names attached to a courthouse or legal services building.

County commissioners in October passed a resolution honoring the longtime judge by dedicating the Montgomery County Court Services Building at 307 Binford St. in Crawfordsville in his honor. The historic and newly renovated building that houses the probation department, some classrooms, and the soon-to-be started drug court offices will be named the Thomas K. Milligan Justice Center.

The resolution honoring him says the Waveland native has served county residents “honorably and well, while maintaining the highest standards of fairness and impartiality in the administration of justice for 36 years… (and) has demonstrated through the administration of his Court that he is one of the preeminent trial judges in the State of Indiana.” It also points out he’s particularly known for “fair and just treatment for children and their families who are most in need or in harm’s way, and that he has dutifully followed the Gentleman's Rule of his alma mater, Wabash College.”

Admitted to practice in 1967 and first elected in November 1974, Judge Milligan has been on the bench longer than any other sitting judge except for Marion Superior Judge Gerald Zore – who was appointed just before Christmas 1974 and as a result beats out his colleague in Montgomery County by just a week.

Through the years, Judge Milligan has been an advocate for youth and has worked in close contact with the Youth Service Bureau in the training of CASA workers, Teen Court, and with the schools and out-of-school suspension program. He is a member of the Indiana Juvenile Judges Association and has also held leadership officer roles with the Indiana Judges Association and served as past president of the Montgomery County Bar Association.

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. I need an experienced attorney to handle a breach of contract matter. Kindly respond for more details. Graham Young

  2. I thought the slurs were the least grave aspects of her misconduct, since they had nothing to do with her being on the bench. Why then do I suspect they were the focus? I find this a troubling trend. At least she was allowed to keep her law license.

  3. Section 6 of Article I of the Indiana Constitution is pretty clear and unequivocal: "Section 6. No money shall be drawn from the treasury for the benefit of any religious or theological institution."

  4. Video pen? Nice work, "JW"! Let this be a lesson and a caution to all disgruntled ex-spouses (or soon-to-be ex-spouses) . . . you may think that altercation is going to get you some satisfaction . . . it will not.

  5. First comment on this thread is a fitting final comment on this thread, as that the MCBA never answered Duncan's fine question, and now even Eric Holder agrees that the MCBA was in material error as to the facts: "I don't get it" from Duncan December 1, 2014 5:10 PM "The Grand Jury met for 25 days and heard 70 hours of testimony according to this article and they made a decision that no crime occurred. On what basis does the MCBA conclude that their decision was "unjust"? What special knowledge or evidence does the MCBA have that the Grand Jury hearing this matter was unaware of? The system that we as lawyers are sworn to uphold made a decision that there was insufficient proof that officer committed a crime. How can any of us say we know better what was right than the jury that actually heard all of the the evidence in this case."

ADVERTISEMENT