ILNews

Circuit judge relocating chambers to Maurer School of Law

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

In a rare move that may be used in only one other jurisdiction nationally, Judge David F. Hamilton on the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals in Chicago plans to relocate his chambers from the Indianapolis courthouse where he’s from to the Indiana University Maurer School of Law – Bloomington.

Since taking the appellate bench in November, Judge Hamilton has kept his chambers in the Southern District of Indiana. But space has become tight in the federal courthouse in Indianapolis and forced Judge Hamilton to reconsider his chambers there.

In an announcement today, the law school and Judge Hamilton said the arrangement is expected to give law students first-hand exposure to the judicial system and be a learning opportunity in both directions.

“It is unusual, and a little complicated as a result,” Judge Hamilton said. “This building is getting crowded enough and it became clear that I’d have to move out of this courthouse, at least. In theory, I could have disrupted and displaced others in this building. But that’s disruptive and unnecessary, and not in the best interest for the District Court, so we were looking at other options.”

Judge Hamilton travels to Chicago about twice a month, usually for three days a time, but lives closer to Bloomington where the law school is located, he said. Federal court policy dictated that he consider courthouse space first if it was available, but this became a possibility because of Judge Hamilton’s and his wife’s roots.

An emeritus member of the Board of Visitors who’s taught a federal court clinic and also served on the school’s Center for Constitutional Democracy, Judge Hamilton credits the idea to his wife, Inge Van der Cruysse, who’s a graduate and former development officer at IU Maurer School of Law. She first mentioned it last year, and the judge began exploring it with his longtime friend Dean Lauren Robel, who he’d clerked with at the 7th Circuit in the early 1980s.

Both the federal government and law school have been working out the logistical and operational details, he said. Judge Hamilton expects the move will be complete by the end of 2010, and he’s working with the law school to explore ways that everyone can most benefit from his experience and judicial work.

“People who say this job is isolating are absolutely right,” Judge Hamilton said. “So I’m looking forward to having a law school office, where I can be some sort of member of the law school community.”

The experience will also be beneficial for his law clerks, who will have the chance to attend law school lectures and events and be able to participate there – particularly for those clerks who’ve graduated from the law school or undergraduate programs, he said.

IU Maurer School of Law officials couldn’t immediately verify how rare this type of arrangement is, but it appears to only be used in one other Circuit jurisdiction throughout the country: the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals in New York, where two appellate judges relocated their chambers to space at Yale Law School. Those two are Judges Ralph Winter and Guido Calabresi, both now serving in senior capacities.
 

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. The practitioners and judges who hail E-filing as the Saviour of the West need to contain their respective excitements. E-filing is federal court requires the practitioner to cram his motion practice into pigeonholes created by IT people. Compound motions or those seeking alternative relief are effectively barred, unless the practitioner wants to receive a tart note from some functionary admonishing about the "problem". E-filing is just another method by which courts and judges transfer their burden to practitioners, who are the really the only powerless components of the system. Of COURSE it is easier for the court to require all of its imput to conform to certain formats, but this imposition does NOT improve the quality of the practice of law and does NOT improve the ability of the practitioner to advocate for his client or to fashion pleadings that exactly conform to his client's best interests. And we should be very wary of the disingenuous pablum about the costs. The courts will find a way to stick it to the practitioner. Lake County is a VERY good example of this rapaciousness. Any one who does not believe this is invited to review the various special fees that system imposes upon practitioners- as practitioners- and upon each case ON TOP of the court costs normal in every case manually filed. Jurisprudence according to Aldous Huxley.

  2. Any attorneys who practice in federal court should be able to say the same as I can ... efiling is great. I have been doing it in fed court since it started way back. Pacer has its drawbacks, but the ability to hit an e-docket and pull up anything and everything onscreen is a huge plus for a litigator, eps the sole practitioner, who lacks a filing clerk and the paralegal support of large firms. Were I an Indiana attorney I would welcome this great step forward.

  3. Can we get full disclosure on lobbyist's payments to legislatures such as Mr Buck? AS long as there are idiots that are disrespectful of neighbors and intent on shooting fireworks every night, some kind of regulations are needed.

  4. I am the mother of the child in this case. My silence on the matter was due to the fact that I filed, both in Illinois and Indiana, child support cases. I even filed supporting documentation with the Indiana family law court. Not sure whether this information was provided to the court of appeals or not. Wish the case was done before moving to Indiana, because no matter what, there is NO WAY the state of Illinois would have allowed an appeal on a child support case!

  5. "No one is safe when the Legislature is in session."

ADVERTISEMENT