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. Just an aside, but regardless of the outcome, I 'm proud of Judge William Hughes. He was the original magistrate on the Home place issue. He ruled for Home Place, and was primaried by Brainard for it. Their tool Poindexter failed to unseat Hughes, who won support for his honesty and courage throughout the county, and he was reelected Judge of Hamilton County's Superior Court. You can still stand for something and survive. Thanks, Judge Hughes!

  2. CCHP's real accomplishment is the 2015 law signed by Gov Pence that basically outlaws any annexation that is forced where a 65% majority of landowners in the affected area disagree. Regardless of whether HP wins or loses, the citizens of Indiana will not have another fiasco like this. The law Gov Pence signed is a direct result of this malgovernance.

  3. I gave tempparry guardship to a friend of my granddaughter in 2012. I went to prison. I had custody. My daughter went to prison to. We are out. My daughter gave me custody but can get her back. She was not order to give me custody . but now we want granddaughter back from friend. She's 14 now. What rights do we have

  4. This sure is not what most who value good governance consider the Rule of Law to entail: "In a letter dated March 2, which Brizzi forwarded to IBJ, the commission dismissed the grievance “on grounds that there is not reasonable cause to believe that you are guilty of misconduct.”" Yet two month later reasonable cause does exist? (Or is the commission forging ahead, the need for reasonable belief be damned? -- A seeming violation of the Rules of Profession Ethics on the part of the commission) Could the rule of law theory cause one to believe that an explanation is in order? Could it be that Hoosier attorneys live under Imperial Law (which is also a t-word that rhymes with infamy) in which the Platonic guardians can do no wrong and never owe the plebeian class any explanation for their powerful actions. (Might makes it right?) Could this be a case of politics directing the commission, as celebrated IU Mauer Professor (the late) Patrick Baude warned was happening 20 years ago in his controversial (whisteblowing) ethics lecture on a quite similar topic: http://www.repository.law.indiana.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1498&context=ilj

  5. I have a case presently pending cert review before the SCOTUS that reveals just how Indiana regulates the bar. I have been denied licensure for life for holding the wrong views and questioning the grand inquisitors as to their duties as to state and federal constitutional due process. True story: https://www.scribd.com/doc/299040839/2016Petitionforcert-to-SCOTUS Shorter, Amici brief serving to frame issue as misuse of govt licensure: https://www.scribd.com/doc/312841269/Thomas-More-Society-Amicus-Brown-v-Ind-Bd-of-Law-Examiners

ADVERTISEMENT