ILNews

Darden retirement ceremony July 25

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrint

The Indiana Court of Appeals will celebrate Judge Carr Darden’s 18 years of service at a retirement ceremony July 25. Darden is leaving the court because will turn 75 Saturday, the age of mandatory retirement. He will continue to serve as a senior judge.

Darden told then-Chief Justice Randall T. Shepard and Gov. Mitch Daniels in January that he planned to retire on his 75th birthday. He joined the court in November 1994, appointed by Gov. Evan Bayh. Prior to becoming an appellate judge, Darden was a judge in Marion County.

The Tennessee native and U.S. Air Force veteran graduated from Indiana University Robert H. McKinney School of Law in 1970. Before becoming a judge, he worked as a Marion County and state public defender.

Darden told the Indiana Lawyer  in January that he would have continued to serve as a Court of Appeals judge if he were not required to retire.

“It’s hard to leave the best job in the world, but you know, I hope I can say it was a job well done,” Darden said in a release from the court. “I can definitely say I worked with a lot of great people and I’ll be happy to keep doing that as a senior judge.”

Darden is the second African-American to serve on the Indiana Court of Appeals.

Chief Judge Margret Robb will preside over Darden’s retirement ceremony, which begins at 10 a.m. in the Indiana Supreme Court courtroom. The ceremony is invitation only, but will be webcast live.

“Judge Darden is an esteemed colleague, a trusted friend and a delightful man,” Robb said. “He’s served our state with distinction and all of us here at the court extend our warmest congratulations and best wishes to him and to Mrs. Darden.”  

Gov. Mitch Daniels has yet to select Darden’s successor. The finalists for the position are Marion Superior Judge Robert Altice Jr., public defender Patricia Caress McMath, and Madison Circuit Judge Rudolph Pyle III. The governor has until Aug. 11 to make the appointment.

 

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. Judge Roger B. Cosbey is unethical and bias toward African American who seeks justice in Title VII claims. He disrespected and used his authority to attempt to intimidate me into taking an unfair settlement and when I refused he proceeded to get my case dismissed and to deny me my Constitutional and Civil Rights. He disobeying several rules of law; specifically, by ruling on summary judgment motions against the Fed. R. Civ. P., without authority of Judge William C. Lee, without consent of the attorneys, and with conspiracy to commit “fraud on the court,” as he conspired with my former attorney. He proved to me that he is bias, unethical, unfair and unfit to be reappointed. In my opinion, he should be disbarred in 2013, for committing fraud on the court, which would make him ineligible for reinstatement in 2014. See docket 3:07 cv 629 where he rules on dispositive motions, knowing magistrates are not vested with that power (especially without consent), grants the defendant an unconscionable number of extensions, accepts my former attorney request for extension for dispositive motion knowing he was working with the opposition, and unbelievably grants the defendant another extension after he requested an extension after he missed the deadline. I know another attorney filed charges against him for bias in race discrimination case(s). I know what he did in my case before he voluntarily recused himself, I just do not know how many other innocent people have been stripped of their rights because of him. I say shame on him and no more of the same.

  2. they are pushing these cases against lawyers too far. thought-crime.

  3. vagueness cannot challenged, so let's write all laws vaguely and throw the constitution out the window.Even if the court is operating under a particular law, if they don't it they will change it to their liking. What a joke!!!

  4. Two convictions becomes one conviction with exactly the same sentence, only it is not clear wheter or not that sentence will be 18 months, 120 months or 138 months. Actually if the guns were in a home, whether or not they were his, he is protected under the 2nd amendment. Jurors need to learn the law and the constitution before judging others. The cour5ts need to do this as well.

  5. With all due respect, Rick, I think you probably would be making a mistake by going to law school. The job market for attorneys is so saturated, you may well find yourself unemployed and with a lot of debt. You mention law would be a good supplement to your skills. True. But employers unfortunately don't value that. You will find that a law degree may well pigeonhole you into an attorney slot and limit career options. If you have a good job now I would hold onto that. As an attorney, you may well end up making less with the aforementioned debt.

ADVERTISEMENT