ILNews

Dickson: Lawmakers’ help needed to fix Marion County Small Claims courts

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Indiana Chief Justice Brent Dickson told a joint session of the General Assembly Wednesday that lawmakers’ help was needed to fix Marion County Township Small Claims Courts, which have been plagued by allegations of forum shopping and other criticism.

“Systemic change is imperative, and this requires legislative action,” Dickson said in his State of the Judiciary speech. He noted local leadership and rules changes instituted after a task force examined problems in the courts “can only scratch the surface.”

Reforming the township courts in Indianapolis was one of three judicial items Dickson said would require legislation. Others include bringing the abstract of judgment into the digital age. The court has been working with clerks and other stakeholders, he said, “in an effort to modernize this relic of the quill pen era. We need your help.”

Lawmakers in the future also should “consider shifting more and more funding of the judicial branch expenses from local government to state funding. For many reasons, this is wise and sound public policy, and it is used effectively in many other states.”

Dickson’s second State of the Judiciary address comes in a short session when lawmakers won’t be hashing out a budget or doing much heavy lifting on financial matters, and he didn’t lobby hard for funding.

“Indiana’s judges are very, very busy; we are extremely challenged but quite gratified every day. We could do even better with more resources,” he said at the outset.

He said the judiciary is “an amazing value to Hoosiers,” spending only 9 cents of every $10 collected by state and local units of governments, and returning more than half of those expenditures in collected revenue.

Mandatory reporting of pro bono hours for Indiana attorneys is moving forward. “We are working to have such a program in place in the coming months,” he said, noting an overview of civil cases statewide recently showed 63 percent of litigants were without counsel.

“When people are in court without a lawyer, bad things happen,” he said.

Meanwhile, Dickson said courts would assist with implementation of the Legislature’s “masterful achievement” of revising Indiana’s Criminal Code. “A product of multiple years of thoughtful efforts and difficult negotiations, the result was an outstanding piece of legislation,” he said.

The full text of Dickson’s address may be viewed on the court’s website.
 

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. I enrolled America's 1st tax-free Health Savings Account (HSA) so you can trust me. I bet 1/3 of my clients were lawyers because they love tax-free deposits, growth and withdrawals or total tax freedom. Most of the time (always) these clients are uninformed about insurance law. Employer-based health insurance is simple if you read the policy. It says, Employers (lawyers) and employees who are working 30-hours-per-week are ELIGIBLE for insurance. Then I show the lawyer the TERMINATION clause which states: When you are no longer ELIGIBLE! Then I ask a closing question (sales term) to the lawyer which is, "If you have a stroke or cancer and become too sick to work can you keep your health insurance?" If the lawyer had dependent children they needed a "Dependent Conversion Privilege" in case their child got sick or hurt which the lawyers never had. Lawyers are pretty easy sales. Save premium, eliminate taxes and build wealth!

  2. Ok, so cheap laughs made about the Christian Right. hardiharhar ... All kidding aside, it is Mohammad's followers who you should be seeking divine protection from. Allahu Akbar But progressives are in denial about that, even as Europe crumbles.

  3. Father's rights? What about a mothers rights? A child's rights? Taking a child from the custody of the mother for political reasons! A miscarriage of justice! What about the welfare of the child? Has anyone considered parent alienation, the father can't erase the mother from the child's life. This child loves the mother and the home in Wisconsin, friends, school and family. It is apparent the father hates his ex-wife more than he loves his child! I hope there will be a Guardian Ad Litem, who will spend time with and get to know the child, BEFORE being brainwashed by the father. This is not just a child! A little person with rights and real needs, a stable home and a parent that cares enough to let this child at least finish the school year, where she is happy and comfortable! Where is the justice?

  4. "The commission will review applications and interview qualified candidates in March and April." Riiiiiight. Would that be the same vaulted process that brought us this result done by "qualified candidates"? http://www.theindianalawyer.com/justices-deny-transfer-to-child-custody-case/PARAMS/article/42774 Perhaps a lottery system more like the draft would be better? And let us not limit it to Indiana attorneys so as to give the untainted a fighting chance?

  5. Steal a little, and they put you in jail. Steal a lot, and they make you king. Bob Dylan ala Samuel Johnson. I had a very similar experience trying to hold due process trampling bureaucrats responsible under the law. Consider this quote and commentary:"'When the president does it, that means it is not illegal,' [Richard] Nixon told his interviewer. Those words were largely seen by the American public -- which continued to hold the ex-president in low esteem -- as a symbol of his unbowed arrogance. Most citizens still wanted to believe that no American citizen, not even the president, is above the law." BWHaahaaahaaa!!!! http://www.philly.com/philly/blogs/attytood/When-the-president-does-it-that-means-it-is-not-illegal.html

ADVERTISEMENT