ILNews

Evansville senior judge dies

IL Staff
July 19, 2012
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Judge Thomas “Tom” Lockyear, the man who was appointed to Vanderburgh Superior Court in 1985 to replace former Chief Justice Randall T. Shepard, died Wednesday.

Lockyear, 79, practiced law for 28 years before Gov. Robert Orr appointed him to take Shepard’s place on the bench. Lockyear was a Superior judge for 12 years before retiring and taking senior status.

Lockyear comes from a family of attorneys: his brother and father were attorneys; his grandfather was the first probate judge of Vanderburgh County and later served on the Indiana Court of Appeals.

He was a United States Army Veteran who served in the Korean War. He graduated from Vanderbilt University and passed the bar in 1957. He was also a certified mediator, former public defender, justice of the peace and county attorney.

Lockyear served on the boards of the Indiana Judges Association and Judicial Conference of Indiana, and received the James Bethel Grisham Freedom Award from the Evansville Bar Association.

He is survived by his wife, Nina Lockyear; daughter Jane Miller (Rob); son, Steve Lockyear (Krista); stepdaughter, Lisa Ochsner; stepson Jeff Horsketter; grandchildren, great-grandchildren, nieces and nephews.

A service will be held Friday at 7 p.m. at Browning Funeral Home, 738 Diamond Ave., Evansville, with visitation from 2 to 7 p.m. Memorial contributions may be made to the Evansville Rescue Mission or the Evansville Boys and Girls Club.

 

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