More ISBA tidbits

October 3, 2008
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share
From IL reporter Michael Hoskins:

Five newer faces on the federal bench (or at least, ones in relatively new roles) came together Thursday afternoon at the ISBA annual meeting. They were Magistrate Jane Magnus-Stinson, selected about two years ago to replace retired Magistrate V. Sue Shields; Judge William T. Lawrence, who's been recently elevated from magistrate in the Southern District; Magistrate Debra McVicker Lynch, who has been chosen by the Southern District to replace Lawrence and hopes that can happen by Dec. 1 following an ongoing FBI check; Judge Joe Van Bokkelen in the Northern District, who took his judicial seat last year; and Judge John D. Tinder, who's been promoted to the 7th Circuit from the Southern District. The group talked about their new roles and what they like and don't like to see from lawyers.

Judge Lawrence quoted one of his colleagues on a question he often receives: What's the best path to becoming a judge? He and Judge Sarah Evans Barker say, "The best path to a judicial career is the one you see in the rearview mirror."

Judge Tinder noted how transportation is the biggest challenge so far in his new role, since he's expected to be in Chicago for arguments roughly 35 days of the year. He’s tried different modes of transportation, and it all equates to time lost traveling. The 7th Circuit hears more arguments than any of its sister appellate Circuit Courts, and with all the other duties he has (such as reviewing rehearing petitions in about 25 percent of all cases), Judge Tinder says it's all a challenge he hadn't anticipated.

Judge Van Bokkelen shared that magistrates in his District handle all settlement matters, and judges don't even see most cases until the discovery process is complete. Judge Lawrence noted how common settlement negotiations are in the lower District, and also encouraged state appellate attorneys to cross over into the federal arena more often, especially since the federal courts use case management plans that state appellate level does not.
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
  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