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. I have had an ongoing custody case for 6 yrs. I should have been the sole legal custodial parent but was a victim of a vindictive ex and the system biasedly supported him. He is an alcoholic and doesn't even have a license for two yrs now after his 2nd DUI. Fast frwd 6 yrs later my kids are suffering poor nutritional health, psychological issues, failing in school, have NO MD and the GAL could care less, DCS doesn't care. The child isn't getting his ADHD med he needs and will not succeed in life living this way. NO one will HELP our family.I tried for over 6 yrs. The judge called me an idiot for not knowing how to enter evidence and the last hearing was 8 mths ago. That in itself is unjust! The kids want to be with their Mother! They are being alienated from her and fed lies by their Father! I was hit in a car accident 3 yrs ago and am declared handicapped myself. Poor poor way to treat the indigent in Indiana!

  2. The Indiana DOE released the 2015-2016 school grades in Dec 2016 and my local elementary school is a "C" grade school. Look at the MCCSC boundary maps and how all of the most affluent neighborhoods have the best performance. It is no surprise that obtaining residency in the "A" school boundaries cost 1.5 to 3 times as much. As a parent I should have more options than my "C" school without needing to pay the premium to live in the affluent parts of town. If the charter were authorized by a non-religious school the plaintiffs would still be against it because it would still be taking per-pupil money from them. They are hiding behind the guise of religion as a basis for their argument when this is clearly all about money and nothing else.

  3. This is a horrible headline. The article is about challenging the ability of Grace College to serve as an authorizer. 7 Oaks is not a religiously affiliated school

  4. Congratulations to Judge Carmichael for making it to the final three! She is an outstanding Judge and the people of Indiana will benefit tremendously if/when she is chosen.

  5. The headline change to from "religious" to "religious-affiliated" is still inaccurate and terribly misleading.

ADVERTISEMENT