Lighter side of nominating commission

October 27, 2010
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Mike Hoskins wrote this blog post.

Though they were tending to an important job of choosing three finalists to possibly become the next Indiana Tax Court judge, the members of the Judicial Nominating Commission made sure to have some fun and some laughs during the interviews on Wednesday.

Before the interviews began at 9 a.m., Justice Steven David made an appearance before those seven people who in late July had suggested him to the governor as one of three names to consider for the state’s top court. Sworn in Oct. 18, the new justice came to not only to say hello and watch the process but to see if the members wanted anything – a reference to his role as the junior-ranking member of the court who typically votes and speaks first.

“Lobster,” some of the commission members said.

Later, semi-finalist Martha Wentworth mentioned in response to a question about her love for traveling that she hasn’t been to Maine but that she loves lobster. She didn’t know about the earlier lobster mention, which made commission members laugh even more.

Wentworth started her interview saying that she’d done her homework, researching the state “judiciary’s journey” by reading all of the State of the Judiciary speeches by Chief Justice Randall Shepard. Pointing that out to commission members in case they “had three or four hours to spare,” one of the commission members mentioned that’d be a good way to cure insomnia, and attorney-commissioner John Trimble patted the chief justice on the back as everyone shared in some laughter.

During the interviews, commission member Fred McCashland observed that he was impressed with Hendricks Superior Judge Karen Love’s writing style and that she could even write a textbook. While she thanked him, some other commission members asked “what subject” and McCashland responded that it’d be the “subject of her choice.”

The book topic carried over to Carol Comer, who’d mentioned during the first interview that she carried a book to read all the time and at any time might be reading four or five. That hasn’t changed, she said, in mentioning some of the titles that she was reading. She also noted that she’d just returned the previous day from a three-week vacation in Israel.

Other candidates drew some laughs, too: Melony Sacopulos raised some laughter when asking the commission if she could refer to some notes. Chief Justice Shepard pointed out it wasn’t a public political debate.

The commission also showed its light side when welcoming banking attorney Dan Carwile, who is from Evansville like members Christine Keck and Chief Justice Shepard. It’s always positive when that southern Indiana city is represented, the chief justice said to some laughs. Members also asked about Carwile’s transition as an undergraduate from religion, philosophy and English to “the dark side” of business administration and law.

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. Such things are no more elections than those in the late, unlamented Soviet Union.

  2. It appears the police and prosecutors are allowed to change the rules halfway through the game to suit themselves. I am surprised that the congress has not yet eliminated the right to a trial in cases involving any type of forensic evidence. That would suit their foolish law and order police state views. I say we eliminate the statute of limitations for crimes committed by members of congress and other government employees. Of course they would never do that. They are all corrupt cowards!!!

  3. Poor Judge Brown probably thought that by slavishly serving the godz of the age her violations of 18th century concepts like due process and the rule of law would be overlooked. Mayhaps she was merely a Judge ahead of her time?

  4. in a lawyer discipline case Judge Brown, now removed, was presiding over a hearing about a lawyer accused of the supposedly heinous ethical violation of saying the words "Illegal immigrant." (IN re Barker) http://www.in.gov/judiciary/files/order-discipline-2013-55S00-1008-DI-429.pdf .... I wonder if when we compare the egregious violations of due process by Judge Brown, to her chiding of another lawyer for politically incorrectness, if there are any conclusions to be drawn about what kind of person, what kind of judge, what kind of apparatchik, is busy implementing the agenda of political correctness and making off-limits legit advocacy about an adverse party in a suit whose illegal alien status is relevant? I am just asking the question, the reader can make own conclsuion. Oh wait-- did I use the wrong adjective-- let me rephrase that, um undocumented alien?

  5. of course the bigger questions of whether or not the people want to pay for ANY bussing is off limits, due to the Supreme Court protecting the people from DEMOCRACY. Several decades hence from desegregation and bussing plans and we STILL need to be taking all this taxpayer money to combat mostly-imagined "discrimination" in the most obviously failed social program of the postwar period.

ADVERTISEMENT