ILNews

Former COA chief judge, IBF founder dies

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

A former chief judge of the Indiana Court of Appeals and a founder of the Indianapolis Bar Foundation died Thursday.

Judge Paul H. Buchanan Jr., 90, served nine years as chief judge of the Court of Appeals after being elected to the bench in 1971. He was active in the Indianapolis Bar Association, serving as president, at which time he helped organize the Indianapolis Bar Foundation in 1968. He served on the IBF's original board of directors until he retired from it in 1999. Judge Buchanan is also credited with helping re-start the IBF's Ask-A-Lawyer program.

The Indianapolis Bar Association created an award in 1990 named after the judge, who was a longtime supporter of the IBA and IBF.

"Judge Buchanan was the heart and soul of the Indianapolis Bar Foundation through his generous support and continuing interests in promoting a positive image for lawyers through the good work done by the foundation," said Mary Marsh, an IBA past president and 2003 recipient of the Buchanan Award, in an e-mail.

Nancy J. Gargula, president of the IBF in 1999 and 2000, said in a statement that it was Judge Buchanan's commitment and dedication to the legal profession, his leadership, and vision that led to the establishment of the IBF.

"When I look at all the Foundation has accomplished in the ensuing years, Judge Buchanan's impact on the Indianapolis community is truly remarkable," she said.

Before becoming a judge, he was a managing partner at law firm Bose Buchanan McKinney Evans; he retired from the Court of Appeals Jan. 1, 1993.

Current Court of Appeals Chief Judge John G. Baker said Judge Buchanan and another former chief judge, Jonathan Robertson, who passed away in October, were the first ones to talk with him about considering joining the Court of Appeals.

The chief judge remembered Judge Buchanan as a renaissance man, one who could discuss sports, arts, literature, and politics in any order. The chief judge worked with Judge Buchanan for nearly four years on the Court of Appeals and knew him as an interesting, accomplished gentleman.

"I think the most lasting thing I will remember about Judge Buchanan is his insistence on clarity and language," said Chief Judge Baker. "He was a wordsmith."

Chief Judge Baker alluded to Judge Buchanan's articles in "Res Gestae," which helped others refine their writing.

Judge Buchanan had a keen interest in the arts and was a collector and longtime arts community supporter. Chief Judge Baker also remembered Judge Buchanan as someone who was very proud of the judiciary, who wanted to protect its integrity and keep the court out of partisan politics.

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. The ADA acts as a tax upon all for the benefit of a few. And, most importantly, the many have no individual say in whether they pay the tax. Those with handicaps suffered in military service should get a pass, but those who are handicapped by accident or birth do NOT deserve that pass. The drivel about "equal access" is spurious because the handicapped HAVE equal access, they just can't effectively use it. That is their problem, not society's. The burden to remediate should be that of those who seek the benefit of some social, constructional, or dimensional change, NOT society generally. Everybody wants to socialize the costs and concentrate the benefits of government intrusion so that they benefit and largely avoid the costs. This simply maintains the constant push to the slop trough, and explains, in part, why the nation is 20 trillion dollars in the hole.

  2. Hey 2 psychs is never enough, since it is statistically unlikely that three will ever agree on anything! New study admits this pseudo science is about as scientifically valid as astrology ... done by via fortune cookie ....John Ioannidis, professor of health research and policy at Stanford University, said the study was impressive and that its results had been eagerly awaited by the scientific community. “Sadly, the picture it paints - a 64% failure rate even among papers published in the best journals in the field - is not very nice about the current status of psychological science in general, and for fields like social psychology it is just devastating,” he said. http://www.theguardian.com/science/2015/aug/27/study-delivers-bleak-verdict-on-validity-of-psychology-experiment-results

  3. Indianapolis Bar Association President John Trimble and I are on the same page, but it is a very large page with plenty of room for others to join us. As my final Res Gestae article will express in more detail in a few days, the Great Recession hastened a fundamental and permanent sea change for the global legal service profession. Every state bar is facing the same existential questions that thrust the medical profession into national healthcare reform debates. The bench, bar, and law schools must comprehensively reconsider how we define the practice of law and what it means to access justice. If the three principals of the legal service profession do not recast the vision of their roles and responsibilities soon, the marketplace will dictate those roles and responsibilities without regard for the public interests that the legal profession professes to serve.

  4. I have met some highly placed bureaucrats who vehemently disagree, Mr. Smith. This is not your father's time in America. Some ideas are just too politically incorrect too allow spoken, says those who watch over us for the good of their concept of order.

  5. Lets talk about this without forgetting that Lawyers, too, have FREEDOM OF SPEECH AND ASSOCIATION

ADVERTISEMENT