ILNews

Governor names new Marion Superior judge

Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Gov. Mitch Daniels has appointed the replacement for former Marion Superior Judge Tanya Walton Pratt, who was appointed to the U.S. District Court’s Southern District of Indiana in June.

The governor on Monday appointed Barbara L. Cook Crawford as the newest Marion Superior judge, and she began her service today. Cook Crawford has spent much of the last two decades in the Marion County Prosecutor’s Office. She’s also worked in the Office of the Indiana Attorney General and Marion County Public Defender’s Office.

She earned her J.D. from Indiana University School of Law – Indianapolis, where she has been an adjunct professor since 1998 teaching trial advocacy.

Marion Superior Judge Robert Altice, presiding judge of the executive committee, said a decision hasn’t yet been made on which court the new judge will preside over. That will be decided at the executive committee meeting Friday, though Judge Altice doesn’t believe she’ll be assigned to environmental/community court following Judge Michael Keele’s move to the civil side earlier this year.

Describing his new judicial colleague, Judge Altice said that she was an excellent choice from a list of very qualified candidates, and that Cook Crawford “is very intelligent, compassionate, and has a tremendous demeanor which will serve her well as a judge.”

The governor’s office conducted interviews in mid-July with the nine people who’d applied for the position: Mark D. Batties III, a Marion Superior master commissioner; Greg Bowes, Marion County assessor who was a Democratic candidate for county prosecutor earlier this year; John J. Boyce, Marion Superior commissioner; Shatrese M. Flowers, Marion Superior commissioner; Bruce A. Hugon, partner at Stuart & Branigin; Jeffrey L. Marchal, Marion Superior commissioner; Victoria M. Ransberger, Marion Superior magistrate; and William K. Teeguardan, retired administrative law judge now working for the state.
 

ADVERTISEMENT

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. 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!!!

  2. 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?

  3. 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?

  4. 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.

  5. You can put your photos anywhere you like... When someone steals it they know it doesn't belong to them. And, a man getting a divorce is automatically not a nice guy...? That's ridiculous. Since when is need of money a conflict of interest? That would mean that no one should have a job unless they are already financially solvent without a job... A photographer is also under no obligation to use a watermark (again, people know when a photo doesn't belong to them) or provide contact information. Hey, he didn't make it easy for me to pay him so I'll just take it! Well heck, might as well walk out of the grocery store with a cart full of food because the lines are too long and you don't find that convenient. "Only in Indiana." Oh, now you're passing judgement on an entire state... What state do you live in? I need to characterize everyone in your state as ignorant and opinionated. And the final bit of ignorance; assuming a photo anyone would want is lucky and then how much does your camera have to cost to make it a good photo, in your obviously relevant opinion?

ADVERTISEMENT