ILNews

High court amends Indiana rules

IL Staff
September 24, 2010
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

The Indiana Supreme Court has issued 14 orders amending various Indiana rules.

The orders are file stamped Sept. 21 and were posted Thursday. Many of the changes involve minor administrative updates, although some amendments are more significant, including doubling the filing fee of relators when submitting an original action application to the Supreme Court Administrator. It will now cost $250 to file.

Even though an amendment to Administrative Rule 3 changes the Indiana judicial districts from 14 to 26 for purposes of judicial administration, the justices decided to leave the current structure of the Pro Bono Committees in Indiana at 14. The justices want to give the Indiana Pro Bono Commission and district committees time to study the effect of the new 26 districts on their operations and report on that to the court by Dec. 31, 2011. The 26 new judicial districts are effective Jan. 1, 2011.

Many of the orders were amended to include using the date a motion, judgment, or notice is noted in the Chronological Case Summary as the trigger date for filing appeals or other motions.

The administrative rules have been amended to require all trial courts to use case numbers that include the year and month in the second part of the case number. This is to make it easier to collect case filing statistics for periods of less than one year. The amendment also asks trial courts with the ability to do so to extend the last part of the cause number to six digits unless it requires reprogramming the court’s existing electronic case management system.

The Indiana court’s website has a complete list of the rules that were amended. All changes become effective Jan. 1, 2011.
 

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. The fee increase would be livable except for the 11% increase in spending at the Disciplinary Commission. The Commission should be focused on true public harm rather than going on witch hunts against lawyers who dare to criticize judges.

  2. Marijuana is safer than alcohol. AT the time the 1937 Marijuana Tax Act was enacted all major pharmaceutical companies in the US sold marijuana products. 11 Presidents of the US have smoked marijuana. Smoking it does not increase the likelihood that you will get lung cancer. There are numerous reports of canabis oil killing many kinds of incurable cancer. (See Rick Simpson's Oil on the internet or facebook).

  3. The US has 5% of the world's population and 25% of the world's prisoners. Far too many people are sentenced for far too many years in prison. Many of the federal prisoners are sentenced for marijuana violations. Marijuana is safer than alcohol.

  4. My daughter was married less than a week and her new hubbys picture was on tv for drugs and now I havent't seen my granddaughters since st patricks day. when my daughter left her marriage from her childrens Father she lived with me with my grand daughters and that was ok but I called her on the new hubby who is in jail and said didn't want this around my grandkids not unreasonable request and I get shut out for her mistake

  5. From the perspective of a practicing attorney, it sounds like this masters degree in law for non-attorneys will be useless to anyone who gets it. "However, Ted Waggoner, chair of the ISBA’s Legal Education Conclave, sees the potential for the degree program to actually help attorneys do their jobs better. He pointed to his practice at Peterson Waggoner & Perkins LLP in Rochester and how some clients ask their attorneys to do work, such as filling out insurance forms, that they could do themselves. Waggoner believes the individuals with the legal master’s degrees could do the routine, mundane business thus freeing the lawyers to do the substantive legal work." That is simply insulting to suggest that someone with a masters degree would work in a role that is subpar to even an administrative assistant. Even someone with just a certificate or associate's degree in paralegal studies would be overqualified to sit around helping clients fill out forms. Anyone who has a business background that they think would be enhanced by having a legal background will just go to law school, or get an MBA (which typically includes a business law class that gives a generic, broad overview of legal concepts). No business-savvy person would ever seriously consider this ridiculous master of law for non-lawyers degree. It reeks of desperation. The only people I see getting it are the ones who did not get into law school, who see the degree as something to add to their transcript in hopes of getting into a JD program down the road.

ADVERTISEMENT