Holcomb’s Supreme Court pick will be a trial judge

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

With the Indiana Judicial Nominating Commission’s stamp of approval next to their names, three trial court judges are waiting to learn who among them will be selected as the state’s next Supreme Court justice.

At the conclusion of two rounds of interviews that wrapped up Wednesday morning, the JNC, led by Indiana Chief Justice Loretta Rush, voted Wednesday evening to recommend Clark Circuit Judge Vicki Carmichael, Wabash Superior Judge Christopher Goff and Boone Superior Judge Matthew Kincaid as finalists to fill the Supreme Court vacancy that will come open after Justice Robert Rucker retires next month. Gov. Eric Holcomb is now tasked with selecting one of the three finalists to take Rucker’s seat.

Kincaid returns to the finalist pool this year after being recommended for the Supreme Court vacancy left when former Chief Justice Brent Dickson retired last year. St. Joseph Superior Judge Steven Hostetler and then-Taft Stettinius & Hollister LLP partner Geoffrey Slaughter were also finalists for Dickson’s spot, with former Gov. Mike Pence ultimately selecting Slaughter.

If selected as the state’s next justice, Kincaid would bring roughly 14 years’ experience as a judge to the state’s highest bench.  Prior to becoming a judge, Kincaid worked as an associate with Riley Bennett & Egloff LLP, where he primarily practiced civil litigation and workers’ compensation law, according to his application.

Asked to describe himself during his Wednesday interview with the JNC, Kincaid said he is a father, a thinker and a confident person. Additionally, Kincaid said he is also frequently the judge of himself as he reflects on his life and work.

Just days shy of his 45th birthday later this month, Goff, if chosen to replace Rucker, would be a decade younger than his colleagues on the bench; Slaughter is the next-youngest justice at 54 years old.

Goff has served on the Wabash Superior Court since July 2005.

Prior to ascending to the bench, Goff wrote in his application that his general law practice “was typical of a county seat practitioner.” His work focused largely on domestic relations and criminal cases, as well as collections, wills and estates, personal injury law and work with small businesses.

Asked during his interview about some of the greatest obstacles to justice facing Indiana litigants, Goff said equal access to justice. Without that access, Goff said citizens’ trust in the legal system will begin to erode.

Like her fellow finalists, Carmichael has been on the trial court bench for more than 10 years, first taking a spot on the Jeffersonville City Court in 2000 then moving to the Clark Circuit Court in 2007. Prior to that, she was a self-employed practicing attorney in Jeffersonville and previously clerked for the Kentucky Supreme Court in the 1980s.

Carmichael was elected to the bench as a Democrat, a fact that differentiates her from Republican Gov. Holcomb. Yet she repeatedly told the JNC that when she is in her role as a judge, politics have no place in her decision-making process. Instead, the judge said she looks solely at the facts of the case, and further said she believes her track record indicates that she is worthy of being a justice, regardless of political party.

The JNC’s next step is to send a formal report on the three finalists to Holcomb, who will then have 60 days to make a selection. Supreme Court spokeswoman Kathryn Dolan said the letter would be sent to Holcomb in the “very near future.” A representative from Holcomb’s office did not immediately respond to a request for comment on the finalists or when he might make his decision after receiving the letter.


Post a comment to this story

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
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. It's an appreciable step taken by the government to curb the child abuse that are happening in the schools. Employees in the schools those are selected without background check can not be trusted. A thorough background check on the teachers or any other other new employees must be performed to choose the best and quality people. Those who are already employed in the past should also be checked for best precaution. The future of kids can be saved through this simple process. However, the checking process should be conducted by the help of a trusted background checking agency(

  2. Almost everything connects to internet these days. From your computers and Smartphones to wearable gadgets and smart refrigerators in your home, everything is linked to the Internet. Although this convenience empowers usto access our personal devices from anywhere in the world such as an IP camera, it also deprives control of our online privacy. Cyber criminals, hackers, spies and everyone else has realized that we don’t have complete control on who can access our personal data. We have to take steps to to protect it like keeping Senseless password. Dont leave privacy unprotected. Check out this article for more ways:

  3. You need to look into Celadon not paying sign on bonuses. We call get the run

  4. My parents took advantage of the fact that I was homeless in 2012 and went to court and got Legal Guardianship I my 2 daughters. I am finally back on my feet and want them back, but now they want to fight me on it. I want to raise my children and have them almost all the time on the weekends. Mynparents are both almost 70 years old and they play favorites which bothers me a lot. Do I have a leg to stand on if I go to court to terminate lehal guardianship? My kids want to live with me and I want to raise them, this was supposed to be temporary, and now it is turning into a fight. Ridiculous

  5. Here's my two cents. While in Texas in 2007 I was not registered because I only had to do it for ten years. So imagine my surprise as I find myself forced to register in Texas because indiana can't get their head out of their butt long enough to realize they passed an ex post facto law in 2006. So because Indiana had me listed as a failure to register Texas said I had to do it there. Now if Indiana had done right by me all along I wouldn't need the aclu to defend my rights. But such is life.