ILNews

Houses active as session nears end

Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

As this year's legislative session winds down, several bills of interest to the legal community have made it through both houses, but many remained stuck in conference committee Thursday.

Senate Bill 163, a child support bill with the controversial provision allowing for garnishment of back child support from casino winnings, passed the full Senate 49-0 Thursday.

SB 394, an attorney general matters bill, has been signed by the president pro tempore. The bill authorizes the attorney general to intervene in a declaratory judgment action alleging a statute or ordinance is unconstitutional, as well as allows the AG to file an amicus brief without permission of the parties or court.

SB 36 also has been signed by the president pro tempore. The bill provides that magistrates who meet certain criteria may be certified as special judges.

SB 140, dealing with adoption matters, passed out of conference committee and is now ready for enrollment.

House Bill 1154, allowing commissioners in Marion County to have the same powers and duties as magistrates, is ready for enrollment. The bill passed the House unanimously Monday.

HB 1193 is also ready for enrollment, passing Monday by a vote of 91-1. The bill establishes a law enforcement, school policing, and youth work group run by the Indiana Criminal Justice Institute. The work group will consist of 26 voting members, including an attorney, law school professor, and judge. The group will submit annual reports with information on legislation and training curricula for schools and law enforcement to various officials, including the governor and the Indiana Supreme Court chief justice.

Several bills remained in conference committee at Indiana Lawyer deadline.

The Senate and the House released conference committee reports for SB 307 Thursday, removing provisions added by the House concerning the establishment of a third Bartholomew Superior Court and a unified Clark Circuit Court. The Senate report passed late Thursday afternoon.

SB 149, a Department of Child Services bill that has added language about out-of-state placements, remained in conference committee Thursday. Also stalling in conference committees were SB 224, a bill that specifies how sex offenders can remove their names from the registry if they qualify; SB 399 that deals with caps on fines for moving violations; HB 1271 on problem-solving courts; and HB 1276, which was amended to add language requiring the Judicial Technology Automation Committee to report on the number of divorce decrees entered in the state.

The General Assembly intended to wrap up the session before March 14, possibly concluding Thursday, but that was still up in the air at IL deadline.

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. 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