ILNews

IBA: Courts Announce Renewal of Attorney Access Cards

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

The Marion County Court Administrator’s Office has announced the renewal schedule for attorney access cards to the City-County Building. Effective Feb. 23, 2012 application and distribution will begin for new cards and those issued prior to that date will no longer be valid on April 1, 2012. Application cost for the 2012-13 card is $25.

To obtain an access card an attorney must complete the application form and bring it to Court’s Jury Pool Office (2nd Floor, City-County Building), City-County Building, 200 E. Washington St., Center Tower, Room T-202, Indianapolis, IN 46204. Beginning Feb. 23, 2012 hours for application and distribution are limited to Thursdays from 2:00 pm to 4:00 pm and Fridays from 9:30 am to 11:30 am. Forms are available at the Indianapolis Bar Association. They may also be obtained online at www.courts.indy.gov or www.indybar.org.

The Court considers the issuance of the cards to be a privilege extended to members of the Bar as officers of the court. Once obtained the authorized attorney identification card may be presented to a court security officer at a City-County Building security screening station which will allow the attorney to enter a secured area without requiring a search.

Two forms of identification are required for application. First, any Government issued and approved photo identification like an Indiana State Driver’s License or other approved photo identification must be presented. Second, a current and valid Indiana Supreme Court Certificate of Good Standing card (“Bar Card”) must also be provided to verify the active status of the attorney’s license and state attorney number. The fee of Twenty-Five Dollars ($25.00) must be paid at the time issuance of the card. Payment may be made by personal or business check, cashier’s check, or money order, made payable to “Marion County Treasurer.”

Attorneys receiving the access cards must agree that they will not bring firearms, knives, or any other weapons or contraband into the City-County Building; that the card is issued for the exclusive personal use of the authorized attorney, and is not to be loaned out to other persons; and that card will be used in accordance with the Rules of Professional Responsibility and the attorney’s responsibilities as an officer of the court. The Court reserves the right to revoke issuance any time at the sole discretion of the Court Administrator. Finally, the Court Administrator’s office must be notified immediately if there is a change in status of the attorney applicant, such as resignation, suspension or disbarment from the practice of law, retirement, or if the card is lost or stolen.

Cards issued on or after Feb. 23, 2012 will expire on Dec. 31, 2013.•

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. Just an aside, but regardless of the outcome, I 'm proud of Judge William Hughes. He was the original magistrate on the Home place issue. He ruled for Home Place, and was primaried by Brainard for it. Their tool Poindexter failed to unseat Hughes, who won support for his honesty and courage throughout the county, and he was reelected Judge of Hamilton County's Superior Court. You can still stand for something and survive. Thanks, Judge Hughes!

  2. CCHP's real accomplishment is the 2015 law signed by Gov Pence that basically outlaws any annexation that is forced where a 65% majority of landowners in the affected area disagree. Regardless of whether HP wins or loses, the citizens of Indiana will not have another fiasco like this. The law Gov Pence signed is a direct result of this malgovernance.

  3. I gave tempparry guardship to a friend of my granddaughter in 2012. I went to prison. I had custody. My daughter went to prison to. We are out. My daughter gave me custody but can get her back. She was not order to give me custody . but now we want granddaughter back from friend. She's 14 now. What rights do we have

  4. This sure is not what most who value good governance consider the Rule of Law to entail: "In a letter dated March 2, which Brizzi forwarded to IBJ, the commission dismissed the grievance “on grounds that there is not reasonable cause to believe that you are guilty of misconduct.”" Yet two month later reasonable cause does exist? (Or is the commission forging ahead, the need for reasonable belief be damned? -- A seeming violation of the Rules of Profession Ethics on the part of the commission) Could the rule of law theory cause one to believe that an explanation is in order? Could it be that Hoosier attorneys live under Imperial Law (which is also a t-word that rhymes with infamy) in which the Platonic guardians can do no wrong and never owe the plebeian class any explanation for their powerful actions. (Might makes it right?) Could this be a case of politics directing the commission, as celebrated IU Mauer Professor (the late) Patrick Baude warned was happening 20 years ago in his controversial (whisteblowing) ethics lecture on a quite similar topic: http://www.repository.law.indiana.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1498&context=ilj

  5. I have a case presently pending cert review before the SCOTUS that reveals just how Indiana regulates the bar. I have been denied licensure for life for holding the wrong views and questioning the grand inquisitors as to their duties as to state and federal constitutional due process. True story: https://www.scribd.com/doc/299040839/2016Petitionforcert-to-SCOTUS Shorter, Amici brief serving to frame issue as misuse of govt licensure: https://www.scribd.com/doc/312841269/Thomas-More-Society-Amicus-Brown-v-Ind-Bd-of-Law-Examiners

ADVERTISEMENT