ILNews

IBA: IndyBar Member Selected as New U.S. Magistrate Judge

Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

The United States District Court for the Southern District of Indiana recently announced the selection of Mark J. Dinsmore as the new United States Magistrate Judge. The position filled by Dinsmore was vacated by the elevation of the Hon. Jane Magnus Stinson.

Dinsmore, a member of the Indianapolis Bar Association, is currently a partner at the law firm of Barnes & Thornburg LLP, where he has practiced since 1996. His practice concentrates in the areas of complex commercial disputes and construction litigation matters, as well as media law issues.
 

Dinsmore-mark-mug Dinsmore

A Magistrate Judge Merit Selection Committee chaired by retired Magistrate Judge V. Sue Shields reviewed more than 50 applications and recommended five candidates for the position. The District Judges of the court interviewed the five candidates and ultimately selected Dinsmore.

Regarding the selection, Chief Judge Richard L. Young commented, “The Merit Selection Panel forwarded to the court an array of very outstanding candidates, and it was a difficult decision for the court to select only one of them. We do believe that Mark Dinsmore has the credentials, background, and experience to make an outstanding Magistrate Judge.“

Born in Valparaiso, Indiana, and a magna cum laude graduate of the University of Toledo College of Law, Dinsmore graduated first in his class, served as lead articles editor of the University of Toledo Law Review, and was named the Outstanding Law Graduate. He received his A.B. in economics from Wabash College in 1983. Mr. Dinsmore has litigated throughout the United States, focusing on management of complex cases, with concentrations in construction litigation and electronic discovery. He has also represented clients in international and domestic arbitrations, including representing the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina in an international arbitration arising out of the Dayton Accords that ended the Balkan war. He serves as treasurer of the board of directors of Indiana Legal Services, Inc., and is a member of the board of directors of the Heartland Pro Bono Council. Mr. Dinsmore is admitted to practice in the state of Indiana, the United States District Courts for the Northern and Southern Districts of Indiana, and the United States Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit.

During his practice he has focused on the use of technology to facilitate the management of complex matters and chairs the firm’s Litigation Department Technology Committee. Prior to joining Barnes & Thornburg, Dinsmore served as a law clerk for the Honorable John Daniel Tinder, then judge of the United States Court District Court for the Southern District of Indiana and now judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit. Before attending law school, Dinsmore served as a captain in the United States Army in, among other places, the Republic of Korea. During his service he was twice named Eighth Army Outstanding Junior Leader.

United States Magistrate Judges are appointed by the Judges of the U.S. District Court for a term of eight years, and are eligible for reappointment to successive terms. Mr. Dinsmore’s appointment will be effective upon completion of required IRS and FBI background investigations.•

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. 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

  2. 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

  3. 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

  4. Here's an idea...how about we MORE heavily regulate the law schools to reduce the surplus of graduates, driving starting salaries up for those new grads, so that we can all pay our insane amount of student loans off in a reasonable amount of time and then be able to afford to do pro bono & low-fee work? I've got friends in other industries, radiology for example, and their schools accept a very limited number of students so there will never be a glut of new grads and everyone's pay stays high. For example, my radiologist friend's school accepted just six new students per year.

  5. I totally agree with John Smith.

ADVERTISEMENT