ILNews

IBA: Interrogatories

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Marcia J. Oddi

Editor, Indiana Law Blog

www.indianalawblog.com

She is a graduate of Indiana University and the Indiana University McKinney School of Law. She served as Revisor of Statutes, Director of the Public Law Division of the Indiana Legislative Services Agency, and Chief Counsel to the Indiana Senate before entering private practice in 1988. She is Marcia Oddi, the preeminent Indiana law blogger, and she has been served with interrogatories.

Q: The Indiana Law Blog (ILB) just celebrated its 10th anniversary last month. How did you decide to start the blog?

A: I’ve had a lifelong fascination with news information and its distribution. (1) My parents were inveterate newspaper clippers, regularly sending me thick envelopes of stories when I was in college. (2) Clifton Utley (Garrick’s father) was an NBC news anchor back in the day when I was working in Chicago. I’d see him on the South Shore, getting ready for his show, clipping stories out of the papers - I was in awe. (3) When I started working for the General Assembly in the mid-1960s, the legislature subscribed to clipping services and I loved reading news from all around the state. So naturally when Howard Bashman started How Appealing (www.howappealing.law.com) I thought, wow, I could do that clipping thing for Indiana!

Q: What is an average day like in the life of the blog? How do you decide what to cover, and how much time does it take?

A: I spend an average of six hours a day on the ILB. Before I get out of bed I’m watching Morning Joe and scrolling through my iPad for news and emails. I file stories away to use throughout the day. I look through a number of online papers. I use Google Reader constantly. I try to start posting between 8 and 9 a.m., but it may be earlier if something big has occurred, or later if I’m working on a long, difficult entry, or have something else on my schedule.

Mid-morning I start looking for court opinions. I check Twitter and my email every few minutes for new news. By mid-afternoon things usually slow down and I can work on more involved posts. Throughout the day I address emails from readers.

A small fraction of what I read ends up on the blog. After all this time I have some sort of internal governor that tells me, “that fits in the blog” or “that doesn’t”.

Q: Frequent readers of the ILB know about your commitment to transparency and access to records. Are you optimistic about the future of transparency in Indiana law?

A: Not really. Look at this past session. A bill to charge fees for public records fortunately didn’t make it this year, but another bill, SEA 369, which allows a public agency to refuse to confirm or deny the existence of investigatory records of law enforcement agencies or criminal intelligence information, is awaiting the Governor’s action. As The Times of Northwest Indiana wrote, “Refusing to acknowledge a record’s existence is even worse than refusing to release it, with or without redaction.”

Q: Assuming a reader follows ILB and has time to follow one other legal blog, which would you recommend and why?

A: SCOTUSblog (www.scotusblog.com), hands down. It has cleared the table, insofar as U.S. Supreme Court coverage is concerned, and it gets better every year. Founder Tom Goldstein has been quoted, “The court is so bad at conveying information about what it’s doing, if someone can helpfully step in in a way that’s free and accessible, people really appreciate it.” Of course, SCOTUSblog has had wonderful monetary support, first from a major law firm and now from Bloomberg.

Q: Google Reader is shutting down next month. Do you have recommendations on how to follow the ILB in the future for current users of that service?

A: Yes, follow the ILB on Twitter @indianalawblog. I send out a tweet after every new blog post, and also do some retweets of others’ items.

The bigger question is, how will the ILB keep up-to-date with the news without Google Reader? Don’t know yet, but I plan to start looking on June 1st—the announced shutdown is July 1st.

Q: What do you think has made ILB so popular?

A: Well, thanks! I try to put together “what an Indiana lawyer may want to know today,” plus some mindstretchers and an occasion chuckle.

According to my Sitemeter stats (which only counts clicks made directly to the blog itself), the ILB averages 2,000 to 2,400 visitors each weekday and about twice that number of page views.

Q: Do you have any goals left for ILB? Where do you see it going?

A: I’d like to see more transparency in the judiciary. We are getting there. When the ILB started 10 years ago, transfer lists were not online and neither were Not for Publication decisions of the Court of Appeals. There was little information available for voters when judges and justices went up for retention. The selection process for appellate judges and justices received minimal coverage. All that has improved. And of course the appellate courts videocast and archive most of their opinions; that is awesome.

As for goals which would allow the ILB to provide enhanced coverage:

I’d like the Supreme Court briefs to be posted online as they are filed. Generally these consist of transfer petitions and responses, sometimes amicus briefs, and in rare cases (Malenchik and Quanardel Wells come to mind) the Supreme Court will ask for more briefing.

I’d like the Court to announce what petitions it will consider in its upcoming weekly or more frequent conference (as does the Supreme Court of the United States), and then promptly post the resultant transfer list that afternoon or the following morning.

Finally, an essential and pressing goal for the ILB is finding more major financial supporters.

Q: Professor Joel Schumm is one of the only people other than you who makes contributions to the blog. How did that come about?

A: When Justice Boehm announced his retirement and Chief Justice Shepard announced that the interviews for a new justice, the first in more than 10 years, not only would be open, but the applications would be posted online, I contacted Prof. Schumm to see how we might work together to report on the selection process. I knew Joel then only through the notes we traded back and forth about ILB items. Joel had great ideas and put much time and effort into the coverage and the rest is history. His contributions via the ILB to the Indiana legal community have been, I believe, unmatchable.

Q: If you had to do something other than blog and practice law, what would it be?

A: I began life after college as a biological illustrator at the Field Museum; I would love to spend more time drawing and painting.•

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

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. "Am I bugging you? I don't mean to bug ya." If what I wrote below is too much social philosophy for Indiana attorneys, just take ten this vacay to watch The Lego Movie with kiddies and sing along where appropriate: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=etzMjoH0rJw

  2. I've got some free speech to share here about who is at work via the cat's paw of the ACLU stamping out Christian observances.... 2 Thessalonians chap 2: "And we also thank God continually because, when you received the word of God, which you heard from us, you accepted it not as a human word, but as it actually is, the word of God, which is indeed at work in you who believe. For you, brothers and sisters, became imitators of God’s churches in Judea, which are in Christ Jesus: You suffered from your own people the same things those churches suffered from the Jews who killed the Lord Jesus and the prophets and also drove us out. They displease God and are hostile to everyone in their effort to keep us from speaking to the Gentiles so that they may be saved. In this way they always heap up their sins to the limit. The wrath of God has come upon them at last."

  3. Did someone not tell people who have access to the Chevy Volts that it has a gas engine and will run just like a normal car? The batteries give the Volt approximately a 40 mile range, but after that the gas engine will propel the vehicle either directly through the transmission like any other car, or gas engine recharges the batteries depending on the conditions.

  4. Catholic, Lutheran, even the Baptists nuzzling the wolf! http://www.judicialwatch.org/press-room/press-releases/judicial-watch-documents-reveal-obama-hhs-paid-baptist-children-family-services-182129786-four-months-housing-illegal-alien-children/ YET where is the Progressivist outcry? Silent. I wonder why?

  5. Thank you, Honorable Ladies, and thank you, TIL, for this interesting interview. The most interesting question was the last one, which drew the least response. Could it be that NFP stamps are a threat to the very foundation of our common law American legal tradition, a throwback to the continental system that facilitated differing standards of justice? A throwback to Star Chamber’s protection of the landed gentry? If TIL ever again interviews this same panel, I would recommend inviting one known for voicing socio-legal dissent for the masses, maybe Welch, maybe Ogden, maybe our own John Smith? As demographics shift and our social cohesion precipitously drops, a consistent judicial core will become more and more important so that Justice and Equal Protection and Due Process are yet guiding stars. If those stars fall from our collective social horizon (and can they be seen even now through the haze of NFP opinions?) then what glue other than more NFP decisions and TRO’s and executive orders -- all backed by more and more lethally armed praetorians – will prop up our government institutions? And if and when we do arrive at such an end … will any then dare call that tyranny? Or will the cost of such dissent be too high to justify?

ADVERTISEMENT