Indiana chief justice delivers final address

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Standing in the same spot that he has annually for the past 25 years, Indiana Chief Justice Randall T. Shepard delivered his State of the Judiciary Jan. 11.

In many ways, the speech was the same as always, with his assessment of the judiciary’s accomplishments and challenges in the past year. But this year was more significant for the Hoosier legal community.

shepard Indiana House Speaker Brian Bosma, R-Indianapolis, right, congratulates Indiana Chief Justice Randall T. Shepard before Shepard delivers his final State of the Judiciary on Jan. 11. (IBJ Photo/ Perry Reichanadter)

This was the final address that Shepard would give as chief justice before his retirement in March. Judges and attorneys throughout Indiana paid closer attention this time, wondering what Shepard – the only chief justice a generation of lawyers has known – might say in his last State of the Judiciary.

The night before, Gov. Mitch Daniels gave his eighth and final State of the State address and thanked Shepard for what he described as “a quarter century of fairness, firmness and farsightedness.”

Giving a 27-minute speech that he titled “On the Way to Something Better,” the chief justice focused on the process of building a more unified and purposeful court system. He rattled off achievements that the court and legal community have experienced, and the list reflected not only the past 12 months, but many of the changes during Shepard’s tenure.

“The yesterday of Indiana’s courts lasted largely unchanged over decades. As in many other states, our courts were a collection of silos that rarely connected,” he said. “That began to change about a generation ago, and over time Indiana’s courts have become less like a collection of Lone Rangers and more like a group of colleagues with a common purpose.”

Shepard praised court reform efforts to unify state court jurisdictions and allow for more collaboration. He detailed court technology improvements that include a statewide case management system that in part gives women’s shelters direct access to the Protective Order Registry. Last year, 9,300 email or text messages about protective orders went out to domestic violence victims, and that’s just one of the many improvements Indiana’s embraced that he says is “literally saving lives.”

The chief justice cited family law and criminal justice examples to show how the state judiciary is better equipped to resolve disputes today than before. He said Indiana has more volunteer Court Appointed Special Advocates than ever, with the largest group of 1,010 volunteers being trained in 2011.

Shepard talked about court reform efforts and judicial opinions that have helped bolster Indiana’s national reputation. He said the Indiana Rules of Evidence and consistent caselaw have provided guidance for trial courts and lawyers, and that’s helped hold down litigation costs and improve access to the legal system overall. The chief justice also discussed Indiana State Bar Association efforts to create the first statewide lawyer-leadership academy with the help of Justice Steven David and said that through the Indiana Conference for Legal Education Opportunity, the state has doubled its number of minority attorneys. Shepard said the lawmakers and judges he’s worked with over time have been gracious, and that allows him to now “leave the stage with full confidence that we will succeed in building Indiana as a safe and prosperous and decent place.”

The chief justice’s address was emotional at times, as he mentioned his friendship with the governor and lieutenant governor and being able to lead a committee with former Gov. Joe Kernan that issued the Kernan-Shepard report on local government reform in 2007.

“Could there be a better cause, a more worthwhile way to ‘spend and be spent’ in life than working toward greater justice?” he said.

After a minute-long standing ovation, those who heard the speech praised Shepard.

Sen. Lindel Hume, D-Princeton, a 38-year legislator who has observed every State of the Judiciary going back to before Shepard’s time, said this chief justice changed his view on attending the annual speech.

“I used to just really hate coming to this, but once he became chief justice, it started being a real pleasure because it was certainly a different approach,” Hume said after the speech.

“That was probably good, because there is no question in my mind that he is the best chief justice the state of Indiana has ever had, and he is probably the best chief justice in the nation,” he said with a laugh.

Lawyer-legislator Rep. Ralph Foley, R-Martinsville, was emotional as he watched the address, noting that as a lawmaker or as a practicing civil attorney in Morgan County, he’s seen all of Shepard’s speeches. Both are nearing the ends of their terms and retiring this year from their public service posts. Shepard thanked Foley in the speech for his legislative work through the years.

“I have a lot of admiration and appreciation for the accessibility he’s offered through the years,” Foley said. “His dedication to improving the judiciary, the bar and all the areas he mentioned has been marvelous and I’ve really enjoyed seeing that evolve.”

Allen Circuit Judge Tom Felts described it as a special day being able to attend and receive a mention from the chief justice about his work launching a family mediation effort for divorces involving children, which is now being used in 33 counties. The trial judge has attended 14 prior speeches, but Felts said he told one of his judicial colleagues as Shepard entered the room what an honor it was to be at this historic, final address. Felts saw the mark of a true leader in Shepard, as he didn’t take direct credit for the judiciary’s accomplishments but highlighted the work of his colleagues – though Felts argues many were inspired and motivated by the chief justice.

“He’s a class act and will be very difficult to replace, and though he’ll be sorely missed, I’m happy he is able to go out on his own terms at a time of his own choosing,” Felts said. “Specifically, with his head held high in the satisfaction of a job well done.”•


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. If a class action suit or other manner of retribution is possible, count me in. I have email and voicemail from the man. He colluded with opposing counsel, I am certain. My case was damaged so severely it nearly lost me everything and I am still paying dearly.

  2. There's probably a lot of blame that can be cast around for Indiana Tech's abysmal bar passage rate this last February. The folks who decided that Indiana, a state with roughly 16,000 to 18,000 attorneys, needs a fifth law school need to question the motives that drove their support of this project. Others, who have been "strong supporters" of the law school, should likewise ask themselves why they believe this institution should be supported. Is it because it fills some real need in the state? Or is it, instead, nothing more than a resume builder for those who teach there part-time? And others who make excuses for the students' poor performance, especially those who offer nothing more than conspiracy theories to back up their claims--who are they helping? What evidence do they have to support their posturing? Ultimately, though, like most everything in life, whether one succeeds or fails is entirely within one's own hands. At least one student from Indiana Tech proved this when he/she took and passed the February bar. A second Indiana Tech student proved this when they took the bar in another state and passed. As for the remaining 9 who took the bar and didn't pass (apparently, one of the students successfully appealed his/her original score), it's now up to them (and nobody else) to ensure that they pass on their second attempt. These folks should feel no shame; many currently successful practicing attorneys failed the bar exam on their first try. These same attorneys picked themselves up, dusted themselves off, and got back to the rigorous study needed to ensure they would pass on their second go 'round. This is what the Indiana Tech students who didn't pass the first time need to do. Of course, none of this answers such questions as whether Indiana Tech should be accredited by the ABA, whether the school should keep its doors open, or, most importantly, whether it should have even opened its doors in the first place. Those who promoted the idea of a fifth law school in Indiana need to do a lot of soul-searching regarding their decisions. These same people should never be allowed, again, to have a say about the future of legal education in this state or anywhere else. Indiana already has four law schools. That's probably one more than it really needs. But it's more than enough.

  3. This man Steve Hubbard goes on any online post or forum he can find and tries to push his company. He said court reporters would be obsolete a few years ago, yet here we are. How does he have time to search out every single post about court reporters and even spy in private court reporting forums if his company is so successful???? Dude, get a life. And back to what this post was about, I agree that some national firms cause a huge problem.

  4. rensselaer imdiana is doing same thing to children from the judge to attorney and dfs staff they need to be investigated as well

  5. Sex offenders are victims twice, once when they are molested as kids, and again when they repeat the behavior, you never see money spent on helping them do you. That's why this circle continues