ILNews

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.”•
 

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. On a related note, I offered the ICLU my cases against the BLE repeatedly, and sought their amici aid repeatedly as well. Crickets. Usually not even a response. I am guessing they do not do allegations of anti-Christian bias? No matter how glaring? I have posted on other links the amicus brief that did get filed (search this ezine, e.g., Kansas attorney), read the Thomas More Society brief to note what the ACLU ran from like vampires from garlic. An Examiner pledged to advance diversity and inclusion came right out on the record and demanded that I choose Man's law or God's law. I wonder, had I been asked to swear off Allah ... what result then, ICLU? Had I been found of bad character and fitness for advocating sexual deviance, what result then ICLU? Had I been lifetime banned for posting left of center statements denigrating the US Constitution, what result ICLU? Hey, we all know don't we? Rather Biased.

  2. It was mentioned in the article that there have been numerous CLE events to train attorneys on e-filing. I would like someone to provide a list of those events, because I have not seen any such events in east central Indiana, and since Hamilton County is one of the counties where e-filing is mandatory, one would expect some instruction in this area. Come on, people, give some instruction, not just applause!

  3. This law is troubling in two respects: First, why wasn't the law reviewed "with the intention of getting all the facts surrounding the legislation and its actual impact on the marketplace" BEFORE it was passed and signed? Seems a bit backwards to me (even acknowledging that this is the Indiana state legislature we're talking about. Second, what is it with the laws in this state that seem to create artificial monopolies in various industries? Besides this one, the other law that comes to mind is the legislation that governed the granting of licenses to firms that wanted to set up craft distilleries. The licensing was limited to only those entities that were already in the craft beer brewing business. Republicans in this state talk a big game when it comes to being "business friendly". They're friendly alright . . . to certain businesses.

  4. Gretchen, Asia, Roberto, Tonia, Shannon, Cheri, Nicholas, Sondra, Carey, Laura ... my heart breaks for you, reaching out in a forum in which you are ignored by a professional suffering through both compassion fatigue and the love of filthy lucre. Most if not all of you seek a warm blooded Hoosier attorney unafraid to take on the government and plead that government officials have acted unconstitutionally to try to save a family and/or rescue children in need and/or press individual rights against the Leviathan state. I know an attorney from Kansas who has taken such cases across the country, arguing before half of the federal courts of appeal and presenting cases to the US S.Ct. numerous times seeking cert. Unfortunately, due to his zeal for the constitutional rights of peasants and willingness to confront powerful government bureaucrats seemingly violating the same ... he was denied character and fitness certification to join the Indiana bar, even after he was cleared to sit for, and passed, both the bar exam and ethics exam. And was even admitted to the Indiana federal bar! NOW KNOW THIS .... you will face headwinds and difficulties in locating a zealously motivated Hoosier attorney to face off against powerful government agents who violate the constitution, for those who do so tend to end up as marginalized as Paul Odgen, who was driven from the profession. So beware, many are mere expensive lapdogs, the kind of breed who will gladly take a large retainer, but then fail to press against the status quo and powers that be when told to heel to. It is a common belief among some in Indiana that those attorneys who truly fight the power and rigorously confront corruption often end up, actually or metaphorically, in real life or at least as to their careers, as dead as the late, great Gary Welch. All of that said, I wish you the very best in finding a Hoosier attorney with a fighting spirit to press your rights as far as you can, for you do have rights against government actors, no matter what said actors may tell you otherwise. Attorneys outside the elitist camp are often better fighters that those owing the powers that be for their salaries, corner offices and end of year bonuses. So do not be afraid to retain a green horn or unconnected lawyer, many of them are fine men and woman who are yet untainted by the "unique" Hoosier system.

  5. I am not the John below. He is a journalist and talk show host who knows me through my years working in Kansas government. I did no ask John to post the note below ...

ADVERTISEMENT