ILNews

Indiana chief justice's retirement 'a natural thing'

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrint

Indiana Chief Justice Randall T. Shepard – the longest-serving state court chief justice in the nation – is retiring from the bench in March after nearly 27 years on the appellate bench and a quarter century in that top administrative position.

The chief justice announced Wednesday that he will leave the bench March 4, 2012.

Turning 65 on Christmas Eve, he said there was nothing specific that required him to retire at this time. His term as chief justice is set to expire in March, and the Judicial Nominating Commission is expected to begin discussing in the next month who should fill that administrative role. After joining the bench in September 1985, Shepard became chief justice in March 1987 and has been reappointed four times. He was last retained as a justice in 2008 and his term would have run through 2018.

Pointing to the court’s calendar and timing of the chief justice appointment as factors, Shepard said nothing specific pushed him to step down now but it’s something he’s weighed in years past with his family and this felt like the best time to leave.

“This is a natural thing … well, mostly natural when it’s secondary to serving out the full term,” he said. “As a family we’ve faced the question, ‘Is this something we still want to be committed to?' The answer has been yes, but we decided this year it’s time to let someone else take the lead.”

He hasn’t made any plans on what his future holds, but said there’s “a lot I’m interested in doing.” Those plans will likely come once he leaves the bench, he said. Until that time, Shepard will continue in the chief justice role and, among other things, will give his final State of the Judiciary address in January.

“This has been a wonderful place to spend a life, and I’ve made so many friends here,” he said.

Many court employees learned of the news earlier this week and at the Indiana Statehouse on Wednesday morning after the announcement, many were emotional. State leaders including Gov. Mitch Daniels and Lt. Gov. Becky Skillman offered their thoughts about the chief’s retirement, as well as Indiana Attorney General Greg Zoeller.

"I was privileged to have been present at the investiture of Chief Justice Shepard in 1985 and he has fulfilled his pledge to transform the Indiana Supreme Court into one that is nationally respected and whose legal insight and analysis serves to lead the development of the law,” Zoeller said in a statement. “His tenure will be highly rated in the history of our state.”

Authoring more than 900 opinions during his time on the court and 68 law review articles, Shepard has ushered in monumental changes in the state’s judiciary during the past quarter century. He’s directed changes that have strengthened capital case standards, made the Supreme Court a “cert court” where it has discretion over most appeals and opened up the appellate courts’ doors to cameras and online live broadcasts during oral arguments. Shepard also co-created the Indiana Conference for Legal Education Opportunity in 1997, and most recently in 2007, he co-chaired the Indiana Commission on Local Government Reform with former Gov. Joe Kernan that led to the “Kernan-Shepard Report” on streamlining government.

“To say the justice system is stronger today because of Chief Justice Shepard’s three decades of dedication would be an understatement,” National Center for State Courts president Mary McQueen said. “He defined ‘justice’ not only for the citizens of Indiana and the United States – Chief Justice Shepard defined ‘justice’ for our generation.”

Before being appointed by Gov. Robert Orr to the state’s highest court, the Evansville native and seventh generation Hoosier served as a Vanderburgh Superior judge for five years. He graduated from Yale Law School in 1972, and after serving briefly as special assistant to the Under Secretary of the U.S. Department of Transportation, he returned to Indiana and worked as chief assistant to Evansville’s mayor until he took the bench at age 33.

The Judicial Nominating Commission will be taking applications for his successor and conduct interviews in February, and the governor will choose from a submitted list of three names the person who will become Indiana’s 107th justice. Once Shepard retires, Justices Brent Dickson will serve as interim chief justice until the nominating commission chooses the next person.
 


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. G. Michael Witte letter states he's suspended for three years. The case that got him suspended is identical to my estate case, including havin the Late Judge Deiter recuse himself because Newman had a conflict of interest with the judge. His Modus Operandi is nearly identical.

  2. SIGNED BY G. MICHAEL WITTE EXECUTIVE SECRETARY INDIANA SUPREME COURT DISCIPLINARY COMMISSION DATED MAY 17, 2012.

    Your 6th complaint against Lawrence T. Newman filed on 4/12/2012. On 1/31/12, the Indiana Supreme Court entered an order suspending Lawrence T. Newman’s law license for a period of three years. More important, even after three years, Lawrence Todd Newman will not get his license back unless and until he goes through a separate proceeding to prove that he is fit to practice law. This is not an easy process, and the burden is upon Lawrence T. Newman to prove by clear and convincing evidence that he is fit to return to practice.
    Because of the length of Lawrence T. Newman’s license suspension and the fact he may never succeed in getting his law license reinstated, we are not opening an investigation file at this time.
    Should Lawrence T. Newman seek reinstatement in the future, we will open your file and ask Lawrence T. Newman to address your grievance as part of his burden of proving fitness. We have attempted to notify Lawrence T. Newman that this will be required of him.
    It may disappoint you to hear that we will be doing nothing on your grievance at this time. However, the most our office can ever accomplish is to take away a lawyer’s license to practice law. We have already done that, albeit as a result of misconduct in cases other than your own. It makes better sense for our office to focus its limited resources on cases where the lawyers are still actively practicing law.

  3. Is there any justice in the Marion County Superior Court Civil Division? I am the unfortunate victim of a retaliatory lawsuit brought by Lawrence Todd Newman, the attorney from an estate case on which I worked as a unsupervised personal representative in 2006. The contract agreement for that case stated that the estate would be responsible for all attorney fees, but Newman refused to close the nearly insolvent estate when my duties were complete and his fees were paid. Instead, he tried to extort additional attorney fees from me by keeping the case open to address a wrongful death claim, despite the estate’s heir’s lack of interest in pursuing it and an expert doctor’s opinion that it would not be worth doing so. He also knowingly deceived me into believing that a “closing statement” was needed to close the estate, even though this requirement had actually been waived by the estate’s heir. The heir’s attorney filed a motion to have Newman removed from the case. After the court closed the probate case with prejudice (barred from further litigation) Newman illegally re-opened the case in another courtroom.
    As a result of complaints filed against him for these and similar actions, Newman has been suspended from practicing law for 18 months by the Indiana Disciplinary Commission. In retaliation, he has filed suit against me demanding additional attorney fees for the 2006 estate case, despite the fact that I made no agreement stating that I would pay any fees from my own assets on behalf of the estate. This lawsuit violates the rules of ethics, due process of law, and equal protection of law. Newman has been allowed to file ridiculous pleadings at an alarming rate and has been supported by a biased court system. Judge Carroll refuses to recuse himself from the case despite the fact that, by his own admission, he intends to grant Newman sanctions regardless of the evidence. When my former counsel discovered that the previous judge on the case, Judge Sosin, was a long-time close friend of Newman’s family, Judge Carroll commented for the record during a hearing that Judge Sosin in so many words “he finds the door “was weak for recusing himself from the case as a result of this obvious conflict of interest.
    This case is a public policy issue. Statutes put in place to protect unsupervised personal representatives in probate matters are being ignored. This case will affect thousands of individuals involved in probating and the personal representation of estates. Justice cannot possibly be served as long as a biased judge is allowed to defend a “vexatious litigant,” as Newman has been described by Judge Logan in Bradenton, Florida court. If there is any justice in the Marion County Superior Court Civil Division, this case against me will be dismissed with prejudice.

  4. Every affront to decency and every style adopted by criminals is not per se a constituttional violation. Only fools believe or espouse that.

  5. This was an unnecessary change in law, a needless fiddling with a tax that impacted very very few hoosiers, but one that erodes a tax base benefitting very many hoosiers. Just because some people wanted to chalk up a "tax cut" on their legislative brag-list, and didnt give a fig about replacing the revenue any other way. Really stupid. I am a republican my whole life and this just shames me like hell. I have to use a fake name over this because I know my fellow republicans are all brain washed over tax cutting too.

ADVERTISEMENT