ILNews

Indiana Judicial Nominating Commission vote extended

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Two Indianapolis attorneys – Barnes & Thornburg LLP partner Jan Carroll and Lee Christie, partner with Cline Farrell Christie & Lee – will have to wait a bit longer to find out who their peers elect to serve on the Indiana Judicial Nominating Commission.

An untold number of lawyers didn’t get ballots, so the voting deadline has been rolled back. Stakes are high, because the person elected will participate in decisions that will shape the Indiana Supreme Court. Chief Justice Brent Dickson will turn 75, hitting the mandatory retirement age for judges, in the final year of the three-year term for which Carroll and Christie are vying.

A glitch in mailings discovered earlier this month prevented some of the more than 7,400 eligible attorneys from receiving ballots. When Indiana Supreme Court staff discovered the problem, they scrambled to make sure all eligible voters received ballots, and the deadline was extended from the original vote-tallying date of Nov. 19 to Dec. 3.

Attorneys in good standing in Marion County and 18 other counties north of Indianapolis are eligible to vote for the successor to Indianapolis attorney William Winingham, whose term on the seven-member commission expires Dec. 31. Commissioners may not be elected or appointed to serve full consecutive terms.

Carroll and Christie each sent voters information about themselves in materials asking for support. For Carroll, the appeal included an overture to elect her as the first woman attorney to serve on the panel established in the early 1970s.

Prominent Carroll supporters formed a group called the 1893 Committee, which refers to the year that a female lawyer was first admitted to practice in Indiana. Backers “thought it was high time for a woman lawyer to be represented on the commission,” Carroll said.

Like Carroll, Christie has lined up big-name, influential supporters he cited in his mailings to voters. “I’m kind of reaching out to people who are more small- and medium-sized practitioners,” Christie said. He said it’s important for such firms to have a seat at the table.

Former Justice Frank Sullivan, now a professor at Indiana University Robert H. McKinney School of Law in Indianapolis, said the attorney member elected this year – and the commissioners elected or appointed in the next few years – unquestionably will influence the future direction of the court.

“In mid-2016, Chief Justice Dickson will reach the mandatory retirement age of 75 and be required by the Indiana Constitution to retire. This means that the attorney elected will participate in selecting the nominees to succeed (Dickson),” Sullivan said.

“Of equal if not greater importance, the commission itself elects – actually elects, not just nominates – which justice serves as chief justice,” he said. “This means that when Chief Justice Dickson steps down, the attorney elected will also participate in selecting the next chief justice of Indiana.”

Dickson declined to discuss his thoughts about a potential successor. But as chair of the panel that includes three attorney members elected by lawyers and three non-lawyer members appointed by the governor, Dickson would hold considerable influence over the selection of the justice who succeeds him and have an even greater say on who the commission selects as the next chief justice.

At the time of Dickson’s mandatory retirement, the panel will include three members appointed by Gov. Mike Pence. The term of non-lawyer member Molly Kitchell, representing COA District 1, expires Dec. 31, and a Pence spokeswoman said no decision had been made regarding a successor. Indiana Code 33-27-2-1 provides that the governor appoint commissioners one month before terms expire, but commissioners may continue to serve until such time as appointments have been made.

Christie has been a practicing trial attorney for 32 years, and Carroll a litigator for almost 28 years. Neither said they were motivated to seek election to the commission by the prospect of having a say in future decisions on who will serve on and lead the Supreme Court.

“My motivation was just having some input on the judges that would be screened to go to the governor,” Christie said. Both Christie and Carroll said judicial temperament would be a key consideration in evaluating nominees to the judiciary.

“I feel that based on my experience as a trial lawyer and a state court practitioner, I have a good sense of what it is that makes a good judge, and we all have an interest in having quality appellate judges,” Carroll said.

Before she began practicing law, Carroll was an Associated Press Statehouse reporter who covered the merit selection of Dickson and Randall Shepard as justices. “I had an interest in it from my reporting days, and that obviously continued in my law practice.”

Along with his experience in the courtroom, Christie has also operated an alternative dispute resolution practice that he said in 20 years has handled some 2,500 cases. “My ideals are more from the individual and from the more small-firm perspective as opposed to the more big-corporation, big-firm perspective,” he said.

Addressing the voting glitch, Supreme Court spokeswoman Kathryn Dolan said ballots will be counted for attorneys who have already returned them, so they need not take further action.

On Nov. 12, the court issued an order that extended the balloting deadline, but the order signed by Dickson shed little light on what happened or why. “During the week of Nov. 4, 2013, it came to the Clerk and the Court’s attention that while most eligible electors had received their ballots and accompanying materials through the mail, many had not,” the order says. “After further investigation, the Clerk determined that an unidentified issue with the delivery of the mail had caused an unknown number of ballots and accompanying materials not to be delivered to eligible voters.”

The commission’s three attorney members are elected by lawyers in each of the three geographical COA districts, and the three governor-appointed non-lawyer commissioners also are selected from each of those districts. The panel interviews candidates and recommends finalists for vacancies on the Supreme Court, Court of Appeals and Tax Court, from which the governor chooses appointees.

The commission members also serve as the Commission on Judicial Qualifications, which investigates complaints against judges.

Court of Appeals District 2 is made up of Adams, Blackford, Carroll, Cass, Clinton, Delaware, Grant, Hamilton, Howard, Huntington, Jay, Madison, Marion, Miami, Tippecanoe, Tipton, Wabash, Wells and White counties.•

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. It appears the police and prosecutors are allowed to change the rules halfway through the game to suit themselves. I am surprised that the congress has not yet eliminated the right to a trial in cases involving any type of forensic evidence. That would suit their foolish law and order police state views. I say we eliminate the statute of limitations for crimes committed by members of congress and other government employees. Of course they would never do that. They are all corrupt cowards!!!

  2. Poor Judge Brown probably thought that by slavishly serving the godz of the age her violations of 18th century concepts like due process and the rule of law would be overlooked. Mayhaps she was merely a Judge ahead of her time?

  3. in a lawyer discipline case Judge Brown, now removed, was presiding over a hearing about a lawyer accused of the supposedly heinous ethical violation of saying the words "Illegal immigrant." (IN re Barker) http://www.in.gov/judiciary/files/order-discipline-2013-55S00-1008-DI-429.pdf .... I wonder if when we compare the egregious violations of due process by Judge Brown, to her chiding of another lawyer for politically incorrectness, if there are any conclusions to be drawn about what kind of person, what kind of judge, what kind of apparatchik, is busy implementing the agenda of political correctness and making off-limits legit advocacy about an adverse party in a suit whose illegal alien status is relevant? I am just asking the question, the reader can make own conclsuion. Oh wait-- did I use the wrong adjective-- let me rephrase that, um undocumented alien?

  4. of course the bigger questions of whether or not the people want to pay for ANY bussing is off limits, due to the Supreme Court protecting the people from DEMOCRACY. Several decades hence from desegregation and bussing plans and we STILL need to be taking all this taxpayer money to combat mostly-imagined "discrimination" in the most obviously failed social program of the postwar period.

  5. You can put your photos anywhere you like... When someone steals it they know it doesn't belong to them. And, a man getting a divorce is automatically not a nice guy...? That's ridiculous. Since when is need of money a conflict of interest? That would mean that no one should have a job unless they are already financially solvent without a job... A photographer is also under no obligation to use a watermark (again, people know when a photo doesn't belong to them) or provide contact information. Hey, he didn't make it easy for me to pay him so I'll just take it! Well heck, might as well walk out of the grocery store with a cart full of food because the lines are too long and you don't find that convenient. "Only in Indiana." Oh, now you're passing judgement on an entire state... What state do you live in? I need to characterize everyone in your state as ignorant and opinionated. And the final bit of ignorance; assuming a photo anyone would want is lucky and then how much does your camera have to cost to make it a good photo, in your obviously relevant opinion?

ADVERTISEMENT