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
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Why are all these lawyers yakking to the media about pending matters? Trial by media? What the devil happened to not making extrajudicial statements? The system is falling apart.

  2. It is a sad story indeed as this couple has been only in survival mode, NOT found guilty with Ponzi, shaken down for 5 years and pursued by prosecution that has been ignited by a civil suit with very deep pockets wrenched in their bitterness...It has been said that many of us are breaking an average of 300 federal laws a day without even knowing it. Structuring laws, & civilForfeiture laws are among the scariest that need to be restructured or repealed . These laws were initially created for drug Lords and laundering money and now reach over that line. Here you have a couple that took out their own money, not drug money, not laundering. Yes...Many upset that they lost money...but how much did they make before it all fell apart? No one ask that question? A civil suit against Williams was awarded because he has no more money to fight...they pushed for a break in order...they took all his belongings...even underwear, shoes and clothes? who does that? What allows that? Maybe if you had the picture of him purchasing a jacket at the Goodwill just to go to court the next day...his enemy may be satisfied? But not likely...bitterness is a master. For happy ending lovers, you will be happy to know they have a faith that has changed their world and a solid love that many of us can only dream about. They will spend their time in federal jail for taking their money from their account, but at the end of the day they have loyal friends, a true love and a hope of a new life in time...and none of that can be bought or taken That is the real story.

  3. Could be his email did something especially heinous, really over the top like questioning Ind S.Ct. officials or accusing JLAP of being the political correctness police.

  4. Sounds like overkill to me, too. Do the feds not have enough "real" crime to keep them busy?

  5. We live in the world that has become wider in sense of business and competition. Everything went into the Web in addition to the existing physical global challenges in business. I heard that one of the latest innovations is moving to VDR - cloud-based security-protected repositories. Of course virtual data rooms comparison is required if you want to pick up the best one.

ADVERTISEMENT