Indiana's newest jurist

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

For Mark Massa, waiting for the decision as to who would be the next Indiana justice was the hardest part.

At first, he had trouble sleeping and jumped every time the phone rang. But eventually, he let go and was ready for anything, including becoming Justice Mark Massa.

Gov. Mitch Daniels announced March 23 he had selected his former general counsel to fill the spot left vacant by Chief Justice Randall T. Shepard’s retirement.

The number 23 has taken on a new meaning in Massa’s life thanks to the application and appointment process. One month prior to his appointment, he was named as one of the three finalists on Feb. 23.

“That’s my new favorite number, and not because of Michael Jordan or LeBron James,” Massa said with a laugh. “If I play the lottery, that’s the number I’ll have to go with.”

His appointment became official on April 2 when he took the oath of office, which was administered by Shepard during a short, private ceremony in the justices’ conference room.

massa-mark03-15col.jpg Mark Massa, left, is sworn in as a justice by former Indiana Supreme Court Chief Justice Randall T. Shepard in a private ceremony. (IL Photo/ Perry Reichanadter)

When announcing his decision, Daniels described his pick as a superb selection and the finest choice he could have made. He chose Massa over Indiana Court of Appeals Judge Cale Bradford and Indiana Judicial Center Executive Director Jane A. Seigel. Daniels said he was impressed by Massa’s background and experience with all three branches of government as well as various aspects of legal practice. He has the principles and temperament to be a great justice and make his own historical contributions on “America’s best Supreme Court,” the governor said.

A 1989 graduate of Indiana University Robert H. McKinney School of Law, the 51-year-old Massa has led the Indiana Criminal Justice Institute since May 2011. He served as the governor’s general counsel from 2006 to 2010 before making an unsuccessful run for Marion County prosecutor and temporarily chairing the Indiana Alcohol & Tobacco Commission.

Massa served as an assistant U.S. attorney in the Southern District from 2002 to 2005, where he oversaw criminal investigations and led a task force to combat mortgage fraud. Before that, he worked as chief counsel and a deputy prosecutor in the Marion County Prosecutor’s Office for about seven years. In the early 1990s, he clerked for Shepard, the justice whose seat he will now occupy.

“This is a sobering responsibility, and I can’t put into words how much it means to be appointed by my governor to replace my judge,” he said. “It’s not something any attorney does, looking in the mirror and seeing a potential Supreme Court justice staring back. This is going to take a while to get used to.”

The fact Massa previously served as Daniels’ general counsel may have actually worked against him as a candidate, Daniels said, because he was so familiar with Massa that he overlooked what the legal community thought about him. Daniels said he was moved by the evidence and testimony in support of Massa.

Massa joins the current court with Acting Chief Justice Brent Dickson and Justices Steven David, Robert Rucker and Frank Sullivan, although that lineup is short-lived as Sullivan announced – on the same day as Massa’s swearing-in – that he will be stepping down from the court this summer to take a teaching position at the Indianapolis law school.

On the day of Massa’s appointment, Dickson said the new chief justice selection process will be delayed so that Massa is able to “get settled.” The Indiana Judicial Nominating Commission likely won’t proceed before the process begins to replace Indiana Court of Appeals Judge Carr Darden, who is retiring in July.

But one thing is certain from Massa’s point of view: He doesn’t want to be the chief and he plans to pull his name from that consideration.

Massa and Shepard had their first chance to meet for lunch a week after the announcement, and the former chief justice – now serving in part as an Indiana Court of Appeals senior judge – said he couldn’t have been more pleased with the governor’s selection.

“He has the character, mental power and generosity of heart to serve in ways that will make Indiana a place of greater justice,” Shepard said. “I’ve said it before, but I predict plenty of applause for his service and performance in the years to come.”

Massa said the appointment process was a unique experience, specifically because he found himself on the opposite end of the interview table. When he was the governor’s counsel, Massa had been the one questioning finalists and ultimately consulting with Daniels on the choices.

He’d asked finalists to review cases or even do some “homework” in preparing a ruling, but that’s not something he faced this time from general counsel Anita Samuels.

“Honestly, it felt like a lot of other meetings with the governor through the years,” Massa said. “We had a wide-ranging conversation about judicial philosophy and many aspects of being a judge.”

Knowing that he has “enormous shoes to fill,” Massa said he hopes to continue the type of collegiality and professionalism for which Shepard and the rest of this court are so well-respected. He doesn’t plan to immediately pursue a particular focus area like other justices have done, such as court media relations or technology, but said he wants to start off learning as much as possible across the board.

“The pride I am feeling, that I’ve felt since that moment when I found out, is indescribable,” he said. “I have an appreciation for the court and how it’s grown through the years in esteem, and I hope as a newcomer I can maintain those time-honored standards.”•


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. I think the cops are doing a great job locking up criminals. The Murder rates in the inner cities are skyrocketing and you think that too any people are being incarcerated. Maybe we need to lock up more of them. We have the ACLU, BLM, NAACP, Civil right Division of the DOJ, the innocent Project etc. We have court system with an appeal process that can go on for years, with attorneys supplied by the government. I'm confused as to how that translates into the idea that the defendants are not being represented properly. Maybe the attorneys need to do more Pro-Bono work

  2. We do not have 10% of our population (which would mean about 32 million) incarcerated. It's closer to 2%.

  3. 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.

  4. 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.

  5. 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.