ILNews

Indiana welcomes new Tax Court judge

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Long before law school and a legal career, Martha B. Wentworth owned a business and says her favorite part of that was paying her taxes.

That may be why it’s no wonder the lawyer who went to work at a multistate accounting firm where she heads up tax services has now become the state’s newest Tax Court judge. Wentworth is second person ever and the first woman to hold that appellate bench seat.

Gov. Mitch Daniels on Dec. 22 announced he had selected her as the state’s new Tax Court judge, succeeding outgoing Judge Thomas G. Fisher who retired at the end of 2010. Judge Fisher was the first judge named to that bench when it was created in 1986.

Martha Wentworth Wentworth

The governor chose Wentworth, 62, over two other finalists selected by the Judicial Nominating Commission in late October: Bloomington attorney Joby Jerrells and Hendricks Superior Judge Karen Love.

Wentworth holds this position for two years until voters decide whether to retain her. If retained, she’d serve a 10-year term.

A robing ceremony will likely be scheduled in early 2011, although a date has not been set.

“I am just truly honored, and this is pretty wondrous,” she said. “This is a pinnacle for someone who loves state taxation, and I’m just honored and humbled to be following in the footsteps of Judge Fisher. The personal joy I have is incalculable, and really the enormity of this, personally and professionally, is still sinking in. This is really a wonderful new adventure.”

Daniels credited her “decades-deep knowledge” of tax law and a strong reputation for fairness and consistency as reasons for choosing Wentworth, and he said she’d fill the role superbly.

Wentworth said she knew from the first day of law school that she wanted to be a tax lawyer, focusing primarily on federal taxation.

“I’d gone back to law school after having a business, so I’m a late-blooming attorney,” she said. “But the most fun I’d had was doing my taxes. I knew this is what I wanted to do.”

Graduating cum laude in the top 40 percent of her law school class and admitted to practice in 1990, Wentworth started her legal career clerking for Judge Fisher from 1990 to 1992, and she says that’s when she fell in love with state taxation. From there, she went to work for six years as a tax attorney at the Indianapolis firm of Hall Render Killian Heath & Lyman.

Though she would have become the first woman partner at the law firm, Wentworth in 1998 took what she describes as a huge risk and joined the multistate accounting firm Deloitte Tax LLP in Indianapolis.

“I love taking complex tax issues and making them simple, and it’s fun trying to break down so people can understand what so many are so afraid of,” Wentworth said. “This is just a wonderful and wonder-filled area.”

Though she hasn’t been able to actively practice law with her position at Deloitte, Wentworth has remained active in organizations such as the Indiana State Bar Association’s Tax Section and taught tax law through the years. She’s also taught graduate-level classes in state and local taxation at the Indiana University Kelley School of Business since 2000.

wentworth Less than a week before Gov. Mitch Daniels announced that he’d chosen Martha B. Wentworth as the state’s newest Tax Court judge, all three finalists gathered at the retirement ceremony Dec. 17 for outgoing Judge Thomas G. Fisher. Pictured above from left to right are Joby Jerrells, Hendricks Superior Judge Karen Love, and Wentworth. (IBJ Photo/ Perry Reichanadter)

During her second interview with the Judicial Nominating Commission, Wentworth said the state faces so many intriguing and challenging legal questions on tax law, such as what is considered distortion on taxes, the amount of discretion the Department of Revenue has in allowing separate corporate entities to file separate or joint returns, and how the state agency can discretionarily change federal taxable income.

She said jobs are the most important issue for the state, especially in this economic climate, and tax law creates certainty for businesses that are trying to figure out what they can pay and who they can hire. The court must help shape a dynamic environment to encourage economic growth and job creation, she said.

“My goal is to maintain the tax court as a forum where devotion to the rule of law, fairness to all litigants, and professional civility are the benchmarks,” she said.

Reflecting on her appointment and the significance it has concerning diversity, Wentworth said she’s proud to offer more female representation on the state’s appellate bench.

“It’s great that we have women on the appellate bench; it’s imperative that we do. I’m glad to be able to join the others, but I don’t focus on that. My gender is not what I saw as a qualification or disqualification in this, but I am proud to be a role model.”

It appears that many in the Indiana legal community are praising the governor’s appointment and believe that Wentworth represents a good choice for the tax court.

“Most of the lawyers will be comfortable because we know she has much experience in this area,” said Barnes & Thornburg partner Larry Stroble, who heads up that firm’s taxation department and has been practicing in that appellate court since its creation. “When she steps in, she won’t have as much of a learning curve. Every judge will handle things a little differently, so everyone has to understand that Judge Wentworth won’t do things the same way as Judge Fisher. But I’m not worried about that at all.”•

ADVERTISEMENT

  • Kudos to Martha!
    Martha will do a great job as our new tax court judge. She truly does love tax law, and is an expert in that arena. Governor Daniels has made a great choice.

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. So that none are misinformed by my posting wihtout a non de plume here, please allow me to state that I am NOT an Indiana licensed attorney, although I am an Indiana resident approved to practice law and represent clients in Indiana's fed court of Nth Dist and before the 7th circuit. I remain licensed in KS, since 1996, no discipline. This must be clarified since the IN court records will reveal that I did sit for and pass the Indiana bar last February. Yet be not confused by the fact that I was so allowed to be tested .... I am not, to be clear in the service of my duty to be absolutely candid about this, I AM NOT a member of the Indiana bar, and might never be so licensed given my unrepented from errors of thought documented in this opinion, at fn2, which likely supports Mr Smith's initial post in this thread: http://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-7th-circuit/1592921.html

  2. When I served the State of Kansas as Deputy AG over Consumer Protection & Antitrust for four years, supervising 20 special agents and assistant attorneys general (back before the IBLE denied me the right to practice law in Indiana for not having the right stuff and pretty much crushed my legal career) we had a saying around the office: Resist the lure of the ring!!! It was a take off on Tolkiem, the idea that absolute power (I signed investigative subpoenas as a judge would in many other contexts, no need to show probable cause)could corrupt absolutely. We feared that we would overreach constitutional limits if not reminded, over and over, to be mindful to not do so. Our approach in so challenging one another was Madisonian, as the following quotes from the Father of our Constitution reveal: The essence of Government is power; and power, lodged as it must be in human hands, will ever be liable to abuse. We are right to take alarm at the first experiment upon our liberties. I believe there are more instances of the abridgement of freedom of the people by gradual and silent encroachments by those in power than by violent and sudden usurpations. Liberty may be endangered by the abuse of liberty, but also by the abuse of power. All men having power ought to be mistrusted. -- James Madison, Federalist Papers and other sources: http://www.constitution.org/jm/jm_quotes.htm RESIST THE LURE OF THE RING ALL YE WITH POLITICAL OR JUDICIAL POWER!

  3. My dear Mr Smith, I respect your opinions and much enjoy your posts here. We do differ on our view of the benefits and viability of the American Experiment in Ordered Liberty. While I do agree that it could be better, and that your points in criticism are well taken, Utopia does indeed mean nowhere. I think Madison, Jefferson, Adams and company got it about as good as it gets in a fallen post-Enlightenment social order. That said, a constitution only protects the citizens if it is followed. We currently have a bevy of public officials and judicial agents who believe that their subjectivism, their personal ideology, their elitist fears and concerns and cause celebs trump the constitutions of our forefathers. This is most troubling. More to follow in the next post on that subject.

  4. Yep I am not Bryan Brown. Bryan you appear to be a bigger believer in the Constitution than I am. Were I still a big believer then I might be using my real name like you. Personally, I am no longer a fan of secularism. I favor the confessional state. In religious mattes, it seems to me that social diversity is chaos and conflict, while uniformity is order and peace.... secularism has been imposed by America on other nations now by force and that has not exactly worked out very well.... I think the American historical experiment with disestablishmentarianism is withering on the vine before our eyes..... Since I do not know if that is OK for an officially licensed lawyer to say, I keep the nom de plume.

  5. I am compelled to announce that I am not posting under any Smith monikers here. That said, the post below does have a certain ring to it that sounds familiar to me: http://www.catholicnewworld.com/cnwonline/2014/0907/cardinal.aspx

ADVERTISEMENT