ILNews

Indianapolis attorney chosen as new magistrate judge

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

An Indianapolis employment law attorney has been chosen as the newest U.S. magistrate judge for the Southern District of Indiana.

The District judges announced a decision late Monday that they had selected Denise K. LaRue to fill the new magistrate position created last fall by the Judicial Conference of the United States to help with the jurisdiction’s heavy caseload. She was one of 44 people to apply for the post by the November deadline, and one of the five finalists submitted for the judges’ consideration by a merit selection panel in early February.

A 1989 cum laude graduate of Indiana University School of Law – Indianapolis, LaRue is a name partner at employment firm Haskin & LaRue, where she began as an associate when the firm opened in 1994.

She’d worked as a staff attorney at the Indiana Civil Rights Commission prior to that. In her current position, she’s represented clients in all aspects of employment law matters involving discrimination and retaliation claims under Title VII, the Americans With Disabilities Act, the Family and Medical Leave Act, and the Age Discrimination in Employment Act. She’s also handled claims involving constitutional due process, free speech, and political association violations, as well as federal labor and wage and hour issues.

LaRue is a life member of the Marion County Bar Association, and some of her legal community leadership roles have included her being a member of the National Employment Lawyers Association-Indiana and serving on the Southern District of Indiana’s Local Rules Advisory Committee. She serves on the Board of the Indiana Minority Health Coalition and has served the Indianapolis chapter of Jack and Jill of America, The Links, and Delta Sigma Theta Sorority.

“We are very pleased that Denise LaRue, with her strong background in litigating civil matters in federal court, will be joining our court family,” Chief Judge Richard Young said in a news release. “We are certain that she will be a valuable addition to the bench.”

Once a background check is complete for LaRue, her eight-year term would begin April 1 and she would be eligible for reappointment to successive terms after that.

The announcement of LaRue’s appointment came on the heels of the District Court’s investiture ceremony Feb. 25 for Magistrate Judge Mark J. Dinsmore, who the judges had selected last fall. He succeeded the Hon. Jane Magnus-Stinson, who was elevated last year to an Article III judgeship.
 

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. 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?

  2. Seventh Circuit Court Judge Diane Wood has stated in “The Rule of Law in Times of Stress” (2003), “that neither laws nor the procedures used to create or implement them should be secret; and . . . the laws must not be arbitrary.” According to the American Bar Association, Wood’s quote drives home this point: The rule of law also requires that people can expect predictable results from the legal system; this is what Judge Wood implies when she says that “the laws must not be arbitrary.” Predictable results mean that people who act in the same way can expect the law to treat them in the same way. If similar actions do not produce similar legal outcomes, people cannot use the law to guide their actions, and a “rule of law” does not exist.

  3. Linda, I sure hope you are not seeking a law license, for such eighteenth century sentiments could result in your denial in some jurisdictions minting attorneys for our tolerant and inclusive profession.

  4. Mazel Tov to the newlyweds. And to those bakers, photographers, printers, clerks, judges and others who will lose careers and social standing for not saluting the New World (Dis)Order, we can all direct our Two Minutes of Hate as Big Brother asks of us. Progress! Onward!

  5. My daughter was taken from my home at the end of June/2014. I said I would sign the safety plan but my husband would not. My husband said he would leave the house so my daughter could stay with me but the case worker said no her mind is made up she is taking my daughter. My daughter went to a friends and then the friend filed a restraining order which she was told by dcs if she did not then they would take my daughter away from her. The restraining order was not in effect until we were to go to court. Eventually it was dropped but for 2 months DCS refused to allow me to have any contact and was using the restraining order as the reason but it was not in effect. This was Dcs violating my rights. Please help me I don't have the money for an attorney. Can anyone take this case Pro Bono?

ADVERTISEMENT