ILNews

New members of the American Law Institute bring energy and diversity

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Reflecting on a prestigious recognition he had just received, Indiana Supreme Court Justice Robert Rucker sat in the court’s conference room and talked about what might have been.

As a young man at Indiana University Northwest, he had plans to become a physician. He was studying pre-med and regularly traveling to Chicago to sit in on a few osteopathic medicine classes.

But a minor legal issue arose that sent him seeking advice. He did not know any attorneys personally so he drove around his hometown of Gary, randomly stopped at a law office, went in and asked to speak to a lawyer.

“To make a long story short, I ran into this lawyer who just seemed to know everything about everything,” Rucker remembered. “He was active in the community and he seemed to be on top of every compelling issue of the time. … I just said, ‘My god, when I grow up I want to be just like you.’”

Institute-15col.jpg Kathleen DeLaney, Indiana Justice Robert Rucker (center) and Alan Mills say they are honored to be members of the American Law Institute. (IL Photo/Eric Learned)

The next day, Rucker began his legal career. He went to the registrar’s office, changed his major and figured out how soon he could graduate because he was anxious to get to law school.

“He was just that impressive,” Rucker said of that attorney, Alton Gill Jr., who became a good friend and mentor.

Rucker went on to build an impressive career of his own, working his way up from private practice to the Supreme Court. His latest accomplishment has put him in the company of prestigious scholars, jurists and attorneys and will allow him to use his experience and knowledge to influence legal thinking.

The former pre-med student has just been elected to the American Law Institute. Rucker joins Alan Mills, partner at Barnes & Thornburg LLP, and Kathleen DeLaney, managing partner at DeLaney & DeLaney LLC, as the newest members from Indiana.

Research, writing and Restatements

The three in the Hoosier delegation are a part of the most recent ALI class of 61 professionals hailing from 26 states. Rucker, DeLaney and Mills say they are honored to have been elected to the organization and look forward to making a contribution.

A primary way they may participate is by helping to research and write the Restatements of the Law. These documents are compiled by members of the institute and regularly used by judges and attorneys to gain insight into laws and how those laws are applied around the country.

Retired Justice Frank Sullivan highlighted the importance of the Restatements in a 2013 lecture he gave at Valparaiso Law School. In particular, the Restatements can provide guidance when the bench is considering overruling precedent.

“But mindful of our separation of powers constraints, the fact that precedent may be legitimately overruled does not give a judge license to adopt a personal political or policy preference instead,” Sullivan said. “This is why Restatements are so helpful, presenting to the court a legal rule based on the careful study by lawyers, judges and professors of the law as it presently stands.”

However, the Restatements have been criticized over the years. They have been deemed too insular and failing to call upon other disciplines for input; too mired in old ways of legal thought and not reflecting the contemporary thinking and approaches of today’s practicing attorneys.

Indiana Court of Appeals Judge Margret Robb acknowledged the criticism but said the Restatements are still valuable. They try to give a summary of where the law is and point out different aspects that have been established by caselaw.

“It’s a starting point, it’s a help,” Robb said.

Like many lawyers, DeLaney was introduced to the Restatements as a law student. She continued to draw upon their experience when she was drafting jury instructions as a clerk for Judge David Hamilton when he served on the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Indiana.

Since then she has continued that work through her appointment to a 7th Circuit Court of Appeals subcommittee on pattern jury instructions. DeLaney sees her work, along with her experience as a practitioner, as good preparation for what she is hoping to do at ALI.

In particular, she believes the institute can provide a benefit to the general public by making the law easier to comprehend and more approachable.

“Clear and concise opinion writing from judges can benefit that process,” DeLaney said. “Similarly, if we can make the Restatements an accessible resource so that people can understand them when they read them and they’re not full of arcane legalese, I think those are good aspirational goals to have which could have the added benefit of making the legal process more accessible and understandable.”

Mills, too, sees the ALI as in a position to give people the feeling the law is there to protect their interests.

“Some people are skeptical about lawyers and the law,” Mills said. “This is one area where we can tramp down on that skepticism and do things that are exceptional.”

The son of a military officer, Mills considered a career in academia but chose to be a practicing lawyer instead. He exhibits a scholar’s interest in the law, watching it develop and change to meet the current challenges of society, and he applauds ALI bringing together academics and practitioners to get different perspectives on the topics being discussed.

Practical applications

The Restatements can give an overview of current law, point out the trends and provide guidance – especially to judges. Restatements are extremely helpful, Rucker said, but they do not have to be adopted by the courts.

Indiana judges have used the Restatements to gain insight when considering an issue of first impression or when revisiting settled law. Rucker pointed to opinions by the Supreme Court which accepted the ideas put forth in a particular Restatement, including Burrell v. Meads, which adopted Restatement (Second) of Torts Section 332.

He pointed to his 2013 opinion for Santelli v. Rahmatullah as an example in which the court rejected the Restatement (Third) of Tort Section 14.

“It’s not so much that it’s a standard that we have to adopt because everybody else does or a standard that is the most popular, but at least it gives us an idea of what are people thinking, what are we missing,” Rucker explained. “Maybe we are not missing anything, maybe we have the better view … .”

Even within the ALI, the Restatements can spark dissent. Carmel attorney and ALI life member John Vargo has stood up at the institute’s meetings and has written letters to offer his advice – and sometimes an opposing view.

“I’m the perfect example of someone who says, ‘You didn’t do that right,’” Vargo said. “They allow that.”

His opposition to a provision in the third edition of the Restatement on torts prompted him to spend nights and weekends for more than two years writing what may be the longest law review article (462 pages) expressing his thoughts on product liability.

Vargo emphasized he just disagreed with one section of the Restatement and overall he still supports the ALI.

“It is a great institution,” he said.

Mirroring society

One recent rainy morning, DeLaney, Mills and Rucker gathered in the Indiana Supreme Court library to have their photo taken. They happily greeted one another and easily conversed as if they were old friends. And as they smiled for the camera, they represented diversity in backgrounds, legal careers, race and gender.

The trio shied away from reading too much into their diversity, but others see their differences as having a positive benefit for the institute and for Indiana.

“I think it’s important in everything we do,” Robb said of diversity. “People say we believe in a justice system that looks like them. If the Restatements are trying to say what the law is, or to some extent be the bellwether of where the law is moving, then we need old white men, minorities and women.”•
 

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. No second amendment, pro life, pro traditional marriage, reagan or trump tshirts will be sold either. And you cannot draw Mohammed even in your own notebook. And you must wear a helmet at all times while at the fair. And no lawyer jokes can be told except in the designated protest area. And next year no crucifixes, since they are uber offensive to all but Catholics. Have a nice bland day here in the Lego movie. Remember ... Everything is awesome comrades.

  2. Thank you for this post . I just bought a LG External DVD It came with Cyber pwr 2 go . It would not play on Lenovo Idea pad w/8.1 . Your recommended free VLC worked great .

  3. All these sites putting up all the crap they do making Brent Look like A Monster like he's not a good person . First off th fight actually started not because of Brent but because of one of his friends then when the fight popped off his friend ran like a coward which left Brent to fend for himself .It IS NOT a crime to defend yourself 3 of them and 1 of him . just so happened he was a better fighter. I'm Brent s wife so I know him personally and up close . He's a very caring kind loving man . He's not abusive in any way . He is a loving father and really shouldn't be where he is not for self defense . Now because of one of his stupid friends trying to show off and turning out to be nothing but a coward and leaving Brent to be jumped by 3 men not only is Brent suffering but Me his wife , his kids abd step kidshis mom and brother his family is left to live without him abd suffering in more ways then one . that man was and still is my smile ....he's the one real thing I've ever had in my life .....f@#@ You Lafayette court system . Learn to do your jobs right he maybe should have gotten that year for misdemeanor battery but that s it . not one person can stand to me and tell me if u we're in a fight facing 3 men and u just by yourself u wouldn't fight back that you wouldn't do everything u could to walk away to ur family ur kids That's what Brent is guilty of trying to defend himself against 3 men he wanted to go home tohisfamily worse then they did he just happened to be a better fighter and he got the best of th others . what would you do ? Stand there lay there and be stomped and beaten or would u give it everything u got and fight back ? I'd of done the same only I'm so smallid of probably shot or stabbed or picked up something to use as a weapon . if it was me or them I'd do everything I could to make sure I was going to live that I would make it hone to see my kids and husband . I Love You Brent Anthony Forever & Always .....Soul 1 baby

  4. Good points, although this man did have a dog in the legal fight as that it was his mother on trial ... and he a dependent. As for parking spaces, handicap spots for pregnant women sure makes sense to me ... er, I mean pregnant men or women. (Please, I meant to include pregnant men the first time, not Room 101 again, please not Room 101 again. I love BB)

  5. I have no doubt that the ADA and related laws provide that many disabilities must be addressed. The question, however, is "by whom?" Many people get dealt bad cards by life. Some are deaf. Some are blind. Some are crippled. Why is it the business of the state to "collectivize" these problems and to force those who are NOT so afflicted to pay for those who are? The fact that this litigant was a mere spectator and not a party is chilling. What happens when somebody who speaks only East Bazurkistanish wants a translator so that he can "understand" the proceedings in a case in which he has NO interest? Do I and all other taxpayers have to cough up? It would seem so. ADA should be amended to provide a simple rule: "Your handicap, YOUR problem". This would apply particularly to handicapped parking spaces, where it seems that if the "handicap" is an ingrown toenail, the government comes rushing in to assist the poor downtrodden victim. I would grant wounded vets (IED victims come to mind in particular) a pass on this.. but others? Nope.

ADVERTISEMENT