ILNews

IndyBar releases judicial candidate survey results

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

A Marion County Superior judge currently suspended pending final disciplinary action was overwhelmingly not recommended by her peers to be re-elected, according to a survey released by the Indianapolis Bar Association’s Judicial Excellence Committee.

Marion Superior Judge Kimberly J. Brown received just a 10 percent approval rate. Brown has been removed from the bench with pay by the Indiana Supreme Court while she awaits possible discipline for violating numerous rules of judicial conduct.

The survey was emailed Jan. 3 to 4,377 attorneys belonging to the IndyBar and Marion County Bar Association, as well as attorneys with the Marion County Prosecutor’s Office and Marion County Public Defender’s Office. By Jan. 20, the committee received 1,201 responses to the survey which asked attorneys if they would recommend 24 judicial candidates for office in 2014.

Marion County attorneys have higher confidence in Republican judicial candidates running for the bench for the first time than their Democratic counterparts, according to the survey results.

Republican non-incumbents Rom Byron, Patrick “P.J.” Dietrick and Therese A. Hannah received no less than a 76 percent approval rate. Byron received the lowest overall approval rate of Republican candidates; incumbent Judge Kurt M. Kisgruber received the highest approval rate of Republican candidates at 95.6 percent.
 
Democratic non-incumbents did not fare as well in the survey. Karen Celestino-Horseman, Angela Dow Davis, Jonathan C. Little and Todd A. Woodmansee all received less than a 53-percent approval rate. Non-incumbent Democratic candidate Mark A. Jones received the highest approval rating for either political party at 96.5 percent. Judge James B. Osborn received the highest approval rate for incumbent Democratic judges at 95.5 percent.

The committee hopes the results of the survey help voters assess the strengths of the candidates on the May 6 primary ballots. Candidate pages with more information will be posted later Wednesday at www.indyjudges.org. Complete survey results are also available on that website.  
 

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. Family court judges never fail to surprise me with their irrational thinking. First of all any man who abuses his wife is not fit to be a parent. A man who can't control his anger should not be allowed around his child unsupervised period. Just because he's never been convicted of abusing his child doesn't mean he won't and maybe he hasn't but a man that has such poor judgement and control is not fit to parent without oversight - only a moron would think otherwise. Secondly, why should the mother have to pay? He's the one who made the poor decisions to abuse and he should be the one to pay the price - monetarily and otherwise. Yes it's sad that the little girl may be deprived of her father, but really what kind of father is he - the one that abuses her mother the one that can't even step up and do what's necessary on his own instead the abused mother is to pay for him???? What is this Judge thinking? Another example of how this world rewards bad behavior and punishes those who do right. Way to go Judge - NOT.

  2. Right on. Legalize it. We can take billions away from the drug cartels and help reduce violence in central America and more unwanted illegal immigration all in one fell swoop. cut taxes on the savings from needless incarcerations. On and stop eroding our fourth amendment freedom or whatever's left of it.

  3. "...a switch from crop production to hog production "does not constitute a significant change."??? REALLY?!?! Any judge that cannot see a significant difference between a plant and an animal needs to find another line of work.

  4. Why do so many lawyers get away with lying in court, Jamie Yoak?

  5. Future generations will be amazed that we prosecuted people for possessing a harmless plant. The New York Times came out in favor of legalization in Saturday's edition of the newspaper.

ADVERTISEMENT