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. Well, maybe it's because they are unelected, and, they have a tendency to strike down laws by elected officials from all over the country. When you have been taught that "Democracy" is something almost sacred, then, you will have a tendency to frown on such imperious conduct. Lawyers get acculturated in law school into thinking that this is the very essence of high minded government, but to people who are more heavily than King George ever did, they may not like it. Thanks for the information.

  2. I pd for a bankruptcy years ago with Mr Stiles and just this week received a garnishment from my pay! He never filed it even though he told me he would! Don't let this guy practice law ever again!!!

  3. Excellent initiative on the part of the AG. Thankfully someone takes action against predators taking advantage of people who have already been through the wringer. Well done!

  4. Conour will never turn these funds over to his defrauded clients. He tearfully told the court, and his daughters dutifully pledged in interviews, that his first priority is to repay every dime of the money he stole from his clients. Judge Young bought it, much to the chagrin of Conour’s victims. Why would Conour need the $2,262 anyway? Taxpayers are now supporting him, paying for his housing, utilities, food, healthcare, and clothing. If Conour puts the money anywhere but in the restitution fund, he’s proved, once again, what a con artist he continues to be and that he has never had any intention of repaying his clients. Judge Young will be proven wrong... again; Conour has no remorse and the Judge is one of the many conned.

  5. Pass Legislation to require guilty defendants to pay for the costs of lab work, etc as part of court costs...

ADVERTISEMENT