ILNews

IndyBar: Interrogatories - 3/12/14

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

 

crone-terry.jpg Crone

By Tyler D. Helmond, Voyles Zahn & Paul
Hon. Terry A. Crone

Indiana Court of Appeals

He is a graduate of DePauw University and the University of Notre Dame Law School. He practiced law for nine years before taking the bench in St. Joseph County – first as magistrate and later as judge of the St. Joseph Circuit Court. He was appointed to the Indiana Court of Appeals in 2004. He is the Honorable Terry A. Crone, and he has been served with interrogatories.

Q: Are you or are any of your colleagues reading briefs on iPads?

A: Yes, it allows us to stay current while traveling or working from home.



Q: When you are first assigned a new case, in what order do you read the briefs?

A: I read the Appellant’s brief followed by the Appellee’s brief and then the reply brief.



Q: Who is the best golfer on the Indiana appellate bench?

A: Steve David. Sort of like being All-State from Rhode Island.



Q: What golf course have you not played that is first on your golfing bucket list?

A: Augusta National.



Q: You’re a DePauw graduate. Do you miss the days of winning the Monon Bell?

A: Almost as much as you IU grads miss the Rose Bowl.

Q: What is your favorite part about traveling oral arguments?

A: The opportunity to educate people about how our legal system really works. It is very distressing to see how little most people know about our system of justice.



Q: You spent many years as a trial court judge. What do you see these days that drives you crazy about the way trial court proceedings are conducted?

A: I have tremendous respect for the work done by our trial judges. I am particularly impressed with how they are using modern technology to improve the delivery of judicial services to the public.



Q: If you could choose one book as required reading for an appellate judge, what would it be?

A: “Devil in the Grove” by Gilbert King. I think it is important to remember the abuses that were occurring not so long ago when we consider why we have some of the procedural safeguards we do and how they ought to be adapted to an ever changing society.•

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. Major social engineering imposed by judicial order well in advance of democratic change, has been the story of the whole post ww2 period. Contraception, desegregation, abortion, gay marriage: all rammed down the throats of Americans who didn't vote to change existing laws on any such thing, by the unelected lifetime tenure Supreme court heirarchs. Maybe people came to accept those things once imposed upon them, but, that's accommodation not acceptance; and surely not democracy. So let's quit lying to the kids telling them this is a democracy. Some sort of oligarchy, but no democracy that's for sure, and it never was. A bourgeois republic from day one.

  2. JD Massur, yes, brings to mind a similar stand at a Texas Mission in 1836. Or Vladivostok in 1918. As you seemingly gloat, to the victors go the spoils ... let the looting begin, right?

  3. I always wondered why high fence deer hunting was frowned upon? I guess you need to keep the population steady. If you don't, no one can enjoy hunting! Thanks for the post! Fence

  4. Whether you support "gay marriage" or not is not the issue. The issue is whether the SCOTUS can extract from an unmentionable somewhere the notion that the Constitution forbids government "interference" in the "right" to marry. Just imagine time-traveling to Philadelphia in 1787. Ask James Madison if the document he and his fellows just wrote allowed him- or forbade government to "interfere" with- his "right" to marry George Washington? He would have immediately- and justly- summoned the Sergeant-at-Arms to throw your sorry self out into the street. Far from being a day of liberation, this is a day of capitulation by the Rule of Law to the Rule of What's Happening Now.

  5. With today's ruling, AG Zoeller's arguments in the cases of Obamacare and Same-sex Marriage can be relegated to the ash heap of history. 0-fer

ADVERTISEMENT