ILNews

ISBA offers 'insider view' of appellate courts

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share
Indiana attorneys and jurists came together Wednesday to get an insider's view of the state's appellate process and learn more about the nuances of the system.

An afternoon continuing legal education seminar took about 100 attorneys on a walk through the appellate process, from filing motions, how staff attorneys and courts review, and what lawyers can do to make the process easier.

"This is the stuff we all get sweaty palms about, and we'd like to know where the daggers might be coming from," said Indiana State Bar Association president Richard Eynon, who attended the two-hour session.

Put on by the ISBA's Appellate Practice Section, the afternoon seminar was led by a six-member panel including Kent Zepick with Bingham McHale, who moderated the panel discussion; Kevin Smith, Indiana Supreme Court Administrator and Clerk of the Appellate Courts; Heather Smith, Deputy Clerk of the Appellate Courts; Danielle Sheff, a staff attorney for the Indiana Court of Appeals; Russ Hughes, a staff attorney for senior judges on the Indiana Court of Appeals; and Steve Lancaster, Indiana Court of Appeals administrator.

Topics that received attention during the seminar included new procedures attorneys will have to follow for "rotunda filing" once new security systems are in place at the Statehouse, recent appeals involving state administrative agencies relating to how motions and notices must be filed, and how attorneys can assist judges and court staff by including trial court chronological case summaries with their appellate summaries even though court rules don't require it.

"Don't think our court has easy access to trial court records," Sheff said, noting that 7,800 motions with orders came last year and the court often uses Doxpop or CivicNet to access trial records when needed. "If we have to stop to look up the history on your motion, that takes time from everything else."

Another topic delved into an ongoing issue of attorneys' incorrectly citing "Not For Publication" memorandum decisions, especially those being picked up by WestLaw and given N.E. 2d citations.

Panelists also discussed an appellate e-filing system that is currently being studied and could be implemented by the end of the fiscal year July 1, 2008. The courts are investigating IT needs for the entire appellate level this month and want to hear from the legal community this year about how the courts can better assist everyone on this.

"This is your chance to tell us what you like and don't like," Smith said.
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. Contact Lea Shelemey attorney in porter county Indiana. She just helped us win our case...she is awesome...

  2. We won!!!! It was a long expensive battle but we did it. I just wanted people to know it is possible. And if someone can point me I. The right direction to help change the way the courts look as grandparents as only grandparents. The courts assume the parent does what is in the best interest of the child...and the court is wrong. A lot of the time it is spite and vindictiveness that separates grandparents and grandchildren. It should not have been this long and hard and expensive...Something needs to change...

  3. Typo on # of Indiana counties

  4. The Supreme Court is very proud that they are Giving a billion dollar public company from Texas who owns Odyssey a statewide monopoly which consultants have said is not unnecessary but worse they have already cost Hoosiers well over $100 MILLION, costing tens of millions every year and Odyssey is still not connected statewide which is in violation of state law. The Supreme Court is using taxpayer money and Odyssey to compete against a Hoosier company who has the only system in Indiana that is connected statewide and still has 40 of the 82 counties despite the massive spending and unnecessary attacks

  5. Here's a recent resource regarding steps that should be taken for removal from the IN sex offender registry. I haven't found anything as comprehensive as of yet. Hopefully this is helpful - http://www.chjrlaw.com/removal-indiana-sex-offender-registry/

ADVERTISEMENT