ILNews

Judiciary announces court reforms

Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

The Indiana Judicial Conference unveiled its "roadmap for the future" today for the Indiana courts, which included consolidating courts and creating a uniform system to select trial judges. At the Indiana Judicial Conference, Indiana Chief Justice Randall T. Shepard discussed the long-term strategic plan's goals to improve the professionalism, efficiency, and effectiveness of the state's judiciary.

After 15 meetings across Indiana beginning in December 2008, the Strategic Planning Committee produced the 27-page document as a blueprint detailing the judiciary's vision for the future. The document isn't intended to be a detailed implementation plan ready for adoption by the legislature, but is an aspiration and vision for the future.

Some areas identified for improvement include increasing CLE requirements for judges and developing minimum standards for court staff; incorporating city, town, and township small claims courts into the trial courts; providing state funding for courts and court-related services; and reducing the seven different methods of selecting trial court judges in the state to a uniform system.

The plan calls for state funding of the trial courts in order to allocate resources fairly. Currently, the state pays for some salaries and court programs and county councils pay for other salaries and programs. Figures aren't yet available on the impact of funding changes.

Elkhart Circuit Judge Terry Shewmaker and Marion Superior Judge Mark Stoner are co-chairs of the Strategic Planning Committee. They say Indiana's complex court system needs to be changed so that it's clear and easy for citizens to understand. Duplication of efforts and inefficiencies that cost taxpayers money should be streamlined or eliminated.

Some aspects of the plan are ready to be implemented, including those dealing with education and training.

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. The is an unsigned editorial masquerading as a news story. Almost everyone quoted was biased in favor of letting all illegal immigrants remain in the U.S. (Ignoring that Obama deported 3.5 million in 8 years). For some reason Obama enforcing part of the immigration laws was O.K. but Trump enforcing additional parts is terrible. I have listed to press conferences and explanations of the Homeland Security memos and I gather from them that less than 1 million will be targeted for deportation, the "dreamers" will be left alone and illegals arriving in the last two years -- especially those arriving very recently -- will be subject to deportation but after the criminals. This will not substantially affect the GDP negatively, especially as it will take place over a number of years. I personally think this is a rational approach to the illegal immigration problem. It may cause Congress to finally pass new immigration laws rationalizing the whole immigration situation.

  2. Mr. Straw, I hope you prevail in the fight. Please show us fellow American's that there is a way to fight the corrupted justice system and make them an example that you and others will not be treated unfairly. I hope you the best and good luck....

  3. @ President Snow - Nah, why try to fix something that ain't broken??? You do make an excellent point. I am sure some Mickey or Minnie Mouse will take Ruckers seat, I wonder how his retirement planning is coming along???

  4. Can someone please explain why Judge Barnes, Judge Mathias and Chief Judge Vaidik thought it was OK to re weigh the evidence blatantly knowing that by doing so was against the rules and went ahead and voted in favor of the father? I would love to ask them WHY??? I would also like to ask the three Supreme Justices why they thought it was OK too.

  5. How nice, on the day of my car accident on the way to work at the Indiana Supreme Court. Unlike the others, I did not steal any money or do ANYTHING unethical whatsoever. I am suing the Indiana Supreme Court and appealed the failure of the district court in SDIN to protect me. I am suing the federal judge because she failed to protect me and her abandonment of jurisdiction leaves her open to lawsuits because she stripped herself of immunity. I am a candidate for Indiana Supreme Court justice, and they imposed just enough sanction so that I am made ineligible. I am asking the 7th Circuit to remove all of them and appoint me as the new Chief Justice of Indiana. That's what they get for dishonoring my sacrifice and and violating the ADA in about 50 different ways.

ADVERTISEMENT