ILNews

Justice encourages judicial applications

IL Staff
January 1, 2008
Keywords
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share
An Indiana Supreme Court justice is in South Bend today to actively encourage attorneys to apply for an opening on the St. Joseph Superior Court that will be available when Judge William T. Means retires Sept. 30.

"Being a judge is a challenging but enormously gratifying way for an attorney to use all of his or her legal skills in a way that improves both the quality of life in our community and the quality of justice in our state," Justice Frank Sullivan Jr. said. "Many lawyers think about pursuing a judicial career; this is a perfect time to do so."

The announcement seeking applicants was made in mid-June, and the county's Judicial Nominating Commission is accepting applications until 5 p.m. Aug. 29. Interviews for applicants will be Sept. 12 in South Bend.

According to state law, unlike other counties in Indiana that have partisan elections for judges, a seven-member nominating commission can submit up to five nominees to the governor for consideration. The governor may also not consider partisan politics in his decision.

Justice Sullivan, who has chaired the commission since 1993, said state law requires the commission to make its recommendation based strictly on merit.

To be eligible, applicants must live in St. Joseph County, be a U.S. citizen, and be admitted to practice law in Indiana. Factors considered by the commission include the applicant's law school record, scholarly work, public service work in civic affairs and justice administration, legal experience, probable judicial temperament, and potential conflicts of interest.

Application forms are available from St. Joseph Court Clerk Rita Glenn at (574) 235-9772 or online at www.in.gov/judiciary/stjoseph/judicial-application.pdf.

"In the 15 years that I have had the great honor of chairing the St. Joseph Superior Court Judicial Nominating Commission, I have been impressed by the high quality and diversity of legal talent in St. Joseph County," Justice Sullivan said.

Many commission-appointed St. Joseph Superior judges have moved on to higher positions: Judge Robert L. Miller became a U.S. District judge and Judge Sanford M. Brook joined the Indiana Court of Appeals.
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. I need an experienced attorney to handle a breach of contract matter. Kindly respond for more details. Graham Young

  2. I thought the slurs were the least grave aspects of her misconduct, since they had nothing to do with her being on the bench. Why then do I suspect they were the focus? I find this a troubling trend. At least she was allowed to keep her law license.

  3. Section 6 of Article I of the Indiana Constitution is pretty clear and unequivocal: "Section 6. No money shall be drawn from the treasury for the benefit of any religious or theological institution."

  4. Video pen? Nice work, "JW"! Let this be a lesson and a caution to all disgruntled ex-spouses (or soon-to-be ex-spouses) . . . you may think that altercation is going to get you some satisfaction . . . it will not.

  5. First comment on this thread is a fitting final comment on this thread, as that the MCBA never answered Duncan's fine question, and now even Eric Holder agrees that the MCBA was in material error as to the facts: "I don't get it" from Duncan December 1, 2014 5:10 PM "The Grand Jury met for 25 days and heard 70 hours of testimony according to this article and they made a decision that no crime occurred. On what basis does the MCBA conclude that their decision was "unjust"? What special knowledge or evidence does the MCBA have that the Grand Jury hearing this matter was unaware of? The system that we as lawyers are sworn to uphold made a decision that there was insufficient proof that officer committed a crime. How can any of us say we know better what was right than the jury that actually heard all of the the evidence in this case."

ADVERTISEMENT