Indiana Judicial Conference Committee

Public comment invited on Indiana’s child support guidelines

March 24, 2014
IL Staff
The Domestic Relations Committee of the Indiana Judicial Conference is soliciting public input concerning recommendations for changes to the state’s child support guidelines.
More

Indiana Judicial Conference convenes in Fort Wayne

September 18, 2013
IL Staff
The 2013 Annual Meeting of the Judicial Conference of Indiana started Sept. 18, with judges and magistrates from around the state gathering in Fort Wayne.
More

Judicial Conference moves parenting time guidelines forward, minus parenting coordination

September 19, 2012
IL Staff
The board of directors of the Indiana Judicial Conference approved proposed changes to the state’s parenting time guidelines Sept. 14 and sent them to the Supreme Court for review. However, the guidelines were sent on without any suggestions on parenting coordination.
More

IJA honors colleague and journalist

December 15, 2011
Jennifer Nelson
An Allen Superior judge and a Louisville journalist received the Community Relations Committee awards this year from the Indiana Judges Association.
More

Commissions applicants Q&A online

October 13, 2010
Michael Hoskins
Read the responses from the five Indiana Judicial Nominating and Qualification commissions nominees to questions posed by Indiana Lawyer.
More

Indiana Judicial Nominating/Qualifications Commissions candidates Q&A

October 13, 2010
Read the answers to questions posed by Indiana Lawyer to the five attorneys – Jan Carroll, David Hennesy, Kathy Osborn, Joel Schumm, and William Winingham - vying for a spot on the Indiana Judicial Nominating/Qualifications Commissions.
More

5 vie for spot on judicial commissions

September 29, 2010
Michael Hoskins
Openings on the Indiana Supreme Court and state Tax Court in recent months have put more focus on the selection process and what goes into choosing appellate jurists, leading to increased interest from the legal community about who has a voice in deciding nomination and other judicial qualifications issues.
More

5 vying for state judicial commissions

September 13, 2010
Michael Hoskins
Five Indianapolis attorneys have put their names in the hat for a single opening on the state’s judicial commissions, which are responsible for deciding whether disciplinary actions should be taken against a jurist and determining who should be on the state’s appellate courts.
More

CJ signs order for increased judicial education requirements

August 25, 2010
IL Staff
Indiana judges and magistrates will have to take more judicial education classes to improve their legal skills next year.
More

Court reform plan starts with enhanced education proposal

July 9, 2010
Michael Hoskins
As part of a larger court reform plan, the governing board of the Judicial Conference of Indiana wants more required education for judges at the state appellate and trial levels.
More

Comment sought on drug, alcohol rules

April 23, 2009
IL Staff
The Court Alcohol and Drug Program Advisory Committee of the Judicial Conference of Indiana is seeking public comment regarding proposed written amendments to the Rules for Court Administered Alcohol and Drug Programs.
More

Changes proposed for child-support rules

April 14, 2009
IL Staff
The Judicial Conference of Indiana's Domestic Relations Committee is accepting comments from judges, attorneys, and the public on the proposed changes to the Indiana Child Support Rules and Guidelines.
More
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. It's a big fat black mark against the US that they radicalized a lot of these Afghan jihadis in the 80s to fight the soviets and then when they predictably got around to biting the hand that fed them, the US had to invade their homelands, install a bunch of corrupt drug kingpins and kleptocrats, take these guys and torture the hell out of them. Why for example did the US have to sodomize them? Dubya said "they hate us for our freedoms!" Here, try some of that freedom whether you like it or not!!! Now they got even more reasons to hate us-- lets just keep bombing the crap out of their populations, installing more puppet regimes, arming one faction against another, etc etc etc.... the US is becoming a monster. No wonder they hate us. Here's my modest recommendation. How about we follow "Just War" theory in the future. St Augustine had it right. How about we treat these obvious prisoners of war according to the Geneva convention instead of torturing them in sadistic and perverted ways.

  2. As usual, John is "spot-on." The subtle but poignant points he makes are numerous and warrant reflection by mediators and users. Oh but were it so simple.

  3. ACLU. Way to step up against the police state. I see a lot of things from the ACLU I don't like but this one is a gold star in its column.... instead of fighting it the authorities should apologize and back off.

  4. Duncan, It's called the RIGHT OF ASSOCIATION and in the old days people believed it did apply to contracts and employment. Then along came title vii.....that aside, I believe that I am free to work or not work for whomever I like regardless: I don't need a law to tell me I'm free. The day I really am compelled to ignore all the facts of social reality in my associations and I blithely go along with it, I'll be a slave of the state. That day is not today......... in the meantime this proposed bill would probably be violative of 18 usc sec 1981 that prohibits discrimination in contracts... a law violated regularly because who could ever really expect to enforce it along the millions of contracts made in the marketplace daily? Some of these so-called civil rights laws are unenforceable and unjust Utopian Social Engineering. Forcing people to love each other will never work.

  5. I am the father of a sweet little one-year-old named girl, who happens to have Down Syndrome. To anyone who reads this who may be considering the decision to terminate, please know that your child will absolutely light up your life as my daughter has the lives of everyone around her. There is no part of me that condones abortion of a child on the basis that he/she has or might have Down Syndrome. From an intellectual standpoint, however, I question the enforceability of this potential law. As it stands now, the bill reads in relevant part as follows: "A person may not intentionally perform or attempt to perform an abortion . . . if the person knows that the pregnant woman is seeking the abortion solely because the fetus has been diagnosed with Down syndrome or a potential diagnosis of Down syndrome." It includes similarly worded provisions abortion on "any other disability" or based on sex selection. It goes so far as to make the medical provider at least potentially liable for wrongful death. First, how does a medical provider "know" that "the pregnant woman is seeking the abortion SOLELY" because of anything? What if the woman says she just doesn't want the baby - not because of the diagnosis - she just doesn't want him/her? Further, how can the doctor be liable for wrongful death, when a Child Wrongful Death claim belongs to the parents? Is there any circumstance in which the mother's comparative fault will not exceed the doctor's alleged comparative fault, thereby barring the claim? If the State wants to discourage women from aborting their children because of a Down Syndrome diagnosis, I'm all for that. Purporting to ban it with an unenforceable law, however, is not the way to effectuate this policy.

ADVERTISEMENT