Indiana Prosecuting Attorneys Council

Funeral Friday for former IPAC leader

March 4, 2014
IL Staff
The funeral for Stephen Johnson, the attorney who led the Indiana Prosecuting Attorneys Council for nearly 15 years, will be held Friday in Indianapolis.
More

Former head of Indiana Prosecuting Attorneys Council dies

March 3, 2014
Jennifer Nelson
Stephen Johnson, the former executive director of the Indiana Prosecuting Attorneys Council, passed away unexpectedly Sunday. Johnson was with the organization for nearly 40 years before retiring in 2011.
More

New IPAC leader named

August 25, 2011
Michael Hoskins
Longtime prosecutor David N. Powell from Greene County is the newest leader of the Indiana Prosecuting Attorneys Council.
More

Applicants vie to become next IPAC director

July 25, 2011
Michael Hoskins
A four-person search committee continues reviewing applications of individuals who have expressed interest in becoming the next Indiana Prosecuting Attorneys Council director. About 20 people have applied to take over the post after the agency’s current leader, Stephen Johnson, retires Aug. 1.
More

IPAC director retiring Aug. 1

June 13, 2011
Michael Hoskins
The longtime leader of the Indiana Prosecuting Attorneys Council is retiring Aug. 1, leaving the statewide agency he’s been with for more than three decades.
More
Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. The practitioners and judges who hail E-filing as the Saviour of the West need to contain their respective excitements. E-filing is federal court requires the practitioner to cram his motion practice into pigeonholes created by IT people. Compound motions or those seeking alternative relief are effectively barred, unless the practitioner wants to receive a tart note from some functionary admonishing about the "problem". E-filing is just another method by which courts and judges transfer their burden to practitioners, who are the really the only powerless components of the system. Of COURSE it is easier for the court to require all of its imput to conform to certain formats, but this imposition does NOT improve the quality of the practice of law and does NOT improve the ability of the practitioner to advocate for his client or to fashion pleadings that exactly conform to his client's best interests. And we should be very wary of the disingenuous pablum about the costs. The courts will find a way to stick it to the practitioner. Lake County is a VERY good example of this rapaciousness. Any one who does not believe this is invited to review the various special fees that system imposes upon practitioners- as practitioners- and upon each case ON TOP of the court costs normal in every case manually filed. Jurisprudence according to Aldous Huxley.

  2. Any attorneys who practice in federal court should be able to say the same as I can ... efiling is great. I have been doing it in fed court since it started way back. Pacer has its drawbacks, but the ability to hit an e-docket and pull up anything and everything onscreen is a huge plus for a litigator, eps the sole practitioner, who lacks a filing clerk and the paralegal support of large firms. Were I an Indiana attorney I would welcome this great step forward.

  3. Can we get full disclosure on lobbyist's payments to legislatures such as Mr Buck? AS long as there are idiots that are disrespectful of neighbors and intent on shooting fireworks every night, some kind of regulations are needed.

  4. I am the mother of the child in this case. My silence on the matter was due to the fact that I filed, both in Illinois and Indiana, child support cases. I even filed supporting documentation with the Indiana family law court. Not sure whether this information was provided to the court of appeals or not. Wish the case was done before moving to Indiana, because no matter what, there is NO WAY the state of Illinois would have allowed an appeal on a child support case!

  5. "No one is safe when the Legislature is in session."

ADVERTISEMENT