interpreter

New task force meant to break down language barriers, aid court interpreters

March 22, 2017
Olivia Covington
As the number of litigants, witnesses or spectators requesting interpretation services continues to rise, the Indiana Supreme Court is taking steps to ensure those services are high-quality and far-reaching.
More

US, ACLU join deaf litigant in ADA suit against Indiana court

February 20, 2017
Dave Stafford
A deaf litigant who was denied a sign language interpreter for court-ordered mediation in his child-custody case has the support of the U.S. Department of Justice and the American Civil Liberties Union of Indiana in his federal disability-discrimination lawsuit against Marion Circuit Court.
More

State appeals judgment for deaf litigant denied interpreter

October 25, 2016
IL Staff
The state of Indiana is appealing a federal court ruling that a deaf Indianapolis man was discriminated against when he was denied an interpreter for a court-ordered mediation session in his child custody case.
More

Court awards $10,000 to deaf litigant denied interpreter

September 14, 2016
Dave Stafford
A deaf Indianapolis man who was denied a sign language interpreter at his court-ordered mediation of a child-custody dispute will receive $10,380 in damages, a federal judge ruled.
More

Judge rejects state’s appeal bid in deaf litigant case

June 17, 2016
Dave Stafford
A federal judge Friday rejected the state’s effort to appeal a ruling that a court discriminated against a deaf litigant, writing the bid was “a classic example of when an immediate appeal is not warranted.”
More

Indiana fights discrimination ruling against trial court

June 15, 2016
Dave Stafford
A federal court ruling that a Marion County court discriminated against a deaf man who was denied an interpreter for his court-ordered mediation is being appealed by the state, which argues he lacked standing to bring the suit under the Americans with Disabilities Act and state courts should be immune from such judgments.
More

State appeals ruling for deaf litigant denied mediation interpreter

June 7, 2016
Dave Stafford
Indiana Attorney General Greg Zoeller’s office has appealed a federal court ruling that found a Marion County court discriminated against a deaf man in violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act when it rejected his request for an American Sign Language interpreter at a court-ordered mediation session during his child custody case.
More

Judge: Court discriminated against deaf man by denying mediation interpreter

May 31, 2016
Dave Stafford
A deaf Indianapolis man was discriminated against when a court denied providing him an interpreter during a mediation session ordered in his child custody case. A federal judge ruled Friday that Marion Superior Court’s decision to deny the interpreter in a court-funded mediation program violated the Americans with Disabilities Act.
More

Deaf litigant’s ADA case proceeds, minus state defendants

May 5, 2015
Dave Stafford
A judge has dismissed state defendants from a lawsuit brought by a deaf man who was denied a court-appointed interpreter during a mediation, but his lawsuit against the Marion Circuit Court will proceed.
More

Technology helps aid non-English-speaking litigants but has limits

November 5, 2014
Dave Stafford
Remote connections for interpreting services are becoming more common in courts and legal proceedings. Speakers of Arabic, Mandarin, Punjabi and countless other languages and dialects are entitled to understand proceedings and communicate, but there isn’t always a qualified interpreter who can show up in person.
More

7th Circuit: Attorney provided effective assistance to man facing drug charges

June 18, 2014
Jennifer Nelson
The 7th Circuit Court of Appeals rejected a defendant’s argument that his trial attorney was ineffective because he failed to object to an interpreter arrangement during a witness’s testimony and chose not to have all of discovery translated into Spanish.
More

Spanish-speaking man did not waive rights in plea, justices hold

June 5, 2014
Jennifer Nelson
A non-native English speaker was able to show the Indiana Supreme Court that, during his guilty plea hearing, he was not properly advised of the constitutional rights he was waiving by pleading guilty. The justices reversed the denial of his petition for post-conviction relief.
More

Right to equal access at center of federal lawsuit

January 29, 2014
Marilyn Odendahl
A courtroom spectator’s persistent requests to two trial courts for an interpreter raises questions of how accessible Indiana courts should be for people who have disabilities as well as how much control the state judiciary has over local judges.
More
Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Actually, and most strikingly, the ruling failed to address the central issue to the whole case: Namely, Black Knight/LPS, who was NEVER a party to the State court litigation, and who is under a 2013 consent judgment in Indiana (where it has stipulated to the forgery of loan documents, the ones specifically at issue in my case)never disclosed itself in State court or remediated the forged loan documents as was REQUIRED of them by the CJ. In essence, what the court is willfully ignoring, is that it is setting a precedent that the supplier of a defective product, one whom is under a consent judgment stipulating to such, and under obligation to remediate said defective product, can: 1.) Ignore the CJ 2.) Allow counsel to commit fraud on the state court 3.) Then try to hide behind Rooker Feldman doctrine as a bar to being held culpable in federal court. The problem here is the court is in direct conflict with its own ruling(s) in Johnson v. Pushpin Holdings & Iqbal- 780 F.3d 728, at 730 “What Johnson adds - what the defendants in this suit have failed to appreciate—is that federal courts retain jurisdiction to award damages for fraud that imposes extrajudicial injury. The Supreme Court drew that very line in Exxon Mobil ... Iqbal alleges that the defendants conducted a racketeering enterprise that predates the state court’s judgments ...but Exxon Mobil shows that the Rooker Feldman doctrine asks what injury the plaintiff asks the federal court to redress, not whether the injury is “intertwined” with something else …Because Iqbal seeks damages for activity that (he alleges) predates the state litigation and caused injury independently of it, the Rooker-Feldman doctrine does not block this suit. It must be reinstated.” So, as I already noted to others, I now have the chance to bring my case to SCOTUS; the ruling by Wood & Posner is flawed on numerous levels,BUT most troubling is the fact that the authors KNOW it's a flawed ruling and choose to ignore the flaws for one simple reason: The courts have decided to agree with former AG Eric Holder that national banks "Are too big to fail" and must win at any cost-even that of due process, case precedent, & the truth....Let's see if SCOTUS wants a bite at the apple.

  2. I am in NJ & just found out that there is a judgment against me in an action by Driver's Solutions LLC in IN. I was never served with any Court pleadings, etc. and the only thing that I can find out is that they were using an old Staten Island NY address for me. I have been in NJ for over 20 years and cannot get any response from Drivers Solutions in IN. They have a different lawyer now. I need to get this vacated or stopped - it is now almost double & at 18%. Any help would be appreciated. Thank you.

  3. I am in NJ & just found out that there is a judgment against me in an action by Driver's Solutions LLC in IN. I was never served with any Court pleadings, etc. and the only thing that I can find out is that they were using an old Staten Island NY address for me. I have been in NJ for over 20 years and cannot get any response from Drivers Solutions in IN. They have a different lawyer now. I need to get this vacated or stopped - it is now almost double & at 18%. Any help would be appreciated. Thank you.

  4. Please I need help with my class action lawsuits, im currently in pro-se and im having hard time findiNG A LAWYER TO ASSIST ME

  5. Access to the court (judiciary branch of government) is the REAL problem, NOT necessarily lack of access to an attorney. Unfortunately, I've lived in a legal and financial hell for the past six years due to a divorce (where I was, supposedly, represented by an attorney) in which I was defrauded of settlement and the other party (and helpers) enriched through the fraud. When I attempted to introduce evidence and testify (pro se) in a foreclosure/eviction, I was silenced (apparently on procedural grounds, as research I've done since indicates). I was thrown out of a residence which was to be sold, by a judge who refused to allow me to speak in (the supposedly "informal") small claims court where the eviction proceeding (by ex-brother-in-law) was held. Six years and I can't even get back on solid or stable ground ... having bank account seized twice, unlawfully ... and now, for the past year, being dragged into court - again, contrary to law and appellate decisions - by former attorney, who is trying to force payment from exempt funds. Friday will mark fifth appearance. Hopefully, I'll be allowed to speak. The situation I find myself in shouldn't even be possible, much less dragging out with no end in sight, for years. I've done nothing wrong, but am watching a lot of wrong being accomplished under court jurisdiction; only because I was married to someone who wanted and was granted a divorce (but was not willing to assume the responsibilities that come with granting the divorce). In fact, the recalcitrant party was enriched by well over $100k, although it was necessarily split with other actors. Pro bono help? It's a nice dream ... but that's all it is, for too many. Meanwhile, injustice marches on.

ADVERTISEMENT