ILNews

Lake County bench brawl

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

A fight over a Lake County judicial vacancy put the Indiana Supreme Court in the unusual position of issuing three orders in 12 days recently, ultimately telling the warring parties to settle among themselves a bitter dispute gone public.

The infighting among judges revealed a level of animosity that surprised some longtime attorneys familiar with the local bench.
 

Bonaventura-MaryBeth.jpg Bonaventura

After Judge Mary Beth Bonaventura announced she would depart Lake Superior Court Juvenile Division to run the Indiana Department of Child Services, judges in the merit-selection county shuffled the deck, and Judge Nicholas Schiralli was granted leave to transfer to the juvenile bench from Superior Court County Division 1 on the basis of seniority.

Bonaventura cried foul, saying state law required the position be filled through the Lake Judicial Nominating Commission’s vetting process, in which attorneys interested in the position would be interviewed and five finalists’ names would be submitted for Gov. Mike Pence’s selection.

Juvenile court magistrates also said the transfer conflicted with the merit-selection statute and would deprive them of an opportunity to apply for the vacancy. They requested a writ of mandamus on March 20, days before Bonaventura was to depart, in State of Indiana ex rel. Glenn D. Commons, et al., v. the Hon. John R. Pera as Chief Judge of the Lake Superior Court, et al., 45S00-1303-OR-209.

The Supreme Court issued a succession of orders:

On March 21, the court issued an emergency order and writ staying Schiralli’s transfer until justices could rule further;

On March 22, the court appointed Senior Judge Thomas W. Webber Sr. to serve as judge pro tem in the juvenile court “until the selection of a replacement for Bonaventura can be determined”; and

On April 1, the court appointed former Justice Frank Sullivan Jr. to oversee mediation among the parties. Mediation is expected to resolve the standoff by mid-May, and Sullivan is to file a mediation report with the court by May 23.

But just in case mediation fails, the court ordered briefing from the judges filed by April 8.


Schiralli-Nicholas.jpg Schiralli

Neither Schiralli nor Bonaventura responded to messages seeking comment regarding the situation, but as the controversy percolated, at least one Lake County judge lashed out in writing.

Lake Superior Judge Jesse M. Villalpando wrote to Chief Judge John Pera and copied three other judges, congratulating Pera on a March 11 letter to Justice Robert Rucker stating the reasons why Schiralli’s transfer was permissible under local rules.

Bonaventura’s objection illustrated her “misplaced priorities,” Villalpando wrote in the letter to Pera published by the Times of Northwest Indiana. Bonaventura had urged the transfer of Judge John Sedia, who declined, before she urged merit selection at a February meeting of Lake Superior judges, Villalpando wrote.


“Her parting shot to her colleagues indicating that she cannot imagine any one of us being able to replace her as Juvenile Court Judge is Exhibit A: Arrogance,” Villalpando wrote. “For her own good she needs to wake up, otherwise, she is in for a rude awakening upon arriving in Indianapolis. … She should be focused on her future and serving the needs of the children of Indiana.”

Judges say they are within their rights under Lake Superior Court rules to fill the vacancy by transfer, but Bonaventura and now the magistrates said merit selection is required.

Bingham Greenebaum Doll LLP partner Karl Mulvaney is representing the Lake County judges in the dispute. “There certainly is an issue regarding a local rule and a state statute,” Mulvaney said. He said he could not comment on his clients’ position ahead of mediation.

Lake County Bar Association President Michael Jasaitis said the local bar has taken no position in the dispute.

“As a result of the recent filings, this matter is now before the Indiana Supreme Court for disposition. Therefore, the Lake County Bar Association, as an organization, has taken the position that it should refrain from commenting on the current pending litigation,” Jasaitis said in a statement.

A veteran Lake County attorney who occasionally practices in juvenile court spoke with Indiana Lawyer on condition of anonymity and said local rules permit transfers within civil, criminal and juvenile divisions. There have been a couple within specific divisions in the past decade, but transfers across those divisions have not happened, the attorney said.

“Lawyers are disappointed with the way the vacancy is being approached by the judges,” the attorney said. “The legal community is somewhat put off that the judges have put off the statutes” regarding merit selection.

The peek behind the curtain of the judges meeting was startling, the attorney said, because Bonaventura “was a very popular judge, and she may have been envied because she was so popular statewide.

“It’s been a surprise to everyone that there’s been this much strife.”

Charles Geyh, a professor and judicial appointment expert at Indiana University Maurer School of Law, said the dispute in Lake County is “driven by the perverse eccentricities of Indiana’s trial court selection processes.

“One would like to think that the process for replacing a juvenile court judge would be sufficiently clear that one would not need to resort to litigation to figure out whether new judges are chosen by commission-based gubernatorial appointment or by other judges within the district,” Geyh said.

The situation in Lake County illustrates the need for a uniform statewide method of trial judge selection, he added.

Meantime, resolution of the dispute will be left up to the parties involved, at least for the next month or so, until Sullivan’s deadline for a mediation report.

“This court expects the mediation process to begin promptly and to proceed with all due deliberate focus,” Chief Justice Brent Dickson wrote in the April 1 order. “This court retains jurisdiction over this original action during mediation but holds in abeyance its consideration of this original action, pending completion of mediation.”

The Lake County attorney was doubtful: “There’s no suggestion or indication that anyone’s going to back down.”•

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
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. I have been on this program while on parole from 2011-2013. No person should be forced mentally to share private details of their personal life with total strangers. Also giving permission for a mental therapist to report to your parole agent that your not participating in group therapy because you don't have the financial mean to be in the group therapy. I was personally singled out and sent back three times for not having money and also sent back within the six month when you aren't to be sent according to state law. I will work to het this INSOMM's removed from this state. I also had twelve or thirteen parole agents with a fifteen month period. Thanks for your time.

  2. Our nation produces very few jurists of the caliber of Justice DOUGLAS and his peers these days. Here is that great civil libertarian, who recognized government as both a blessing and, when corrupted by ideological interests, a curse: "Once the investigator has only the conscience of government as a guide, the conscience can become ‘ravenous,’ as Cromwell, bent on destroying Thomas More, said in Bolt, A Man For All Seasons (1960), p. 120. The First Amendment mirrors many episodes where men, harried and harassed by government, sought refuge in their conscience, as these lines of Thomas More show: ‘MORE: And when we stand before God, and you are sent to Paradise for doing according to your conscience, *575 and I am damned for not doing according to mine, will you come with me, for fellowship? ‘CRANMER: So those of us whose names are there are damned, Sir Thomas? ‘MORE: I don't know, Your Grace. I have no window to look into another man's conscience. I condemn no one. ‘CRANMER: Then the matter is capable of question? ‘MORE: Certainly. ‘CRANMER: But that you owe obedience to your King is not capable of question. So weigh a doubt against a certainty—and sign. ‘MORE: Some men think the Earth is round, others think it flat; it is a matter capable of question. But if it is flat, will the King's command make it round? And if it is round, will the King's command flatten it? No, I will not sign.’ Id., pp. 132—133. DOUGLAS THEN WROTE: Where government is the Big Brother,11 privacy gives way to surveillance. **909 But our commitment is otherwise. *576 By the First Amendment we have staked our security on freedom to promote a multiplicity of ideas, to associate at will with kindred spirits, and to defy governmental intrusion into these precincts" Gibson v. Florida Legislative Investigation Comm., 372 U.S. 539, 574-76, 83 S. Ct. 889, 908-09, 9 L. Ed. 2d 929 (1963) Mr. Justice DOUGLAS, concurring. I write: Happy Memorial Day to all -- God please bless our fallen who lived and died to preserve constitutional governance in our wonderful series of Republics. And God open the eyes of those government officials who denounce the constitutions of these Republics by arbitrary actions arising out capricious motives.

  3. From back in the day before secularism got a stranglehold on Hoosier jurists comes this great excerpt via Indiana federal court judge Allan Sharp, dedicated to those many Indiana government attorneys (with whom I have dealt) who count the law as a mere tool, an optional tool that is not to be used when political correctness compels a more acceptable result than merely following the path that the law directs: ALLEN SHARP, District Judge. I. In a scene following a visit by Henry VIII to the home of Sir Thomas More, playwriter Robert Bolt puts the following words into the mouths of his characters: Margaret: Father, that man's bad. MORE: There is no law against that. ROPER: There is! God's law! MORE: Then God can arrest him. ROPER: Sophistication upon sophistication! MORE: No, sheer simplicity. The law, Roper, the law. I know what's legal not what's right. And I'll stick to what's legal. ROPER: Then you set man's law above God's! MORE: No, far below; but let me draw your attention to a fact I'm not God. The currents and eddies of right and wrong, which you find such plain sailing, I can't navigate. I'm no voyager. But in the thickets of law, oh, there I'm a forester. I doubt if there's a man alive who could follow me there, thank God... ALICE: (Exasperated, pointing after Rich) While you talk, he's gone! MORE: And go he should, if he was the Devil himself, until he broke the law! ROPER: So now you'd give the Devil benefit of law! MORE: Yes. What would you do? Cut a great road through the law to get after the Devil? ROPER: I'd cut down every law in England to do that! MORE: (Roused and excited) Oh? (Advances on Roper) And when the last law was down, and the Devil turned round on you where would you hide, Roper, the laws being flat? (He leaves *1257 him) This country's planted thick with laws from coast to coast man's laws, not God's and if you cut them down and you're just the man to do it d'you really think you would stand upright in the winds that would blow then? (Quietly) Yes, I'd give the Devil benefit of law, for my own safety's sake. ROPER: I have long suspected this; this is the golden calf; the law's your god. MORE: (Wearily) Oh, Roper, you're a fool, God's my god... (Rather bitterly) But I find him rather too (Very bitterly) subtle... I don't know where he is nor what he wants. ROPER: My God wants service, to the end and unremitting; nothing else! MORE: (Dryly) Are you sure that's God! He sounds like Moloch. But indeed it may be God And whoever hunts for me, Roper, God or Devil, will find me hiding in the thickets of the law! And I'll hide my daughter with me! Not hoist her up the mainmast of your seagoing principles! They put about too nimbly! (Exit More. They all look after him). Pgs. 65-67, A MAN FOR ALL SEASONS A Play in Two Acts, Robert Bolt, Random House, New York, 1960. Linley E. Pearson, Atty. Gen. of Indiana, Indianapolis, for defendants. Childs v. Duckworth, 509 F. Supp. 1254, 1256 (N.D. Ind. 1981) aff'd, 705 F.2d 915 (7th Cir. 1983)

  4. "Meanwhile small- and mid-size firms are getting squeezed and likely will not survive unless they become a boutique firm." I've been a business attorney in small, and now mid-size firm for over 30 years, and for over 30 years legal consultants have been preaching this exact same mantra of impending doom for small and mid-sized firms -- verbatim. This claim apparently helps them gin up merger opportunities from smaller firms who become convinced that they need to become larger overnight. The claim that large corporations are interested in cost-saving and efficiency has likewise been preached for decades, and is likewise bunk. If large corporations had any real interest in saving money they wouldn't use large law firms whose rates are substantially higher than those of high-quality mid-sized firms.

  5. The family is the foundation of all human government. That is the Grand Design. Modern governments throw off this Design and make bureaucratic war against the family, as does Hollywood and cultural elitists such as third wave feminists. Since WWII we have been on a ship of fools that way, with both the elite and government and their social engineering hacks relentlessly attacking the very foundation of social order. And their success? See it in the streets of Fergusson, on the food stamp doles (mostly broken families)and in the above article. Reject the Grand Design for true social function, enter the Glorious State to manage social dysfunction. Our Brave New World will be a prison camp, and we will welcome it as the only way to manage given the anarchy without it.

ADVERTISEMENT