ILNews

Leadership in Law 2013: Hon. Lloyd Mark Bailey

Judge, Indiana Court of Appeals, Indianapolis Indiana University Robert H. McKinney School of Law

Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

 

mark-bailey02-15col.jpg (IL Photo/ Perry Reichanadter)

Indiana Court of Appeals Judge L. Mark Bailey has come a long way from his college days when he worked as a courier in a law firm to get exposure to the legal system. His career path has taken him from a small firm and a solo practice to serving as an administrative law judge, state trial judge, and now a jurist on the Court of Appeals. Mark, along with Judges John Baker and Edward Najam, initiated the “Appeals on Wheels” project that brings appellate arguments into community settings. While serving on the bench, he has earned his master’s in business administration from Indiana Wesleyan University. He continues to seek out learning opportunities – in 2009, the judge earned a designation as an Advanced Science & Technology Adjudication Resource Center Science and Technology Fellow. Mark’s ability to blend legal, social and public policy analysis is admired by his colleagues.

What civic cause is the most important to you?
Meaningful access to justice.

If you could take a sabbatical from the law for a year to work your fantasy job, what job would you choose?
I would return to the family farm.

In life or law, what bugs you?
A sense by some people that life is just a dress rehearsal which allows them to traipse through it without any sense of personal meaning or purpose.

If you could meet and spend a day with one lawyer from history, who would it be and why?
Thurgood Marshall. I can’t think of a better person to provide unique insight, understanding and perspective on the role of law in our society.

What class in law school did you find the most difficult?
Every class presented its own unique challenges. The goal for me was to master the unique terminology for each subject and to understand its boundaries, history and purpose in our society.

What do you find scary?
Missing a deadline.

If you could go back in time, “when” would you go to and what would you do?
Follow Stephen Decatur to battle in the Barbary Wars on the open seas of North Africa.

What advice would you give your 25-year-old self?
Read Stephen R. Covey’s book, “7 Habits of Highly Effective People” and “prepare to begin!”

If you could have one superpower, what would it be?
Fully understand the reasons for each person’s perspective.

If you could pick a theme song to describe your life, what would it be?
“Bright Side of the Road,” by Van Morrison. From my perspective, the song reflects a great life with my wife of 29 years and counting.

Would a world without 24/7 technology be a good or bad thing?
It is what it is. Just because it’s there doesn’t mean it has to be engaged 24/7.

Numerous TV shows center around lawyers and their practices. Are any of them close to realistic?
“The Good Wife.” It depicts real issues involving lawyers, their clients and their practices. The resolution of those issues is not so realistic. Most legal issues unfold over a period of time, not in an hour from beginning to end including commercial breaks. Additionally, wouldn’t it be nice if we could truly write the script for each client’s case.
 

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsored by
2015 Distinguished Barrister &
Up and Coming Lawyer Reception

Tuesday, May 5, 2015 • 4:30 - 7:00 pm
Learn More


ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. The $320,000 is the amount the school spent in litigating two lawsuits: One to release the report involving John Trimble (as noted in the story above) and one defending the discrimination lawsuit. The story above does not mention the amount spent to defend the discrimination suit, that's why the numbers don't match. Thanks for reading.

  2. $160k? Yesterday the figure was $320k. Which is it Indiana Lawyer. And even more interesting, which well connected law firm got the (I am guessing) $320k, six time was the fired chancellor received. LOL. (From yesterday's story, which I guess we were expected to forget overnight ... "According to records obtained by the Journal & Courier, Purdue spent $161,812, beginning in July 2012, in a state open records lawsuit and $168,312, beginning in April 2013, for defense in a federal lawsuit. Much of those fees were spent battling court orders to release an independent investigation by attorney John Trimble that found Purdue could have handled the forced retirement better")

  3. The numbers are harsh; 66 - 24 in the House, 40 - 10 in the Senate. And it is an idea pushed by the Democrats. Dead end? Ummm not necessarily. Just need to go big rather than go home. Nuclear option. Give it to the federal courts, the federal courts will ram this down our throats. Like that other invented right of the modern age, feticide. Rights too precious to be held up by 2000 years of civilization hang in the balance. Onward!

  4. I'm currently seeing someone who has a charge of child pornography possession, he didn't know he had it because it was attached to a music video file he downloaded when he was 19/20 yrs old and fought it for years until he couldn't handle it and plead guilty of possession. He's been convicted in Illinois and now lives in Indiana. Wouldn't it be better to give them a chance to prove to the community and their families that they pose no threat? He's so young and now because he was being a kid and downloaded music at a younger age, he has to pay for it the rest of his life? It's unfair, he can't live a normal life, and has to live in fear of what people can say and do to him because of something that happened 10 years ago? No one deserves that, and no one deserves to be labeled for one mistake, he got labeled even though there was no intent to obtain and use the said content. It makes me so sad to see someone I love go through this and it makes me holds me back a lot because I don't know how people around me will accept him...second chances should be given to those under the age of 21 at least so they can be given a chance to live a normal life as a productive member of society.

  5. It's just an ill considered remark. The Sup Ct is inherently political, as it is a core part of government, and Marbury V Madison guaranteed that it would become ever more so Supremely thus. So her remark is meaningless and she just should have not made it.... what she could have said is that Congress is a bunch of lazys and cowards who wont do their jobs so the hard work of making laws clear, oftentimes stops with the Sups sorting things out that could have been resolved by more competent legislation. That would have been a more worthwhile remark and maybe would have had some relevance to what voters do, since voters cant affect who gets appointed to the supremely un-democratic art III courts.

ADVERTISEMENT