ILNews

Leadership in Law 2014: Hon. Timothy W. Oakes

Judge, Marion Superior Court, Civil 13, Indianapolis • Indiana University Robert H. McKinney School of Law, 1991

April 23, 2014
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share
15col-Oakes.jpg Hon. Timothy W. Oakes (IL photo/Eric Learned)

Hon. Timothy W. Oakes is known for his willingness to work on administrative matters that affect the court and find ways to improve the judicial system. He created a program whereby he and a fellow judge host and mentor law students, and as part of that program developed a curriculum that provides the students exposure to the practical aspects of the practice of law. He has worked on several successful court projects, including gaining additional funding for guardians ad litem in child in need of services cases. Tim understands the importance of being a civil servant and the responsibility that comes with it. He is driven not by accolades but by a desire to serve the judicial system.

What was the biggest surprise going from attorney to judge?

Everyone tells you and it is true: Being a judge is extremely isolating. Even my best friends and wife stopped calling me for lunch. My parents don’t even drive up from Kentucky to visit me anymore, and I’m an only child with their only four grandchildren.

You created a program to provide mentoring to law students. Why is it important to work with the students?

Mentoring matters – it can define and direct careers and lives. I’ve benefited from truly exceptional mentors and friendships. To have just a piece of that positive influence on someone else’s life and career would be exceptionally rewarding.

You’re currently working to expand e-filing in the county’s civil courts. What’s one way technology has made it easier to be a judge and one way it’s made it more difficult?

Access to files, documents, exhibits has been made easier not just for judges, but for everyone. The transition phase which we, as a legal profession, are just beginning is, and will be, the most difficult. Some folks, including me, have to adjust some old habits and comforts.

What was the worst or most memorable job you had prior to becoming an attorney?

The most painful one was working for a federal bureaucracy with some very talented people. However, despite the talent, the bureaucracy favored form over outcomes. My supervisor literally told me once during a performance evaluation that I had to stop working late. I thought I was living in a sequel to Kafka.

Why do you think people have negative stereotypes about lawyers?

Lawyers, by design, make it look easy. People don’t like seeing others make significant money for something they do for free – give advice. They don’t see the time and training that goes into making that lawyer’s advice solid and correct, not just a hunch.

Is there a moment in your career you wish you could do over?

In life, yes; in my career, no. My career mistakes usually resulted in me learning something about life, myself or others. The experience of those mistakes can’t be duplicated in a classroom or a lecture, and they can’t be bought other than with time and trying.

What class do you wish you could have skipped in law school?

All of them … except legal writing and except for the classes I took with Professors Papke, Dean Harvey, Jegen and Kinney – great professors who made being in the classroom enjoyable and intellectually stimulating.

What’s something you’ve learned over the years that you wish you could go back in time and tell your younger self?

Not much because experience is earned, not taught.  I wouldn’t have listened to me anyway, except for maybe this: I would tell my younger self, “Go hangout with Grandpa Oakes even more than you do because one day he will be gone and there will no longer be ‘next weekends.’”

What are some tips for achieving a work/life balance?

Imagine your funeral; imagine who you would want there and what you would want them to be saying about you. Now, work back from there, and let that be your guide for today and every day.

What’s been the biggest change in the practice of law you’ve seen since you began?

Socialization among the lawyers has declined, which is not good, and the increase of technology as tools of the trade has changed the business model for lawyers forever.

If you couldn’t be a lawyer, what would you do for a living?

Lobby the Legislature or teach adolescents probably. Insert your own joke here, but both are worthy professions that don’t get the recognition, treatment or place in our society each deserve.

What civic cause is the most important to you?

Generally anything to do with abused, neglected or disadvantaged children or anything that helps military veterans.

We hear a lot about civility. Have you noticed a change in how attorneys treat each other since you began practicing?

Not really. I know there is that perception of increased incivility, but I also see a good number of quality lawyers practicing with civility every day. I suspect the ratio has always been about the same, but because there are so many more lawyers, the ill-tempered ones perhaps garner a disproportionate share of our memories.

Who is your favorite fictional lawyer?

Atticus Finch – strong, loyal, well-educated, principled, a dedicated advocate and perhaps most importantly, southern.

What’s something about you not many people know?

Probably nothing – I’m such an open book. I can keep everyone’s secrets but my own.


 

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