ILNews

  • Home

Merit-selection panel formed to select new federal magistrate

Michael W. Hoskins
July 12, 2010
Keywords
Court vacancies, Courts, Judge Jane E. Magnus-Stinson, U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Indiana
Back to TopE-mailPrint

Anyone interested in being a federal magistrate for the southern part of Indiana has until Wednesday to apply for that position.

Attorneys face the Wednesday deadline for the magistrate opening in the U.S. District Court’s Southern District of Indiana, following last month’s elevation of Judge Jane Magnus-Stinson to an Article III judgeship.

An 18-person panel of attorneys and community members has the task of interviewing and selecting the next federal magistrate. Chairing the panel is former Magistrate Judge V. Sue Shields, who retired in 2007 and paved the way for Judge Magnus-Stinson to take the spot.

Attorneys on the panel are: Barry Bitzegaio, Robert L. Burkart, Amanda C. Couture, William W. Drummy, Angela M. Espada, Matthew R. Gutwein, Richard D. Hailey, Lacy M. Johnson, Bart A. Karwath, John F. Kautzman, Michael S. Miller, Doris Pryor, James H. Voyles Jr., William E. Winingham Jr., and Sally Zweig. Two other community members also sit on the panel: Larry Griggers, owner of Ruth’s Chris Steakhouse; and Dr. Paul R. Helft, director of the Charles Warren Fairbanks Center for Medical Ethics.

Once all the applications are submitted, the merit-selection panel will review them and interview prospects, said U.S. District Court Clerk Laura Briggs, who is the panel’s liaison. No timeline exists for making a decision, but Chief Judge Richard Young had previously said he hopes to have a new magistrate as soon as possible this summer or early fall. The process is confidential to protect applicants’ privacy, and the names of the five most qualified candidates will be forwarded to the District judges for consideration and final approval.

The position pays an annual salary of $160,080 and runs for an eight-year term before that person is eligible for reappointment. Applicants are required to have practiced for at least five years and be no more than 70 years old.

Those interested in applying can find an application online at the District Court’s website. Applications must be received or postmarked by July 14, 2010.

 

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVANCED SEARCH
Sponsored by

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Indiana State Bar Association

Indianapolis Bar Association

Evansville Bar Association

Allen County Bar Association

Indiana Lawyer on Facebook

facebook
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer

  1. Judge Roger B. Cosbey is unethical and bias toward African American who seeks justice in Title VII claims. He disrespected and used his authority to attempt to intimidate me into taking an unfair settlement and when I refused he proceeded to get my case dismissed and to deny me my Constitutional and Civil Rights. He disobeying several rules of law; specifically, by ruling on summary judgment motions against the Fed. R. Civ. P., without authority of Judge William C. Lee, without consent of the attorneys, and with conspiracy to commit “fraud on the court,” as he conspired with my former attorney. He proved to me that he is bias, unethical, unfair and unfit to be reappointed. In my opinion, he should be disbarred in 2013, for committing fraud on the court, which would make him ineligible for reinstatement in 2014. See docket 3:07 cv 629 where he rules on dispositive motions, knowing magistrates are not vested with that power (especially without consent), grants the defendant an unconscionable number of extensions, accepts my former attorney request for extension for dispositive motion knowing he was working with the opposition, and unbelievably grants the defendant another extension after he requested an extension after he missed the deadline. I know another attorney filed charges against him for bias in race discrimination case(s). I know what he did in my case before he voluntarily recused himself, I just do not know how many other innocent people have been stripped of their rights because of him. I say shame on him and no more of the same.

  2. they are pushing these cases against lawyers too far. thought-crime.

  3. vagueness cannot challenged, so let's write all laws vaguely and throw the constitution out the window.Even if the court is operating under a particular law, if they don't it they will change it to their liking. What a joke!!!

  4. Two convictions becomes one conviction with exactly the same sentence, only it is not clear wheter or not that sentence will be 18 months, 120 months or 138 months. Actually if the guns were in a home, whether or not they were his, he is protected under the 2nd amendment. Jurors need to learn the law and the constitution before judging others. The cour5ts need to do this as well.

  5. With all due respect, Rick, I think you probably would be making a mistake by going to law school. The job market for attorneys is so saturated, you may well find yourself unemployed and with a lot of debt. You mention law would be a good supplement to your skills. True. But employers unfortunately don't value that. You will find that a law degree may well pigeonhole you into an attorney slot and limit career options. If you have a good job now I would hold onto that. As an attorney, you may well end up making less with the aforementioned debt.

ADVERTISEMENT