ILNews

New executive committee, talk of judicial complex

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

The trial courts in the state’s largest county have a new leadership lineup, and the Marion Superior Executive Committee has changed the time of its weekly business meetings. Its first meeting will bring up a much-discussed and significant concept of building a new judicial complex in Marion County.

Starting this week, the four-person executive committee has new members: Judge John Hanley takes over the presiding judge spot previously held by Judge Robert Altice, while Judges Becky Pierson-Treacy, David Certo, and Marc Rothenberg have taken the other spots. The executive committee’s current term runs through the end of 2012.

The executive committee also has changed the time it will meet each Friday to noon. This week will be the first meeting that begins at the new time.

On the agenda this week are budget, contract, and agreement matters, as well as discussion of a possible new judicial center for Marion County. The city, mayor and county sheriff have formed a task force to study the possibility of building a new judicial complex, which would take the place of the currently used City-County Building that opened in the early 1960s. The Greater Indianapolis Progress Committee (GIPC) is the lead agency and has hired consultants to assist on the study. A new complex is an initiative that the Indianapolis Bar Association has been involved in for years, and it’s created its own Judicial Center Task Force that has been conducting outreach to the public and legal community.

The weekly meetings are open to the public and held in the City-County Building located at 200 E. Washington St., in the 12th floor conference room.
 

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. Don't we have bigger issues to concern ourselves with?

  2. Anyone who takes the time to study disciplinary and bar admission cases in Indiana ... much of which is, as a matter of course and by intent, off the record, would have a very difficult time drawing lines that did not take into account things which are not supposed to matter, such as affiliations, associations, associates and the like. Justice Hoosier style is a far departure than what issues in most other parts of North America. (More like Central America, in fact.) See, e.g., http://www.theindianalawyer.com/indiana-attorney-illegally-practicing-in-florida-suspended-for-18-months/PARAMS/article/42200 When while the Indiana court system end the cruel practice of killing prophets of due process and those advocating for blind justice?

  3. Wouldn't this call for an investigation of Government corruption? Chief Justice Loretta Rush, wrote that the case warranted the high court’s review because the method the Indiana Court of Appeals used to reach its decision was “a significant departure from the law.” Specifically, David wrote that the appellate panel ruled after reweighing of the evidence, which is NOT permissible at the appellate level. **But yet, they look the other way while an innocent child was taken by a loving mother who did nothing wrong"

  4. Different rules for different folks....

  5. I would strongly suggest anyone seeking mediation check the experience of the mediator. There are retired judges who decide to become mediators. Their training and experience is in making rulings which is not the point of mediation.

ADVERTISEMENT