ILNews

New justice joins the Indiana Supreme Court

Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

The state now has its 106th justice on the Indiana Supreme Court.

Justice Steven H. David officially took his oath and donned his black robe for the state’s highest court today, culminating a process that began with a May announcement that Justice Theodore R. Boehm was stepping down from the bench. Gov. Mitch Daniels chose the 15-year Boone Circuit judge about a month ago.

“Governor Daniels, sir, what can I say to the person who picked me over so many qualified candidates to be number 106,” the new justice said this morning, moments after the governor administered the judicial oath and he put on the new robe for the first time and took a seat on the bench. “I haven’t got the tattoo yet but I intend to get one. It’ll go right over the gavel I have right now.”

Dozens packed the ornate third-floor courtroom inside the Statehouse for the ceremony, people from all ranks of the state and federal judiciary and other parts of the Indiana legal community. Among the dignitaries attending were former Justices Boehm and Myra Selby, who was the first and only female on that court during the 1990s before she returned to private practice.

As the ceremony began, the new justice’s portrait on the courtroom wall between Chief Justice Randall T. Shepard and Justice Robert D. Rucker was covered with a red curtain. After his robing and when Justice David actually joined the bench with his new colleagues, the curtain was removed to reveal his portrait.

When introducing those who’d speak about the new member, Chief Justice Shepard praised the merit-selection system that sets Indiana apart from many of its neighboring states that endure high-dollar and contentious judicial elections.

The governor pointed to the new justice’s extensive experience at the trial court level, corporate experience with Mayflower, private practice in Columbus, and his longtime service as a U.S. Army colonel and Judge Advocate General who’d represented detainees at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.

Nashville attorney James Reichert, who served as vice president of legal for Mayflower back when Justice David worked there, talked about his friend and colleague’s passion for running and his love for family, the latter demonstrated by the justice’s kidney donation to his niece.

Once the court recessed briefly, the justices all returned with the newly sworn in Justice David. During his speech, the Justice David frequently cited a diverse roster of historical quotes and musical lyrics ranging from Abraham Lincoln, John F. Kennedy, Oliver Wendell Holmes, John Mellencamp, Kenny Chesney, and other country-western singers that he noted were a favorite.

Wanting to be a lawyer since his childhood and a judge since the first day of law school, Justice David mentioned his judicial philosophy to those listening – including the governor, whom he apologized to for being “too late” following the interviews – and said it was humility, respect, fairness, and the rule of law. He also mentioned his love for family and juvenile cases and praised the civility and professionalism that the Supreme Court has demonstrated through the years.

“Every day I will do the best I can,” Justice David said, vowing to have respect for the executive and legislative branches and to always fight to protect the Indiana Constitution. “I have no agenda. I am not an ‘R’, I am not a ‘D’, I am not an ‘I’. I owe no one anything.”

One of his final notes during the ceremony was, “Life is a contact sport. You’ve got to play. You just can’t sit on the sidelines.”
 

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. The practitioners and judges who hail E-filing as the Saviour of the West need to contain their respective excitements. E-filing is federal court requires the practitioner to cram his motion practice into pigeonholes created by IT people. Compound motions or those seeking alternative relief are effectively barred, unless the practitioner wants to receive a tart note from some functionary admonishing about the "problem". E-filing is just another method by which courts and judges transfer their burden to practitioners, who are the really the only powerless components of the system. Of COURSE it is easier for the court to require all of its imput to conform to certain formats, but this imposition does NOT improve the quality of the practice of law and does NOT improve the ability of the practitioner to advocate for his client or to fashion pleadings that exactly conform to his client's best interests. And we should be very wary of the disingenuous pablum about the costs. The courts will find a way to stick it to the practitioner. Lake County is a VERY good example of this rapaciousness. Any one who does not believe this is invited to review the various special fees that system imposes upon practitioners- as practitioners- and upon each case ON TOP of the court costs normal in every case manually filed. Jurisprudence according to Aldous Huxley.

  2. Any attorneys who practice in federal court should be able to say the same as I can ... efiling is great. I have been doing it in fed court since it started way back. Pacer has its drawbacks, but the ability to hit an e-docket and pull up anything and everything onscreen is a huge plus for a litigator, eps the sole practitioner, who lacks a filing clerk and the paralegal support of large firms. Were I an Indiana attorney I would welcome this great step forward.

  3. Can we get full disclosure on lobbyist's payments to legislatures such as Mr Buck? AS long as there are idiots that are disrespectful of neighbors and intent on shooting fireworks every night, some kind of regulations are needed.

  4. I am the mother of the child in this case. My silence on the matter was due to the fact that I filed, both in Illinois and Indiana, child support cases. I even filed supporting documentation with the Indiana family law court. Not sure whether this information was provided to the court of appeals or not. Wish the case was done before moving to Indiana, because no matter what, there is NO WAY the state of Illinois would have allowed an appeal on a child support case!

  5. "No one is safe when the Legislature is in session."

ADVERTISEMENT