ILNews

9 remain in running for Indiana Supreme Court

Back to TopE-mailPrint

Nearly three-quarters of the 34 attorneys who’d applied for an Indiana Supreme Court opening won’t get a second interview.

After two days of interviewing all the candidates, the Judicial Nominating Commission narrowed the full list of applicants to nine people after about two hours of deliberation behind closed doors on Wednesday. Those semi-finalists will return for second interviews July 30 before the seven-member commission chooses three names to forward on to Gov. Mitch Daniels to make the final appointment.

Whoever is chosen will succeed Justice Theodore R. Boehm, who announced earlier this year his plans to retire Sept. 30.

The semi-finalist group is made up of four women and five men, who in their professional legal roles offer a variety of experiences: four are trial judges, two are big firm private practitioners, one is a law school general counsel, one is a state senator, and one is the state’s solicitor general. Semi-finalists are:

Indianapolis attorney Ellen E. Boshkoff, a partner at law firm Baker & Daniels for more than a decade and who’s been in practice for more than 20 years.

Boone Circuit Judge Steve David, who’s been on the bench since 1995 and has had an active career with the Army Reserves.

Bloomington attorney Kiply S. Drew, who has served as associate general counsel at Indiana University in Bloomington since 1994.

Johnson Superior Judge Cynthia S. Emkes, who’s been on the bench since 1987 after serving as a magistrate and working in private practice.

Thomas M. Fisher, who has been Indiana's solicitor general since the office’s creation in 2005 and has worked in the Attorney General’s Office. Before joining the AG, he worked at Baker & Daniels in Indianapolis and also Jones Day in Washington, D.C., following a clerkship at the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals.

Marion Superior Judge Robyn L. Moberly, who’s been on the bench since 1997 and had worked as a commissioner after being in private practice.

Indianapolis attorney Karl L. Mulvaney, who’s been practicing since 1977 and is an appellate attorney with Bingham McHale. He previously served as Indiana Supreme Court administrator from 1984 to 1991.

Hamilton Superior Judge Steven R. Nation, who has been on the bench since 1995 and previously served as Hamilton County prosecutor.

State Sen. Brent E. Steele, R-Bedford, who’s served in both the House and Senate and works an attorney with the law office of Steele & Steele.

Following a unanimous public vote on the semi-finalists, Chief Justice Randall T. Shepard, who chairs the commission, said that he initially expected fewer semi-finalists than the number chosen, but it was a direct result of having so many highly qualified applicants to draw from.
 

ADVERTISEMENT

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