No opinions for 3rd day in a row

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

The Indiana Court of Appeals has not had any published or unpublished opinions posted online since May 6.

Don’t worry. That’s not a glitch, and the state’s appellate judges aren’t slacking.

Appellate Clerk Kevin Smith said no glitches were preventing opinions from being posted online. There just haven’t been any opinions ready to be handed down recently, he said.

Chief Judge John G. Baker said there’s nothing to worry about.

This year, the state-marked holiday for primary election day May 4 combined with the appellate court’s arguments scheduled outside Indianapolis meant that no opinions were circulated as usual last week. Opinions are typically posted about a week after they are circulated internally for review by the judges sitting on the court panels, but that didn’t happen last week and meant a lapse in finalized rulings, Chief Judge Baker said.

“April was slammed, and we had two teams on the road every week,” the chief judge said, noting the court’s had 23 traveling arguments so far this year.

The court’s oral argument website page shows that judges heard arguments in Evansville on primary day, in West Lafayette Wednesday, and in Wheatfield Friday.

For those watching appellate opinions online, the chief judge also noted that Wednesday might likely only produce one opinion. But he said this time of year usually produces fewer opinions being posted, even though judges are continuing their work.

In the five past years, the first week of May – even those when the state paused for primary elections – has produced appellate opinions. The court’s opinion page shows that 27 opinions came down in 2009 during the first week of the month not counting primary election day; 67 in 2008, 57 in 2007, and 10 in 2006.



Post a comment to this story

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
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. This is ridiculous. Most JDs not practicing law don't know squat to justify calling themselves a lawyer. Maybe they should try visiting the inside of a courtroom before they go around calling themselves lawyers. This kind of promotional BS just increases the volume of people with JDs that are underqualified thereby dragging all the rest of us down likewise.

  2. I think it is safe to say that those Hoosier's with the most confidence in the Indiana judicial system are those Hoosier's who have never had the displeasure of dealing with the Hoosier court system.

  3. I have an open CHINS case I failed a urine screen I have since got clean completed IOP classes now in after care passed home inspection my x sister in law has my children I still don't even have unsupervised when I have been clean for over 4 months my x sister wants to keep the lids for good n has my case working with her I just discovered n have proof that at one of my hearing dcs case worker stated in court to the judge that a screen was dirty which caused me not to have unsupervised this was at the beginning two weeks after my initial screen I thought the weed could have still been in my system was upset because they were suppose to check levels n see if it was going down since this was only a few weeks after initial instead they said dirty I recently requested all of my screens from redwood because I take prescriptions that will show up n I was having my doctor look at levels to verify that matched what I was prescripted because dcs case worker accused me of abuseing when I got my screens I found out that screen I took that dcs case worker stated in court to judge that caused me to not get granted unsupervised was actually negative what can I do about this this is a serious issue saying a parent failed a screen in court to judge when they didn't please advise

  4. I have a degree at law, recent MS in regulatory studies. Licensed in KS, admitted b4 S& 7th circuit, but not to Indiana bar due to political correctness. Blacklisted, nearly unemployable due to hostile state action. Big Idea: Headwinds can overcome, esp for those not within the contours of the bell curve, the Lego Movie happiness set forth above. That said, even without the blacklisting for holding ideas unacceptable to the Glorious State, I think the idea presented above that a law degree open many vistas other than being a galley slave to elitist lawyers is pretty much laughable. (Did the law professors of Indiana pay for this to be published?)

  5. Joe, you might want to do some reading on the fate of Hoosier whistleblowers before you get your expectations raised up.