ILNews

Norman Metzger praised for longtime leadership at ILS

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Like many young adults in the 1960s, Norman Metzger was inspired by the belief that it is possible to change the world.

After a lifetime in public service, the 75-year-old attorney has never lost his passion to make things better for those who have little means and often no voice.

Metzger has led Indiana Legal Services Inc. for 44 years as it upended the status quo by demanding equal justice for the poor. He recently decided he had stayed long enough and announced his decision to retire. The idealism that first drove him to legal aid is still burning.

“We really did and still do make a difference,” Metzger said. “You can bring out rulings by the court that reform the law to such a point that it changes everything.”

metzger-15col.jpg Indiana Legal Services Inc. Executive Director Norman Metzger (center), conferring with staff member Ida Hayes (left), and staff attorney Tracy Pappas (right), will retire in March after 44 years at the agency.(IL Photo/Eric Learned)

Reform

When Metzger took over the helm of ILS in 1970, he added cases that sought to reform the law.

The organization brought class actions against the then-Indiana Welfare Department, challenging the state’s residency requirements and man-in-the-house rule. It also brought lawsuits on behalf of inmates in Indiana state prisons, including one that argued the cold indoor temperature at the Michigan City facility in the winter constituted cruel and inhuman punishment.

On his second day as an attorney at the organization in the early 1970s, Ron Elberger flew to Chicago to file an interlocutory appeal with the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals. The ILS had filed a complaint and motion for temporary restraining order against the state’s ejectment bond statute. Three District Court judges in the Southern District of Indiana had refused to take up the case, one insisting he did not want to hear a matter about social legislation.

Elberger and the late John Manning secured an injunction and an order from the 7th Circuit that the lower court must hear the case. Eventually, ILS convinced the District Court the statute was unconstitutional, and the state law was repealed.

“It was a time when reform took on real meaning,” Elberger, now a partner at Bose McKinney & Evans LLP, said. “When you could file a suit on behalf of an indigent client and get results.”

Metzger’s sense of social responsibility was nurtured as an undergraduate at Manchester University and as a law student at the University of Michigan. Receiving his J.D. degree about six months after President John F. Kennedy was assassinated, the Larwill native joined the Peace Corps and spent the next three years in Ethiopia. Coming back to Indiana, he thought he would settle into practice in Fort Wayne. Instead, he accepted the position of director of Fort Wayne Legal Aid in 1968. Two years later, he moved to Indianapolis to become the executive director of ILS’ precursor, Legal Services Organization of Indianapolis.

Metzger said he felt like he was part of a movement to bring equal justice to America. President Lyndon Johnson declared a war on poverty, President Richard Nixon signed the law that created the national Legal Services Corp. and President Jimmy Carter pushed for legal aid programs to be established in every county of the United States.

“There was so much you could do with the Civil Rights Act, the Constitution and federal law and the 14th Amendment,” Metzger explained. “There was just a lot of things happening with legal aid all across the country and it was just amazing and reassuring to see the courts, when they were given the opportunity of deciding cases like we were bringing, they would rule in favor of our poor people clients.”

elberger-ron-mug Elberger

Resistance

Despite the initiatives from the White House, legal aid was given a rude welcome at the local level.

Louis Rosenberg, now a Marion Circuit Court judge, joined ILS in 1970. He described the office as ground zero in a war. All quarters of the community, including the bar and some judges, opposed the organization.

In fact, one editorial in the local newspaper specifically invited Rosenberg to leave the city, labeling him a federally paid provocateur.

ILS was unpopular because it was going against the status quo, Rosenberg said. Most of the cases the organization brought were significant and very controversial, regularly winning constitutional challenges against state agencies.

Ivan Bodensteiner, the first attorney Metzger ever hired, also noted the backlash but said Metzger ran interference by courting attorneys to serve on the organization’s board. Metzger did not shy away from hot-button cases, and he did not want his attorneys ignoring their clients’ claims.

“It was exciting because you were dealing in an area of the law that had been ignored for many, many years,” Bodensteiner, now a professor and former dean of Valparaiso University Law School, said.

rosenberg-louis-mug Rosenberg

“He was able to see beyond the controversy to see what it takes to establish legal services as a viable part of the community,” Rosenberg said of Metzger. “He supported the attorneys who were acting in good faith and within the law.”

The 1980s and subsequent years brought a different kind of resistance.

First, federal money for legal aid was cut, forcing Metzger to close six ILS offices. When Legal Services Corp. decided to give funding to only one legal aid agency in each state, Metzger had to merge ILS with Legal Services of Northwest Indiana Inc. in Gary and Legal Services Program of Northern Indiana Inc. in South Bend and Lafayette.

During the 1990s, Congress barred legal aid offices from lobbying and, particularly hurtful for ILS, filing class-action lawsuits.

“We went through a long period of adjustment where we had to figure out how to remain significant and how case-to-case litigation, as opposed to class action, could be just as effective in helping poor people,” Metzger said.

The organization designed a new strategy that has been successful in setting precedent with the rulings won in single cases. Specifically, he pointed to an individual lawsuit that mandated parents and children in Children In Need of Services cases must be represented by attorneys and the lawsuit which established that individuals who are being involuntarily committed to a mental institution have a right to legal representation.

Former ILS litigation director Ken Falk was frustrated when Congress truncated what legal services could do. To him, legal aid provided a means for the indigent to access justice and that access should encompass all remedies, including administrative judgments, class actions, individual lawsuits, legislative lobbying and community outreach.

As a fresh graduate of Columbia Law School, Falk was persuaded by Metzger to move from Manhattan to Indiana to work at ILS in the 1970s. In the mid-1990s, he left to join the American Civil Liberties Union of Indiana where he is now legal director.

Falk remains a “big fan” of Metzger. He credits his former boss with always supporting the attorneys and never letting them feel like they were second-rate because they represented low-income clients and did not make as much money as private practitioners.

Right time to retire

Metzger’s vision for running a legal services agency, he said, was to “hire the best people you can, do a national search, bring them in here, and then get out of their way because you’d be surprised what bright, young, vigorous, energetic people will do on their own.”

After four decades of getting out of the way, Metzger said this is the right time to retire.

The ILS is looking for more office space to make room for the new attorneys who are coming onboard. And with an influx of new federal dollars, ILS has started contracting with private attorneys to provide legal services in rural areas and has created a fellowship program to help the agency develop new services.

“Unless I’m missing something, the time is just about exactly right for me to retire,” Metzger said.

His last day at ILS will be March 31, 2015.

Reflecting on his tenure, Metzger praised the attorneys who joined ILS, applauded the work the agency has done, and showed his optimism remains strong.

“Watching the justice system work has always been amazing to me,” Metzger said, “because if you give it the chance to work, God bless it, it often works.”•

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. Applause, applause, applause ..... but, is this duty to serve the constitutional order not much more incumbent upon the State, whose only aim is to be pure and unadulterated justice, than defense counsel, who is also charged with gaining a result for a client? I agree both are responsible, but it seems to me that the government attorneys bear a burden much heavier than defense counsel .... "“I note, much as we did in Mechling v. State, 16 N.E.3d 1015 (Ind. Ct. App. 2014), trans. denied, that the attorneys representing the State and the defendant are both officers of the court and have a responsibility to correct any obvious errors at the time they are committed."

  2. Do I have to hire an attorney to get co-guardianship of my brother? My father has guardianship and my older sister was his co-guardian until this Dec 2014 when she passed and my father was me to go on as the co-guardian, but funds are limit and we need to get this process taken care of quickly as our fathers health isn't the greatest. So please advise me if there is anyway to do this our self or if it requires a lawyer? Thank you

  3. I have been on this program while on parole from 2011-2013. No person should be forced mentally to share private details of their personal life with total strangers. Also giving permission for a mental therapist to report to your parole agent that your not participating in group therapy because you don't have the financial mean to be in the group therapy. I was personally singled out and sent back three times for not having money and also sent back within the six month when you aren't to be sent according to state law. I will work to het this INSOMM's removed from this state. I also had twelve or thirteen parole agents with a fifteen month period. Thanks for your time.

  4. Our nation produces very few jurists of the caliber of Justice DOUGLAS and his peers these days. Here is that great civil libertarian, who recognized government as both a blessing and, when corrupted by ideological interests, a curse: "Once the investigator has only the conscience of government as a guide, the conscience can become ‘ravenous,’ as Cromwell, bent on destroying Thomas More, said in Bolt, A Man For All Seasons (1960), p. 120. The First Amendment mirrors many episodes where men, harried and harassed by government, sought refuge in their conscience, as these lines of Thomas More show: ‘MORE: And when we stand before God, and you are sent to Paradise for doing according to your conscience, *575 and I am damned for not doing according to mine, will you come with me, for fellowship? ‘CRANMER: So those of us whose names are there are damned, Sir Thomas? ‘MORE: I don't know, Your Grace. I have no window to look into another man's conscience. I condemn no one. ‘CRANMER: Then the matter is capable of question? ‘MORE: Certainly. ‘CRANMER: But that you owe obedience to your King is not capable of question. So weigh a doubt against a certainty—and sign. ‘MORE: Some men think the Earth is round, others think it flat; it is a matter capable of question. But if it is flat, will the King's command make it round? And if it is round, will the King's command flatten it? No, I will not sign.’ Id., pp. 132—133. DOUGLAS THEN WROTE: Where government is the Big Brother,11 privacy gives way to surveillance. **909 But our commitment is otherwise. *576 By the First Amendment we have staked our security on freedom to promote a multiplicity of ideas, to associate at will with kindred spirits, and to defy governmental intrusion into these precincts" Gibson v. Florida Legislative Investigation Comm., 372 U.S. 539, 574-76, 83 S. Ct. 889, 908-09, 9 L. Ed. 2d 929 (1963) Mr. Justice DOUGLAS, concurring. I write: Happy Memorial Day to all -- God please bless our fallen who lived and died to preserve constitutional governance in our wonderful series of Republics. And God open the eyes of those government officials who denounce the constitutions of these Republics by arbitrary actions arising out capricious motives.

  5. From back in the day before secularism got a stranglehold on Hoosier jurists comes this great excerpt via Indiana federal court judge Allan Sharp, dedicated to those many Indiana government attorneys (with whom I have dealt) who count the law as a mere tool, an optional tool that is not to be used when political correctness compels a more acceptable result than merely following the path that the law directs: ALLEN SHARP, District Judge. I. In a scene following a visit by Henry VIII to the home of Sir Thomas More, playwriter Robert Bolt puts the following words into the mouths of his characters: Margaret: Father, that man's bad. MORE: There is no law against that. ROPER: There is! God's law! MORE: Then God can arrest him. ROPER: Sophistication upon sophistication! MORE: No, sheer simplicity. The law, Roper, the law. I know what's legal not what's right. And I'll stick to what's legal. ROPER: Then you set man's law above God's! MORE: No, far below; but let me draw your attention to a fact I'm not God. The currents and eddies of right and wrong, which you find such plain sailing, I can't navigate. I'm no voyager. But in the thickets of law, oh, there I'm a forester. I doubt if there's a man alive who could follow me there, thank God... ALICE: (Exasperated, pointing after Rich) While you talk, he's gone! MORE: And go he should, if he was the Devil himself, until he broke the law! ROPER: So now you'd give the Devil benefit of law! MORE: Yes. What would you do? Cut a great road through the law to get after the Devil? ROPER: I'd cut down every law in England to do that! MORE: (Roused and excited) Oh? (Advances on Roper) And when the last law was down, and the Devil turned round on you where would you hide, Roper, the laws being flat? (He leaves *1257 him) This country's planted thick with laws from coast to coast man's laws, not God's and if you cut them down and you're just the man to do it d'you really think you would stand upright in the winds that would blow then? (Quietly) Yes, I'd give the Devil benefit of law, for my own safety's sake. ROPER: I have long suspected this; this is the golden calf; the law's your god. MORE: (Wearily) Oh, Roper, you're a fool, God's my god... (Rather bitterly) But I find him rather too (Very bitterly) subtle... I don't know where he is nor what he wants. ROPER: My God wants service, to the end and unremitting; nothing else! MORE: (Dryly) Are you sure that's God! He sounds like Moloch. But indeed it may be God And whoever hunts for me, Roper, God or Devil, will find me hiding in the thickets of the law! And I'll hide my daughter with me! Not hoist her up the mainmast of your seagoing principles! They put about too nimbly! (Exit More. They all look after him). Pgs. 65-67, A MAN FOR ALL SEASONS A Play in Two Acts, Robert Bolt, Random House, New York, 1960. Linley E. Pearson, Atty. Gen. of Indiana, Indianapolis, for defendants. Childs v. Duckworth, 509 F. Supp. 1254, 1256 (N.D. Ind. 1981) aff'd, 705 F.2d 915 (7th Cir. 1983)

ADVERTISEMENT