Otte to retire as S.D. bankruptcy judge

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Judge Frank J. Otte will retire at the end of 2014 after 28 years on the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of Indiana.

Otte was appointed to his first 14-year term in 1986. The court announced Otte’s retirement Monday and said a private celebration in honor would take place Friday.
“The bankruptcy bench and bar have been fortunate to have had the steady leadership and thoughtful jurisprudence of Judge Frank J. Otte for the past 28 years,” Chief Judge Robyn Moberly said. “Most of the practitioners in our court cannot recall a time when Judge Otte wasn’t on the bench. He guided many young bankruptcy lawyers to become outstanding practitioners, and he’s been a wonderful mentor to each of the other bankruptcy judges. … We are so fortunate to count him as a colleague and a good friend.”

Otte practiced privately after graduating from Indiana University Maurer School of Law in 1966 until his appointment to the bankruptcy court. He served in the Army for three years after earning a bachelor’s degree from IU in 1960.

Otte’s retirement from the court this year will be the second departure this year of a longtime judge from the court with six presiding jurists. Judge James Coachys retired from the court Sept. 30.



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. 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., 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.