ILNews

Pence appoints Hurley to St. Joseph bench

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Gov. Mike Pence on Monday made his first appointment to the judiciary, announcing Elizabeth C. Hurley will fill a vacancy when St. Joseph Superior Judge Roland W. Chamblee retires March 31.

“I'm pleased to appoint Elizabeth Hurley to the St. Joseph Superior Court where she has already proven to be a valuable part of the court system,” Pence said in a statement. “She has the character, life experiences and professional skills that make her a good fit for the position. Undoubtedly, Judge Hurley will continue to be a strong leader when she assumes her new role as Superior Court Judge.”

Hurley became a magistrate in the St. Joseph Circuit Court in January 2012 after serving nine years in the county prosecutor’s office working with child support, family violence, and major crimes divisions. She serves on the Violence Fatality Review Team, Bench and Bar Committee and Civility Subcommittee of the St. Joseph County Bar Association.
 
Hurley earned her J.D. from Notre Dame University School of Law after graduating cum laude with a B.A. from Villanova University.

Other finalists for the position were Mary Catherine Andres, St. Joseph deputy prosecuting attorney; attorney Scott Duerring, Duerring Law Offices in South Bend; Andre B. Gammage, managing partner at Berger & Gammage in South Bend; and Jeffrey Lane Sanford, deputy public defender for St. Joseph County and deputy city attorney in South Bend.

Gammage, Sanford and Hurley also were among five finalists for another upcoming vacancy that will occur when St. Joseph Superior Chief Judge Michael P. Scopelitis retires in June. Other candidates for that vacancy are Steven L. Hostetler, a partner at Thorne Grodnik LLP; and Mark F. James, associate at Anderson Agostino & Keller P.C.

Finalists for that judicial position were selected March 19, and Pence has 60 days from formal notification of the finalists to name an appointee. The finalists were selected after interviews with the St. Joseph County Judicial Nominating Commission that consists of seven members – three attorneys and three non-attorneys and chaired by Justice Mark Massa.

 

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

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. Such things are no more elections than those in the late, unlamented Soviet Union.

  2. It appears the police and prosecutors are allowed to change the rules halfway through the game to suit themselves. I am surprised that the congress has not yet eliminated the right to a trial in cases involving any type of forensic evidence. That would suit their foolish law and order police state views. I say we eliminate the statute of limitations for crimes committed by members of congress and other government employees. Of course they would never do that. They are all corrupt cowards!!!

  3. Poor Judge Brown probably thought that by slavishly serving the godz of the age her violations of 18th century concepts like due process and the rule of law would be overlooked. Mayhaps she was merely a Judge ahead of her time?

  4. in a lawyer discipline case Judge Brown, now removed, was presiding over a hearing about a lawyer accused of the supposedly heinous ethical violation of saying the words "Illegal immigrant." (IN re Barker) http://www.in.gov/judiciary/files/order-discipline-2013-55S00-1008-DI-429.pdf .... I wonder if when we compare the egregious violations of due process by Judge Brown, to her chiding of another lawyer for politically incorrectness, if there are any conclusions to be drawn about what kind of person, what kind of judge, what kind of apparatchik, is busy implementing the agenda of political correctness and making off-limits legit advocacy about an adverse party in a suit whose illegal alien status is relevant? I am just asking the question, the reader can make own conclsuion. Oh wait-- did I use the wrong adjective-- let me rephrase that, um undocumented alien?

  5. of course the bigger questions of whether or not the people want to pay for ANY bussing is off limits, due to the Supreme Court protecting the people from DEMOCRACY. Several decades hence from desegregation and bussing plans and we STILL need to be taking all this taxpayer money to combat mostly-imagined "discrimination" in the most obviously failed social program of the postwar period.

ADVERTISEMENT