Power of attorney, Allen County magistrate bills ready for enrollment

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Legislation that deals with power of attorney and that would give Allen Circuit Court a second full-time magistrate have made it through both houses of the Indiana Legislature.

Senate Bill 157 will allow for copies of a power of attorney to have the same force and effect as the original as long as the person granting the power of attorney certifies that the copy is correct and true. The bill also asks the Legislative Council to take a look at issues related to POA during the 2012 legislative interim. SB 152 allows for the Allen Circuit judge to appoint a second full-time magistrate beginning July 1, 2013. The bill repeals the judge’s authority to appoint a hearing officer who has the powers of a magistrate.

SB 97, which looks to narrow the scope of Indiana’s public intoxication law, is being considered by a conference committee. The bill will address the issues that arose in Moore v. State, in which the Indiana Supreme court reinstated the public intoxication conviction of a woman who was riding in her car that was being driven by a sober driver. The car was pulled over and police discovered the driver didn’t have a valid license. When Brenda Moore couldn’t drive the car because of her state of intoxication, police arrested her for public intoxication.

The legislation says that someone can’t be convicted of public intoxication unless the person endangers his or her own life, someone else’s life, or is likely to disturb the peace, create a disturbance, or harass someone else.

Another bill inspired by a Supreme Court ruling – Barnes v. State – has passed third reading in the House and has been sent back to the Senate with amendments. SB 1 specifies that a person may use reasonable force against any other person – including law enforcement – in certain circumstances.

SB 235, which would add a fee to address declining IOTLA funds, has stalled in the House Ways and Means Committee, but language was added to House Bill 1049 creating a $1 pro bono legal fee before July 1, 2020, that would go to the Indiana Bar Foundation. That bill, which also addresses courts, the inspector general and protection orders, is back in the House for consideration.

Legislation that would phase out Indiana’s inheritance tax, SB 293, has passed the House and been sent back to the Senate with amendments. SB 18, which dictates that a parent no longer has to provide child support after a child turns 19, is also back in the Senate with amendments.

Thus far, Gov. Mitch Daniels has received 26 enrolled acts this session and signed 18. To view the status of these or any other bills, visit the General Assembly’s bill watch page.


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. We do not have 10% of our population (which would mean about 32 million) incarcerated. It's closer to 2%.

  2. If a class action suit or other manner of retribution is possible, count me in. I have email and voicemail from the man. He colluded with opposing counsel, I am certain. My case was damaged so severely it nearly lost me everything and I am still paying dearly.

  3. There's probably a lot of blame that can be cast around for Indiana Tech's abysmal bar passage rate this last February. The folks who decided that Indiana, a state with roughly 16,000 to 18,000 attorneys, needs a fifth law school need to question the motives that drove their support of this project. Others, who have been "strong supporters" of the law school, should likewise ask themselves why they believe this institution should be supported. Is it because it fills some real need in the state? Or is it, instead, nothing more than a resume builder for those who teach there part-time? And others who make excuses for the students' poor performance, especially those who offer nothing more than conspiracy theories to back up their claims--who are they helping? What evidence do they have to support their posturing? Ultimately, though, like most everything in life, whether one succeeds or fails is entirely within one's own hands. At least one student from Indiana Tech proved this when he/she took and passed the February bar. A second Indiana Tech student proved this when they took the bar in another state and passed. As for the remaining 9 who took the bar and didn't pass (apparently, one of the students successfully appealed his/her original score), it's now up to them (and nobody else) to ensure that they pass on their second attempt. These folks should feel no shame; many currently successful practicing attorneys failed the bar exam on their first try. These same attorneys picked themselves up, dusted themselves off, and got back to the rigorous study needed to ensure they would pass on their second go 'round. This is what the Indiana Tech students who didn't pass the first time need to do. Of course, none of this answers such questions as whether Indiana Tech should be accredited by the ABA, whether the school should keep its doors open, or, most importantly, whether it should have even opened its doors in the first place. Those who promoted the idea of a fifth law school in Indiana need to do a lot of soul-searching regarding their decisions. These same people should never be allowed, again, to have a say about the future of legal education in this state or anywhere else. Indiana already has four law schools. That's probably one more than it really needs. But it's more than enough.

  4. This man Steve Hubbard goes on any online post or forum he can find and tries to push his company. He said court reporters would be obsolete a few years ago, yet here we are. How does he have time to search out every single post about court reporters and even spy in private court reporting forums if his company is so successful???? Dude, get a life. And back to what this post was about, I agree that some national firms cause a huge problem.

  5. rensselaer imdiana is doing same thing to children from the judge to attorney and dfs staff they need to be investigated as well