ILNews

Public input wanted on proposed changes to court rules

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

The Indiana Supreme Court wants to hear from judges, attorneys and the general public as it considers possible changes to court rules.

A nine-member Committee on Rules of Practice and Procedure was created by the court to conduct a continuous study of the Indiana Rules of Trial Procedure along with other rules as directed.

The rule changes being considered include the:
•    Wavier of Counsel by Juveniles (procedure before a child can say he/she does not want an attorney);
•    Electronically Filed Briefs (two proposals for submitting electronic briefs);
•    Small Claims Venue (brings township small claims court venue rules in line with similar courts); and
•    Rules of Evidence (revisions to increase conformity between Indiana’s Rules and Federal Rules).

The complete list of rule changes with descriptions can be viewed here. 

Public comments about the proposed rule changes will be taken until June 5, 2013. Comments can be sent via email to RulesComments@courts.in.gov or in writing to Lilia G. Judson, Indiana Supreme Court, Division of State Court Administration, 30 S. Meridian St., Suite 500, Indianapolis, IN 46204.


 

ADVERTISEMENT

  • proposed small claims rule change
    The proposed change would appear to make a mistaken filing in an improper township a violation of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act. The rule should state that venue is proper in any township in the county but state in what township preferred venue lies.

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. What is this, the Ind Supreme Court thinking that there is a separation of powers and limited enumerated powers as delegated by a dusty old document? Such eighteen century thinking, so rare and unwanted by the elites in this modern age. Dictate to us, dictate over us, the massess are chanting! George Soros agrees. Time to change with times Ind Supreme Court, says all President Snows. Rule by executive decree is the new black.

  2. I made the same argument before a commission of the Indiana Supreme Court and then to the fedeal district and federal appellate courts. Fell flat. So very glad to read that some judges still beleive that evidentiary foundations matter.

  3. KUDOS to the Indiana Supreme Court for realizing that some bureacracies need to go to the stake. Recall what RWR said: "No government ever voluntarily reduces itself in size. Government programs, once launched, never disappear. Actually, a government bureau is the nearest thing to eternal life we'll ever see on this earth!" NOW ... what next to this rare and inspiring chopping block? Well, the Commission on Gender and Race (but not religion!?!) is way overdue. And some other Board's could be cut with a positive for State and the reputation of the Indiana judiciary.

  4. During a visit where an informant with police wears audio and video, does the video necessary have to show hand to hand transaction of money and narcotics?

  5. I will agree with that as soon as law schools stop lying to prospective students about salaries and employment opportunities in the legal profession. There is no defense to the fraudulent numbers first year salaries they post to mislead people into going to law school.

ADVERTISEMENT