ILNews

Pyle: COA appointment an ‘awesome honor’

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Gov. Mitch Daniels Tuesday appointed Madison Circuit Judge Rudolph Pyle III to the Indiana Court of Appeals, filling a vacancy left by Pyle’s mentor, Judge Carr Darden.

Pyle said it is an “awesome honor” to be selected as an appellate judge, and “it’s not every day you are able to walk in the steps of your mentor.”

Pyle, 42, was a law clerk for Darden from 2000 to 2004. Daniels’ last appellate appointment, Justice Mark Massa, also clerked for the man he replaced, former Chief Justice Randall Shepard.

Daniels described Pyle as a fun, energetic and competent judge. He told the story of when Daniels appointed Pyle to Madison Circuit Court in October 2009.

“When we introduced (Pyle) as Circuit judge, before we adjourned to the traditional reception and celebration, Pyle insisted on presiding on his first case,” Daniels said. Pyle adjudicated an adoption.

While Madison Circuit judge, he managed a docket of criminal and civil cases and instituted technological improvements to the courtroom. He also created a public service campaign to increase community support for jury trials.

Before becoming a judge, Pyle was a deputy prosecutor in Madison County and later was in private practice, focusing on trial and appellate advocacy. Pyle also has the distinction of being the first Indiana state trooper to be appointed to the state’s top courts, Daniels said.

Pyle was a trooper before becoming an attorney. He said that experience can give him additional perspective in criminal cases, as he will expect law enforcement to live up to their professional standards.

Pyle’s robing ceremony will be held at a later date determined by the court.

The other finalists for the COA vacancy were Marion Superior Judge Robert Altice Jr. and appellate attorney Patricia Caress McMath.

 

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. I gave tempparry guardship to a friend of my granddaughter in 2012. I went to prison. I had custody. My daughter went to prison to. We are out. My daughter gave me custody but can get her back. She was not order to give me custody . but now we want granddaughter back from friend. She's 14 now. What rights do we have

  2. This sure is not what most who value good governance consider the Rule of Law to entail: "In a letter dated March 2, which Brizzi forwarded to IBJ, the commission dismissed the grievance “on grounds that there is not reasonable cause to believe that you are guilty of misconduct.”" Yet two month later reasonable cause does exist? (Or is the commission forging ahead, the need for reasonable belief be damned? -- A seeming violation of the Rules of Profession Ethics on the part of the commission) Could the rule of law theory cause one to believe that an explanation is in order? Could it be that Hoosier attorneys live under Imperial Law (which is also a t-word that rhymes with infamy) in which the Platonic guardians can do no wrong and never owe the plebeian class any explanation for their powerful actions. (Might makes it right?) Could this be a case of politics directing the commission, as celebrated IU Mauer Professor (the late) Patrick Baude warned was happening 20 years ago in his controversial (whisteblowing) ethics lecture on a quite similar topic: http://www.repository.law.indiana.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1498&context=ilj

  3. I have a case presently pending cert review before the SCOTUS that reveals just how Indiana regulates the bar. I have been denied licensure for life for holding the wrong views and questioning the grand inquisitors as to their duties as to state and federal constitutional due process. True story: https://www.scribd.com/doc/299040839/2016Petitionforcert-to-SCOTUS Shorter, Amici brief serving to frame issue as misuse of govt licensure: https://www.scribd.com/doc/312841269/Thomas-More-Society-Amicus-Brown-v-Ind-Bd-of-Law-Examiners

  4. Here's an idea...how about we MORE heavily regulate the law schools to reduce the surplus of graduates, driving starting salaries up for those new grads, so that we can all pay our insane amount of student loans off in a reasonable amount of time and then be able to afford to do pro bono & low-fee work? I've got friends in other industries, radiology for example, and their schools accept a very limited number of students so there will never be a glut of new grads and everyone's pay stays high. For example, my radiologist friend's school accepted just six new students per year.

  5. I totally agree with John Smith.

ADVERTISEMENT