ILNews

Retired COA Judge William G. Conover dies

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Former Indiana Court of Appeals Judge William G. Conover died Monday in Valparaiso. He was 86.

Conover retired from the appellate court in 1993 after a legal career that spanned four decades. He served two more years as a senior judge. Judge Patricia Riley succeeded him on the appellate bench.

“Judge Conover was from a generation of people – the greatest generation – that took charge and got things done,” said Court of Appeals Judge John Baker, who served with Conover in the late 1980s and early 90s. “He was a good student of the law. From time to time he may have thought the law should have been different, but he applied it as he found it. He was a real asset to our court and the legal profession.”

Conover was a World War II veteran who served in the U.S. Navy’s construction battalion building and preparing airbases in the Pacific Ocean before being honorably discharged in 1946. After graduating from Valparaiso University School of Law in 1951, Conover became a Valparaiso City Court judge in 1952. Before joining the appellate bench, he maintained a general private practice and served in several public posts, including Porter County Plan Commission attorney and later as Porter County prosecutor from 1963 to 1971. His legal and community involvement included service as president of the Porter County Bar Association in 1965. Gov. Robert Orr appointed him to the appellate bench in 1981.

Arrangements are pending at Moeller Funeral Home in Valparaiso.

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