ILNews

Rush to take lead on proposed Commission on Children, juvenile panels

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Justice Loretta Rush is poised to take a leading position on matters of juvenile law and head a proposed Indiana Commission on Children, according to an order of the Indiana Supreme Court issued Tuesday.

Rush, who was sworn in during a private ceremony Nov. 7, will serve as the court’s liaison to the Juvenile Justice Improvement Committee and Problem Solving Courts Committee of the Judicial Conference, according to the assignment of judicial duties contained in the order. Rush also will lead the State Board of Law Examiners.

Chief Justice Brent Dickson will remain the court liaison to the Division of Supreme Court Administration and Division of State Court Administration and the Indiana Judicial Center. He also will continue to chair the commissions on Judicial Nomination and Judicial Qualifications.

The order redistributes liaison and chair positions to the agencies, boards, commissions and task forces under Indiana Supreme Court Administrative Rule 4(B).

Responsibilities of remaining justices are as follows:

Justice Steven David: Chair of the Records Management Committee and liaison to the Disciplinary Commission and to the Strategic Planning Committee and Education Committee of the Judicial Conference.

Justice Mark Massa: Chair of the Judicial Technology and Automation Committee and liaison for appellate court and agency technology oversight.

Justice Robert Rucker: Chair of the Task Force on Access by Persons with Limited English Proficiency and liaison to the Commission for Continuing Legal Education and the Judges and Lawyers Assistance Program.

The order is the first redesignation of responsibilities to a full court since the departure of former Chief Justice Randall Shepard and former Justice Frank Sullivan.

Rush’s formal, public swearing in ceremony will be Dec. 28.


 

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. IF the Right to Vote is indeed a Right, then it is a RIGHT. That is the same for ALL eligible and properly registered voters. And this is, being able to cast one's vote - until the minute before the polls close in one's assigned precinct. NOT days before by absentee ballot, and NOT 9 miles from one's house (where it might be a burden to get to in time). I personally wait until the last minute to get in line. Because you never know what happens. THAT is my right, and that is Mr. Valenti's. If it is truly so horrible to let him on school grounds (exactly how many children are harmed by those required to register, on school grounds, on election day - seriously!), then move the polling place to a different location. For ALL voters in that precinct. Problem solved.

  2. "associates are becoming more mercenary. The path to partnership has become longer and more difficult so they are chasing short-term gains like high compensation." GOOD FOR THEM! HELL THERE OUGHT TO BE A UNION!

  3. Let's be honest. A glut of lawyers out there, because law schools have overproduced them. Law schools dont care, and big law loves it. So the firms can afford to underpay them. Typical capitalist situation. Wages have grown slowly for entry level lawyers the past 25 years it seems. Just like the rest of our economy. Might as well become a welder. Oh and the big money is mostly reserved for those who can log huge hours and will cut corners to get things handled. More capitalist joy. So the answer coming from the experts is to "capitalize" more competition from nonlawyers, and robots. ie "expert systems." One even hears talk of "offshoring" some legal work. thus undercutting the workers even more. And they wonder why people have been pulling for Bernie and Trump. Hello fools, it's not just the "working class" it's the overly educated suffering too.

  4. And with a whimpering hissy fit the charade came to an end ... http://baltimore.cbslocal.com/2016/07/27/all-charges-dropped-against-all-remaining-officers-in-freddie-gray-case/ WHISTLEBLOWERS are needed more than ever in a time such as this ... when politics trump justice and emotions trump reason. Blue Lives Matter.

  5. "pedigree"? I never knew that in order to become a successful or, for that matter, a talented attorney, one needs to have come from good stock. What should raise eyebrows even more than the starting associates' pay at this firm (and ones like it) is the belief systems they subscribe to re who is and isn't "fit" to practice law with them. Incredible the arrogance that exists throughout the practice of law in this country, especially at firms like this one.

ADVERTISEMENT