Senior judge accused of misconduct

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

The Indiana Commission on Judicial Qualifications has filed five charges against a senior judge and former LaPorte Superior Court judge, alleging he violated ethics rules while serving as an elected judge.

According to charges filed today, in 2001, Senior Judge Walter P. Chapala suspended 18 years of a 20-year sentence of a defendant in exchange for a $100,000 donation to two court programs from the defendant's father.

The second allegation stems from a 2004 case in which the judge, while presiding over the criminal case of his daughter-in-law's nephew, ordered the nephew released from a "hold" in Michigan relating to felony charges he faced in that state. After the LaPorte County Sheriff's Department lawfully returned the nephew to Michigan authorities, Senior Judge Chapala began contempt proceedings against the sheriff of LaPorte County. He dismissed the contempt only after the sheriff apologized to the judge. Despite the judge's relationship with the nephew, he continued to preside over the case.

In the five counts filed against the senior judge, he's accused of violating Cannons 1A and 2A of the Code of Judicial Conduct, which requires judges to uphold the integrity of the judicial office; Cannon 2B, which prohibits a judge from lending the prestige of the office to advance their own private interests or of others, and prohibits a judge from allowing family or other relationships to influence a judge's judicial conduct; Canon 3B(2), which requires judges to be faithful to the law and not be swayed by partisan interests; Canon 3B(8), which prohibits ex parte contacts; Canon 3B(9), which requires judges to dispose of all judicial matters fairly; and Canon 3E(1), which requires judges to disqualify themselves from proceedings when their impartiality may be questioned.

The counts also allege Senior Judge Chapala committed conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice and willful misconduct in office.

Bingham McHale attorney Kevin P. McGoff, who is representing Senior Judge Chapala, declined to discuss the charges, saying he just received them today. The judge has confidence in the process and he'll want to see it through, McGoff said.

Senior Judge Chapala took the bench in 1991 and became a senior judge in 2005. According to the Indiana Roll of Attorneys, he was admitted to practice in 1970. The senior judge has 20 days to file an answer to the charges and upon his filing, three masters will be appointed by the Indiana Supreme Court to conduct a public hearing on the charges.


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. This is ridiculous. Most JDs not practicing law don't know squat to justify calling themselves a lawyer. Maybe they should try visiting the inside of a courtroom before they go around calling themselves lawyers. This kind of promotional BS just increases the volume of people with JDs that are underqualified thereby dragging all the rest of us down likewise.

  2. I think it is safe to say that those Hoosier's with the most confidence in the Indiana judicial system are those Hoosier's who have never had the displeasure of dealing with the Hoosier court system.

  3. I have an open CHINS case I failed a urine screen I have since got clean completed IOP classes now in after care passed home inspection my x sister in law has my children I still don't even have unsupervised when I have been clean for over 4 months my x sister wants to keep the lids for good n has my case working with her I just discovered n have proof that at one of my hearing dcs case worker stated in court to the judge that a screen was dirty which caused me not to have unsupervised this was at the beginning two weeks after my initial screen I thought the weed could have still been in my system was upset because they were suppose to check levels n see if it was going down since this was only a few weeks after initial instead they said dirty I recently requested all of my screens from redwood because I take prescriptions that will show up n I was having my doctor look at levels to verify that matched what I was prescripted because dcs case worker accused me of abuseing when I got my screens I found out that screen I took that dcs case worker stated in court to judge that caused me to not get granted unsupervised was actually negative what can I do about this this is a serious issue saying a parent failed a screen in court to judge when they didn't please advise

  4. I have a degree at law, recent MS in regulatory studies. Licensed in KS, admitted b4 S& 7th circuit, but not to Indiana bar due to political correctness. Blacklisted, nearly unemployable due to hostile state action. Big Idea: Headwinds can overcome, esp for those not within the contours of the bell curve, the Lego Movie happiness set forth above. That said, even without the blacklisting for holding ideas unacceptable to the Glorious State, I think the idea presented above that a law degree open many vistas other than being a galley slave to elitist lawyers is pretty much laughable. (Did the law professors of Indiana pay for this to be published?)

  5. Joe, you might want to do some reading on the fate of Hoosier whistleblowers before you get your expectations raised up.