ILNews

Senior Judge Jonathan Robertson dies

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

The Indiana Court of Appeals has lost a former chief judge who had authored more majority opinions than any of his colleagues during his nearly three decades on the appellate bench.

Judge Jonathan J. Robertson, 76, died about 5:20 p.m. Monday at his home in southern Indiana. He had been diagnosed about four months ago with lung cancer, according to his son, Joe Robertson. The legal community is remembering a man who served his country in the military and public service, and who always kept a sense of humor and had the ability to make everyone smile.

"He was a true patriot who loved his state, country, family, and the law," said Indiana Court of Appeals Chief Judge John G. Baker, a friend who has known the family for more than 30 years. "He was really a quiet cheerleader for all that's good in our business."

Born in Jackson County, Judge Robertson earned his law degree from Vanderbilt University School of Law in 1961 and practiced privately in Seymour until becoming a prosecuting attorney for Jackson County. He served as counsel to the Indiana House of Representatives for a year in 1963, and in 1965 became Jackson Circuit judge until his election to the appellate bench in 1970.

Judge Robertson was part of the last group of appellate jurists to be elected before a constitutional change converted Indiana to a merit selection system in 1971. Since then, he was retained by retention vote three times.

During his time on the Indiana Court of Appeals, Judge Robertson served as chief judge from 1975 to 1978, and was widely seen as one of the most prolific members of the court with his record-setting authoring of more than 3,000 majority opinions.

Judge Robertson partially retired from the appellate court in 1998, but continued serving as senior judge at that level and in southern Indiana's trial courts. His son said the judge had stopped serving at the trial level recently because of his illness, but that he'd continued working up to the end for the appellate court.

Prior to law school, Judge Robertson served in the U.S. Army from 1954 to 1956. He was honorably discharged as a corporal.

His family, friends, and colleagues say they will remember his sense of humor and ability to make anyone smile.

"That sense of humor never left him," the judge's son said. "He always had a joke, always had something nice to say about someone. That will be a hallmark of his life."

Details are being finalized today for funeral services, but his son said a calling will take place Friday afternoon and evening at the Spurgeon Funeral Home in Brownstown. The funeral is expected to take place Saturday.

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. The ADA acts as a tax upon all for the benefit of a few. And, most importantly, the many have no individual say in whether they pay the tax. Those with handicaps suffered in military service should get a pass, but those who are handicapped by accident or birth do NOT deserve that pass. The drivel about "equal access" is spurious because the handicapped HAVE equal access, they just can't effectively use it. That is their problem, not society's. The burden to remediate should be that of those who seek the benefit of some social, constructional, or dimensional change, NOT society generally. Everybody wants to socialize the costs and concentrate the benefits of government intrusion so that they benefit and largely avoid the costs. This simply maintains the constant push to the slop trough, and explains, in part, why the nation is 20 trillion dollars in the hole.

  2. Hey 2 psychs is never enough, since it is statistically unlikely that three will ever agree on anything! New study admits this pseudo science is about as scientifically valid as astrology ... done by via fortune cookie ....John Ioannidis, professor of health research and policy at Stanford University, said the study was impressive and that its results had been eagerly awaited by the scientific community. “Sadly, the picture it paints - a 64% failure rate even among papers published in the best journals in the field - is not very nice about the current status of psychological science in general, and for fields like social psychology it is just devastating,” he said. http://www.theguardian.com/science/2015/aug/27/study-delivers-bleak-verdict-on-validity-of-psychology-experiment-results

  3. Indianapolis Bar Association President John Trimble and I are on the same page, but it is a very large page with plenty of room for others to join us. As my final Res Gestae article will express in more detail in a few days, the Great Recession hastened a fundamental and permanent sea change for the global legal service profession. Every state bar is facing the same existential questions that thrust the medical profession into national healthcare reform debates. The bench, bar, and law schools must comprehensively reconsider how we define the practice of law and what it means to access justice. If the three principals of the legal service profession do not recast the vision of their roles and responsibilities soon, the marketplace will dictate those roles and responsibilities without regard for the public interests that the legal profession professes to serve.

  4. I have met some highly placed bureaucrats who vehemently disagree, Mr. Smith. This is not your father's time in America. Some ideas are just too politically incorrect too allow spoken, says those who watch over us for the good of their concept of order.

  5. Lets talk about this without forgetting that Lawyers, too, have FREEDOM OF SPEECH AND ASSOCIATION

ADVERTISEMENT