ILNews

Southern District names new magistrate

Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

The United States District Court for the Southern District of Indiana announced today the selection of Mark J. Dinsmore as magistrate judge. He fills the position vacated by Jane E. Magnus-Stinson, who was elevated to an Article III judgeship in June.
 

Dinsmore-mark-mug Dinsmore

A Magistrate Judge Merit Selection Committee chaired by retired Magistrate Judge V. Sue Shields reviewed more than 50 applications and recommended five candidates for the position. The District judges of the court interviewed the candidates and chose Dinsmore.

Dinsmore is currently a partner at Barnes & Thornburg. He has focused on the use of technology to facilitate the management of complex matters and chairs the firm’s Litigation Department Technology Committee. Dinsmore has focused his litigation practice on management of complex cases, with concentrations in construction litigation and electronic discovery. He has also represented clients in international and domestic arbitrations, including representing the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina in an international arbitration arising out of the Dayton Accords that ended the Balkan war.

Prior to joining Barnes & Thornburg, he was a law clerk for Judge John D. Tinder when the judge was on the bench of the U.S. District Court, Southern District of Indiana. A Valparaiso native, Dinsmore is a graduate of the University of Toledo College of Law where he graduated first in his class. Before attending law school, Dinsmore served as a captain in the U.S. Army.

He serves as treasurer of the Indiana Legal Services board of directors and is a member of the Heartland Pro Bono Council board of directors.

U.S. magistrate judges are appointed by the judges of the U.S. District Court for a term of eight years and are eligible for reappointment to successive terms. Dinsmore’s appointment will be effective upon completion of required Internal Revenue Service and FBI background investigations.
 

ADVERTISEMENT

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. I need an experienced attorney to handle a breach of contract matter. Kindly respond for more details. Graham Young

  2. I thought the slurs were the least grave aspects of her misconduct, since they had nothing to do with her being on the bench. Why then do I suspect they were the focus? I find this a troubling trend. At least she was allowed to keep her law license.

  3. Section 6 of Article I of the Indiana Constitution is pretty clear and unequivocal: "Section 6. No money shall be drawn from the treasury for the benefit of any religious or theological institution."

  4. Video pen? Nice work, "JW"! Let this be a lesson and a caution to all disgruntled ex-spouses (or soon-to-be ex-spouses) . . . you may think that altercation is going to get you some satisfaction . . . it will not.

  5. First comment on this thread is a fitting final comment on this thread, as that the MCBA never answered Duncan's fine question, and now even Eric Holder agrees that the MCBA was in material error as to the facts: "I don't get it" from Duncan December 1, 2014 5:10 PM "The Grand Jury met for 25 days and heard 70 hours of testimony according to this article and they made a decision that no crime occurred. On what basis does the MCBA conclude that their decision was "unjust"? What special knowledge or evidence does the MCBA have that the Grand Jury hearing this matter was unaware of? The system that we as lawyers are sworn to uphold made a decision that there was insufficient proof that officer committed a crime. How can any of us say we know better what was right than the jury that actually heard all of the the evidence in this case."

ADVERTISEMENT