ILNews

Supreme Court amends Indiana rules

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

The Indiana justices have issued several orders amending the rules of court. Among them is a change that allows the Disciplinary Commission to seek reimbursement from attorneys who have resigned or been disbarred.

Orders dated Sept. 7 spell out the changes to Indiana’s Rules of Appellate Procedure, Admission and Discipline Rules, Administrative Rules, Rules of Criminal Procedure, and Rules of Trial Procedure. The justices modified Rule 23, Section 10 of the Disciplinary Commission and Proceedings to allow the commission the ability to seek $500 in reimbursement plus out-of-pocket expenses from attorneys who are disbarred or resign in any proceeding. The rule currently allows these costs to be obtained from attorneys whose complaints have been dismissed for cooperation or suspended. Rule 14 has also been amended.

The justices have amended Indiana Rules of Trial Procedure 3.1, 5, 6, 26, 34, 53.1, 72, 77, 79 and Appendix B. Changes include allowing the use of fax or email for service if a party consents. Other rules have been modified to include language referencing this electronic service. Judges appointed as a special judge under Rule 79(D) will now have seven days instead of 15 to decide whether to accept a case. If a special judge does not accept the case, or is disqualified or recused, the appointment of an eligible special judge will be made pursuant to a local rule. If a special judge is unavailable for any reason after assuming jurisdiction on a date when a hearing or trial is scheduled, that special judge may appoint a judge pro tempore, temporary judge or senior judge.

Indiana Administrative Rules 5, 7, 8, 9 and 10 have been amended. The changes affect senior judge credit and what records are authorized to be microfilmed, and include the addition of language referring to the recently passed law that restricts access to certain criminal history information.

Rule 10 outlines how a trial court may reconstruct judicial records that have been lost or destroyed.

Rule 12 on change of venue in criminal cases has been updated to allow an application for a change of judge or venue to be filed within 30 days from the initial hearing. Current rules allow 10 days.

The rule changes can be viewed on the court’s website.  All amendments take effect Jan. 1, 2013.

 

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. 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!!!

  2. 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?

  3. 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?

  4. 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.

  5. You can put your photos anywhere you like... When someone steals it they know it doesn't belong to them. And, a man getting a divorce is automatically not a nice guy...? That's ridiculous. Since when is need of money a conflict of interest? That would mean that no one should have a job unless they are already financially solvent without a job... A photographer is also under no obligation to use a watermark (again, people know when a photo doesn't belong to them) or provide contact information. Hey, he didn't make it easy for me to pay him so I'll just take it! Well heck, might as well walk out of the grocery store with a cart full of food because the lines are too long and you don't find that convenient. "Only in Indiana." Oh, now you're passing judgement on an entire state... What state do you live in? I need to characterize everyone in your state as ignorant and opinionated. And the final bit of ignorance; assuming a photo anyone would want is lucky and then how much does your camera have to cost to make it a good photo, in your obviously relevant opinion?

ADVERTISEMENT