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. I just wanted to point out that Congressman Jim Sensenbrenner, Senator Feinstein, former Senate majority leader Bill Frist, and former attorney general John Ashcroft are responsible for this rubbish. We need to keep a eye on these corrupt, arrogant, and incompetent fools.

  2. Well I guess our politicians have decided to give these idiot federal prosecutors unlimited power. Now if I guy bounces a fifty-dollar check, the U.S. attorney can intentionally wait for twenty-five years or so and have the check swabbed for DNA and file charges. These power hungry federal prosecutors now have unlimited power to mess with people. we can thank Wisconsin's Jim Sensenbrenner and Diane Feinstein, John Achcroft and Bill Frist for this one. Way to go, idiots.

  3. I wonder if the USSR had electronic voting machines that changed the ballot after it was cast? Oh well, at least we have a free media serving as vicious watchdog and exposing all of the rot in the system! (Insert rimshot)

  4. Jose, you are assuming those in power do not wish to be totalitarian. My experience has convinced me otherwise. Constitutionalists are nearly as rare as hens teeth among the powerbrokers "managing" us for The Glorious State. Oh, and your point is dead on, el correcta mundo. Keep the Founders’ (1791 & 1851) vision alive, my friend, even if most all others, and especially the ruling junta, chase only power and money (i.e. mammon)

  5. Hypocrisy in high places, absolute immunity handed out like Halloween treats (it is the stuff of which tyranny is made) and the belief that government agents are above the constitutions and cannot be held responsible for mere citizen is killing, perhaps has killed, The Republic. And yet those same power drunk statists just reel on down the hallway toward bureaucratic fascism.

ADVERTISEMENT