ILNews

Supreme Court grants writ of mandamus

Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Indiana Supreme Court justices unanimously voted to grant a permanent writ of mandamus and prohibition in a case out of Howard Superior Court.

Relators Jeffrey Scott Bousum and Regina Lee Bousum alleged Judge Stephen M. Jessup of Howard Superior Court 2 failed to rule on motions for summary judgment within the Trial Rule 53.1 time limits after a hearing on those motions. They also allege trial court clerk Mona L. Myers failed in her duty to withdraw the case from the trial court upon the filing of the relators' praecipe and to transmit the case to the Supreme Court for the appointment of a special judge.

In the order from Wednesday, the Supreme Court directed Judge Jessup to vacate any orders or judgment issued after the filing of the praecipe on June 1, 2009, and to stop exercising jurisdiction over the case except for administrative tasks needed to execute the writ. Clerk Myers is to give written notice to the judge and the Supreme Court that the submission of the case has been withdrawn.

The judge must also file a written report pursuant to Trial Rules 53.1(F) and 53.2(F) once the clerk complies with Trial Rule 53.1(E)(2) and the high court issues an order appointing a special judge. The writ is effective immediately.

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Major social engineering imposed by judicial order well in advance of democratic change, has been the story of the whole post ww2 period. Contraception, desegregation, abortion, gay marriage: all rammed down the throats of Americans who didn't vote to change existing laws on any such thing, by the unelected lifetime tenure Supreme court heirarchs. Maybe people came to accept those things once imposed upon them, but, that's accommodation not acceptance; and surely not democracy. So let's quit lying to the kids telling them this is a democracy. Some sort of oligarchy, but no democracy that's for sure, and it never was. A bourgeois republic from day one.

  2. JD Massur, yes, brings to mind a similar stand at a Texas Mission in 1836. Or Vladivostok in 1918. As you seemingly gloat, to the victors go the spoils ... let the looting begin, right?

  3. I always wondered why high fence deer hunting was frowned upon? I guess you need to keep the population steady. If you don't, no one can enjoy hunting! Thanks for the post! Fence

  4. Whether you support "gay marriage" or not is not the issue. The issue is whether the SCOTUS can extract from an unmentionable somewhere the notion that the Constitution forbids government "interference" in the "right" to marry. Just imagine time-traveling to Philadelphia in 1787. Ask James Madison if the document he and his fellows just wrote allowed him- or forbade government to "interfere" with- his "right" to marry George Washington? He would have immediately- and justly- summoned the Sergeant-at-Arms to throw your sorry self out into the street. Far from being a day of liberation, this is a day of capitulation by the Rule of Law to the Rule of What's Happening Now.

  5. With today's ruling, AG Zoeller's arguments in the cases of Obamacare and Same-sex Marriage can be relegated to the ash heap of history. 0-fer

ADVERTISEMENT