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 Clerk Myers is to give written notice to the judge and the Supreme Court that the submission of the case has been withdrawn.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
2015 Distinguished Barrister &
Up and Coming Lawyer Reception

Tuesday, May 5, 2015 • 4:30 - 7:00 pm
Learn More


ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. by the time anybody gets to such files they will probably have been totally vacuumed anyways. they're pros at this at universities. anything to protect their incomes. Still, a laudable attempt. Let's go for throat though: how about the idea of unionizing football college football players so they can get a fair shake for their work? then if one of the players is a pain in the neck cut them loose instead of protecting them. if that kills the big programs, great, what do they have to do with learning anyways? nada. just another way for universities to rake in the billions even as they skate from paying taxes with their bogus "nonprofit" status.

  2. Um the affidavit from the lawyer is admissible, competent evidence of reasonableness itself. And anybody who had done law work in small claims court would not have blinked at that modest fee. Where do judges come up with this stuff? Somebody is showing a lack of experience and it wasn't the lawyers

  3. My children were taken away a year ago due to drugs, and u struggled to get things on track, and now that I have been passing drug screens for almost 6 months now and not missing visits they have already filed to take my rights away. I need help.....I can't loose my babies. Plz feel free to call if u can help. Sarah at 765-865-7589

  4. Females now rule over every appellate court in Indiana, and from the federal southern district, as well as at the head of many judicial agencies. Give me a break, ladies! Can we men organize guy-only clubs to tell our sob stories about being too sexy for our shirts and not being picked for appellate court openings? Nope, that would be sexist! Ah modernity, such a ball of confusion. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QmRsWdK0PRI

  5. LOL thanks Jennifer, thanks to me for reading, but not reading closely enough! I thought about it after posting and realized such is just what was reported. My bad. NOW ... how about reporting who the attorneys were raking in the Purdue alum dollars?

ADVERTISEMENT