ILNews

Taking the oath

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share
Indiana Lawyer Focus

Admission ceremony for new lawyers weaves together feelings of joy and responsibility

The details of the day fade like all memories do, but attorneys do not forget the pomp, the circumstance and the feeling of going through the Indiana Supreme Court Admission Ceremony and taking the oaths of the courts.

Admission-15col.jpg New lawyers participate in the Indiana Supreme Court Admission ceremony Oct. 15 in Indianapolis. Oaths were administered for state and federal courts.(Photo courtesy Vincent Morretino/ISBA)

Twice a year, once in May and again in October, the Indiana Supreme Court holds a session to administer the oath to new attorneys. The session has evolved from the group of applicants being crowded into a courtroom to a grand ceremony complete with a processional of all the new lawyers, inductions and remarks by judges from the state court and federal circuit and, of course, the oath for the state courts as well as the oaths for the U.S. District Court’s Southern and Northern Indiana districts.

Retired Indiana Chief Justice Randall Shepard said the pageantry serves two functions. One, it congratulates the individuals who have passed the bar exam and, two, it reminds everybody that what lawyers are allowed to do is a real privilege as well as important in the lives of citizens.

“I think it emphasizes the importance that the system of the judiciary represents in American society,” he said.

TaKeena Thompson, associate at Cohen & Malad LLP, remembers a flood of feelings from her admission ceremony in October 2009. She was excited to recognize applicants who sat around her during the bar exam who were now standing next to her in the processional line. She was a little anxious about introducing herself to the courts, yet she was proud to take the oath and become an attorney.

She also remembers her mother traveling from San Antonio, Texas, to be there. Knowing her mom wanted a photo to commemorate the special event, Thompson obliged by stepping from the line, putting her hand on her hip and flashing a big smile.

“It meant just as much to her as it did to me,” Thompson said. “I think we both felt the same way about that experience.”

The contrast between being admitted to the bar in Illinois and being admitted to the bar in Indiana has stayed with Julia Orzeske, executive director of the Commission for Continuing Legal Education at the Indiana Supreme Court.

In 1985, she traveled from her small town of 1,200 in Southern Illinois to Springfield to be admitted to the state court. There she was crunched behind a filing cabinet in “some gray office” where she could only hear, not see, the individual administering the oath.

A few months later, taking the oath for the Indiana courts, she stood in the Scottish Rite Cathedral in Indianapolis. All the Supreme Court justices were there, making eloquent speeches and giving a warm welcome to the applicants.

“It was just a different experience,” Orzeske said. “Going from something that took place in a small office to a real ceremony really made it feel like you were entering the bar.” She pointed out the Illinois bar hosts a more ceremonial induction that includes dignitaries from the court and bar associations.

Administering the oath

Prior to the late 1930s, Indiana residents who wanted to practice law just went to the local court and asked to be admitted to the bar, according to Shepard. They were then sent to be examined by other attorneys in the community who would decide whether or not to recommend admission.

Around 1938, the Supreme Court instituted the bar exam and, Shepard believes, as a matter of convenience all who passed the test at the same time where sworn in together. The courtroom was the natural location for the administration of the oath but by the 1960s, the number of attorneys filled the room and family members were relegated to standing in the corridor.

Some time in the early 1980s, the ceremony was moved to the Scottish Rite Cathedral where it remained for 25 years. During this period, the oaths from the federal courts were added, a development that Shepard called a major innovation that has worked extraordinarily well.

Before that change, the applicants were walked down the street after they took the state court oath and went to the federal courthouse in Indianapolis for the oath to the Southern District. Anyone wanting admission to the Northern District had to make their own arrangements.

Judge Robert Miller Jr., of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Indiana, remembered the federal courts setting aside a few

minutes at the beginning of either the morning or afternoon session to swear in a new lawyer. The process began with an attorney making a motion to present the new lawyer to the court and saying a few nice things about that person. Then the judge would administer the oath.

Miller said after he swore in a new attorney, he would step down from the bench and shake hands before returning to his seat and tackling the court docket.

Missing from the District courts were the families. Thompson wanted her mom at the ceremony because she heard for years Thompson’s dream of becoming a lawyer, and later about the demands of law school. Her mother also listened while Thompson described the stress of the bar exam and the worry she did not pass.

Orzeske’s parents made the trip to Springfield as well as Indianapolis to see her admitted to the bar. In Illinois, they also stood among the file cabinets because she was the first of her sisters to continue her education after getting a bachelor’s degree.

“I think it’s a ceremony for families for the sacrifices they’re made as well as a reward for the lawyers for having passed the bar,” Orzeske said.

‘Magnitude of responsibility’

Reynold Berry attended the October 2005 ceremony as a new lawyer and returned in October 2012 to represent the Indiana State Bar Association’s Young Lawyers Section. More than a celebration, Berry, who is now section chair, said the speeches, the motions for admission, and the oaths reflect the gravity of being an attorney.

That observation was echoed by Bradley Skolnik, executive director of the Indiana State Board of Law Examiners.

“I think it is a very important moment for the profession as we welcome new attorneys,” Skolnik said. “It is meant not only to celebrate achieving admission to the bar but also to impress upon the applicants the magnitude of responsibility they are undertaking by becoming a lawyer.”

The participating judges from the Supreme Court, Indiana Court of Appeals and the U.S. District courts are not immune to the rush of feeling that comes with the ceremony. Shepard said the event is as moving for the judges as for the new lawyers, reminding them of how grateful they are for having had the opportunity to become attorneys.

Moreover, the day’s momentousness may come to mean more as an attorney builds a career, Miller and Orzeske said. As the lawyers go into practice, they will encounter unpleasant situations and this memory could not only counterbalance the cynicism, but also prevent them from taking a misstep in a weak moment.

“The one message that this sends is when you walk into that beautiful courtroom, suddenly you realize people are taking you seriously,” Miller said. •

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
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. I have been on this program while on parole from 2011-2013. No person should be forced mentally to share private details of their personal life with total strangers. Also giving permission for a mental therapist to report to your parole agent that your not participating in group therapy because you don't have the financial mean to be in the group therapy. I was personally singled out and sent back three times for not having money and also sent back within the six month when you aren't to be sent according to state law. I will work to het this INSOMM's removed from this state. I also had twelve or thirteen parole agents with a fifteen month period. Thanks for your time.

  2. Our nation produces very few jurists of the caliber of Justice DOUGLAS and his peers these days. Here is that great civil libertarian, who recognized government as both a blessing and, when corrupted by ideological interests, a curse: "Once the investigator has only the conscience of government as a guide, the conscience can become ‘ravenous,’ as Cromwell, bent on destroying Thomas More, said in Bolt, A Man For All Seasons (1960), p. 120. The First Amendment mirrors many episodes where men, harried and harassed by government, sought refuge in their conscience, as these lines of Thomas More show: ‘MORE: And when we stand before God, and you are sent to Paradise for doing according to your conscience, *575 and I am damned for not doing according to mine, will you come with me, for fellowship? ‘CRANMER: So those of us whose names are there are damned, Sir Thomas? ‘MORE: I don't know, Your Grace. I have no window to look into another man's conscience. I condemn no one. ‘CRANMER: Then the matter is capable of question? ‘MORE: Certainly. ‘CRANMER: But that you owe obedience to your King is not capable of question. So weigh a doubt against a certainty—and sign. ‘MORE: Some men think the Earth is round, others think it flat; it is a matter capable of question. But if it is flat, will the King's command make it round? And if it is round, will the King's command flatten it? No, I will not sign.’ Id., pp. 132—133. DOUGLAS THEN WROTE: Where government is the Big Brother,11 privacy gives way to surveillance. **909 But our commitment is otherwise. *576 By the First Amendment we have staked our security on freedom to promote a multiplicity of ideas, to associate at will with kindred spirits, and to defy governmental intrusion into these precincts" Gibson v. Florida Legislative Investigation Comm., 372 U.S. 539, 574-76, 83 S. Ct. 889, 908-09, 9 L. Ed. 2d 929 (1963) Mr. Justice DOUGLAS, concurring. I write: Happy Memorial Day to all -- God please bless our fallen who lived and died to preserve constitutional governance in our wonderful series of Republics. And God open the eyes of those government officials who denounce the constitutions of these Republics by arbitrary actions arising out capricious motives.

  3. From back in the day before secularism got a stranglehold on Hoosier jurists comes this great excerpt via Indiana federal court judge Allan Sharp, dedicated to those many Indiana government attorneys (with whom I have dealt) who count the law as a mere tool, an optional tool that is not to be used when political correctness compels a more acceptable result than merely following the path that the law directs: ALLEN SHARP, District Judge. I. In a scene following a visit by Henry VIII to the home of Sir Thomas More, playwriter Robert Bolt puts the following words into the mouths of his characters: Margaret: Father, that man's bad. MORE: There is no law against that. ROPER: There is! God's law! MORE: Then God can arrest him. ROPER: Sophistication upon sophistication! MORE: No, sheer simplicity. The law, Roper, the law. I know what's legal not what's right. And I'll stick to what's legal. ROPER: Then you set man's law above God's! MORE: No, far below; but let me draw your attention to a fact I'm not God. The currents and eddies of right and wrong, which you find such plain sailing, I can't navigate. I'm no voyager. But in the thickets of law, oh, there I'm a forester. I doubt if there's a man alive who could follow me there, thank God... ALICE: (Exasperated, pointing after Rich) While you talk, he's gone! MORE: And go he should, if he was the Devil himself, until he broke the law! ROPER: So now you'd give the Devil benefit of law! MORE: Yes. What would you do? Cut a great road through the law to get after the Devil? ROPER: I'd cut down every law in England to do that! MORE: (Roused and excited) Oh? (Advances on Roper) And when the last law was down, and the Devil turned round on you where would you hide, Roper, the laws being flat? (He leaves *1257 him) This country's planted thick with laws from coast to coast man's laws, not God's and if you cut them down and you're just the man to do it d'you really think you would stand upright in the winds that would blow then? (Quietly) Yes, I'd give the Devil benefit of law, for my own safety's sake. ROPER: I have long suspected this; this is the golden calf; the law's your god. MORE: (Wearily) Oh, Roper, you're a fool, God's my god... (Rather bitterly) But I find him rather too (Very bitterly) subtle... I don't know where he is nor what he wants. ROPER: My God wants service, to the end and unremitting; nothing else! MORE: (Dryly) Are you sure that's God! He sounds like Moloch. But indeed it may be God And whoever hunts for me, Roper, God or Devil, will find me hiding in the thickets of the law! And I'll hide my daughter with me! Not hoist her up the mainmast of your seagoing principles! They put about too nimbly! (Exit More. They all look after him). Pgs. 65-67, A MAN FOR ALL SEASONS A Play in Two Acts, Robert Bolt, Random House, New York, 1960. Linley E. Pearson, Atty. Gen. of Indiana, Indianapolis, for defendants. Childs v. Duckworth, 509 F. Supp. 1254, 1256 (N.D. Ind. 1981) aff'd, 705 F.2d 915 (7th Cir. 1983)

  4. "Meanwhile small- and mid-size firms are getting squeezed and likely will not survive unless they become a boutique firm." I've been a business attorney in small, and now mid-size firm for over 30 years, and for over 30 years legal consultants have been preaching this exact same mantra of impending doom for small and mid-sized firms -- verbatim. This claim apparently helps them gin up merger opportunities from smaller firms who become convinced that they need to become larger overnight. The claim that large corporations are interested in cost-saving and efficiency has likewise been preached for decades, and is likewise bunk. If large corporations had any real interest in saving money they wouldn't use large law firms whose rates are substantially higher than those of high-quality mid-sized firms.

  5. The family is the foundation of all human government. That is the Grand Design. Modern governments throw off this Design and make bureaucratic war against the family, as does Hollywood and cultural elitists such as third wave feminists. Since WWII we have been on a ship of fools that way, with both the elite and government and their social engineering hacks relentlessly attacking the very foundation of social order. And their success? See it in the streets of Fergusson, on the food stamp doles (mostly broken families)and in the above article. Reject the Grand Design for true social function, enter the Glorious State to manage social dysfunction. Our Brave New World will be a prison camp, and we will welcome it as the only way to manage given the anarchy without it.

ADVERTISEMENT