ILNews

Terre Haute federal courthouse opens Monday

Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

After years of debate as to whether Terre Haute would keep a U.S. District Court, a new federal courthouse is set to open Aug. 24.

Construction began on the 14,000 square-foot building last summer that will house the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Indiana, U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District, clerks' offices for both courts, and the U.S Probation Office. The U.S. Attorney's Office and U.S. Marshals Service will also have space within the building.

The new building was needed because the current federal building no longer met the security requirements for federal buildings. The courts also shared space with the U.S. Post Office, which wanted more space for postal operations. USPS made the decision to stop leasing space in the federal building in 2000, forcing the courts to look for alternative locations.

In September 2005, a decision was made to close the District Court in Terre Haute, but less than a year later, the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts in Washington, D.C., confirmed that the location would remain open.

The current federal building will be converted by Indiana State University for its School of Business. The new courthouse will incorporate furniture and features from the current courthouse.

The Terre Haute Division will have limited operations Friday as the move is made to 921 Ohio St. in Terre Haute. Starting Aug. 24, phone numbers will change to:

- U.S. District Court Clerk's Office: (812) 231-1840

- U.S. Bankruptcy Court Clerk's Office (812) 231-1850

- U.S. District and Bankruptcy Court Fax: (812) 231-1844

- U.S. Probation Office: (812) 231-1855

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. "So we broke with England for the right to "off" our preborn progeny at will, and allow the processing plant doing the dirty deeds (dirt cheap) to profit on the marketing of those "products of conception." I was completely maleducated on our nation's founding, it would seem. (But I know the ACLU is hard at work to remedy that, too.)" Well, you know, we're just following in the footsteps of our founders who raped women, raped slaves, raped children, maimed immigrants, sold children, stole property, broke promises, broke apart families, killed natives... You know, good God fearing down home Christian folk! :/

  2. Who gives a rats behind about all the fluffy ranking nonsense. What students having to pay off debt need to know is that all schools aren't created equal and students from many schools don't have a snowball's chance of getting a decent paying job straight out of law school. Their lowly ranked lawschool won't tell them that though. When schools start honestly (accurately) reporting *those numbers, things will get interesting real quick, and the looks on student's faces will be priceless!

  3. Whilst it may be true that Judges and Justices enjoy such freedom of time and effort, it certainly does not hold true for the average working person. To say that one must 1) take a day or a half day off work every 3 months, 2) gather a list of information including recent photographs, and 3) set up a time that is convenient for the local sheriff or other such office to complete the registry is more than a bit near-sighted. This may be procedural, and hence, in the near-sighted minds of the court, not 'punishment,' but it is in fact 'punishment.' The local sheriffs probably feel a little punished too by the overwork. Registries serve to punish the offender whilst simultaneously providing the public at large with a false sense of security. The false sense of security is dangerous to the public who may not exercise due diligence by thinking there are no offenders in their locale. In fact, the registry only informs them of those who have been convicted.

  4. Unfortunately, the court doesn't understand the difference between ebidta and adjusted ebidta as they clearly got the ruling wrong based on their misunderstanding

  5. A common refrain in the comments on this website comes from people who cannot locate attorneys willing put justice over retainers. At the same time the judiciary threatens to make pro bono work mandatory, seemingly noting the same concern. But what happens to attorneys who have the chumptzah to threatened the legal status quo in Indiana? Ask Gary Welch, ask Paul Ogden, ask me. Speak truth to power, suffer horrendously accordingly. No wonder Hoosier attorneys who want to keep in good graces merely chase the dollars ... the powers that be have no concerns as to those who are ever for sale to the highest bidder ... for those even willing to compromise for $$$ never allow either justice or constitutionality to cause them to stand up to injustice or unconstitutionality. And the bad apples in the Hoosier barrel, like this one, just keep rotting.

ADVERTISEMENT