DOCSLIB.ORG

Bench Book for Indiana Courts

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Bench Book for Indiana Courts Public Health Law Bench Book For Indiana Courts Center for Public Health Law Partnerships University of Louisville A Collaborating Center of the Public Health Law Program Centers for Disease Control & Prevention Authors Amy R. Schofield, J.D., M.P.H. – Project Director Linda L. Chezem, J.D. – Associate Director for Professional Education Professor, Dept. of Youth Development & Agricultural Education, College of Agriculture, Purdue University Adjunct Professor, Indiana University School of Medicine Former Judge, Lawrence County Court (1976-1982) Lawrence County Circuit Court (1982-1988) Indiana Court of Appeals (1988-1998) Contributors Larry I. Palmer, LL.B. – Associate Director for Research Mark A. Rothstein, J.D. – Director and Principal Investigator T. Howard Stone, J.D., LL.M. – Project Collaborator Acknowledgements The Center for Public Health Law Partnerships would like to thank the following individuals, whose thoughtful comments and shared experiences shaped and refined this Bench Book: Hon. Susan A. Ehrlich James F. Gallagher William I. Garrard Steven D. Gravely Wilfredo Lopez Hon. Edward W. Najam, Jr. Greg Ullrich Kathy Weaver Comments The Center welcomes feedback on this Bench Book. Comments may be directed to Project Director Schofield via email at [email protected] or in writing to the following address: Center for Public Health Law Partnerships Institute for Bioethics, Health Policy and Law University of Louisville School of Medicine 501 East Broadway, Suite 310 Louisville, KY 40292 Disclaimer This publication was supported by Cooperative Agreement Number U50/CCU423386 from the Public Health Law Program of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Its contents are solely the responsibility of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official views of CDC. PREFACE In 1905, the United States Supreme Court’s landmark Jacobson v. Massachusetts ruling recognized the judiciary as both an enforcer of governmental public health policies and an arbiter of the conflicts between individual liberties and public interests that arise from governmental public health action. See generally Wendy E. Parmet et al. “Individual Rights versus the Public’s Health – 100 Years after Jacobson v. Massachusetts.” 352 NEW ENG. J. MED. 652 (2005). Despite this central role, most members of the judiciary have received little, if any, formal public health law training. The events of fall 2001 starkly illustrated that many prevailing public health laws and systems were incommensurate with emerging public health threats, both manmade and natural. These concerns were further heightened by the global epidemic of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS) and the emerging threat of avian flu. In recent years, attention has increasingly focused on public health legal preparedness, i.e., assessing current public health laws, updating those laws as needed, and educating the persons who enforce and interpret public health laws to ensure adequate and efficient responses to both emerging public health threats (e.g., emerging natural diseases, bioterrorism) and traditional public health concerns (e.g., vaccination, tuberculosis) in the 21st century. Public health law is primarily state law, and several considerations make judicial interpretation of state public health law especially challenging. First, the majority of public health cases addressing infectious diseases or other conditions requiring the intervention of county or local health departments date to at least the early twentieth century. The applicability of this case law to modern public health challenges in a global community is questionable. Second, public health experts in court proceedings often use of complex scientific terminology and public health science methodology (e.g., contact tracing) (see Appendix B for a Public Health Glossary). In some cases, judges will need to adapt legal parlance to the public health context. For example, at law the term “quarantine” means (a) the right of a widow to remain in her deceased husband’s principal home for a period of forty days following his death; (b) the holding of potentially contaminated ships and other vessels of transportation away from the general public for a specified period of time (originally, forty days); (c) the segregation of plants and animals to prevent the spread of agricultural diseases; or (d) the placement of a prisoner into solitary confinement. While several of these definitions are clearly health- related, none specifically captures the most common public health usage of the term “quarantine” to describe the limitation of a healthy individual’s activities after that individual has been exposed to a communicable disease in order to prevent the spread of that disease during its period of communicability. Third, the application of many public health laws is complicated by the fact that the authorizing statutes predate current rules of evidence and procedure. Fourth, although public health orders are civil in nature, they often have significant impact on the liberty, property, and economic rights of individuals. Throughout the last half-century, the courts have developed a large body of law guiding the curtailment of individual rights by the state in the criminal context. However, no analogous body of law exists in the public health context, and the applicability of the criminal law to public health situations in which the individual has committed no wrongful or criminal act is fraught with legal difficulties. Finally, in the event of a public health emergency, the deliberative nature of the judicial process may be strained to keep pace with the rapid response and containment measures sought by members of the public health community. This Bench Book was created as a significant part of the current public health emergency legal preparedness initiative underway at the Public Health Law Program of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). This work, initiated in early 2001, has generated draft model state public health legislation; training materials and programs for public health personnel, law enforcement agents, emergency management, and state attorneys general addressing issues such as the legal bases for coordinated responses to public health emergencies; checklists and other tools for assessing county- and state-level public health legal preparedness; and the CDC Public Health Emergency Legal Preparedness Clearinghouse, among other products and services. The Center for Public Health Law Partnerships was founded in October 2003, with funding from the Public Health Law Program, to improve legal preparedness by developing partnerships with public health agencies, judicial education organizations, and law enforcement training organizations. The Bench Book is intended to protect the health and safety of communities by improving legal preparedness for both public health emergencies and more routine public health cases. In addition, it is our hope that this Bench Book will increase communication between the judiciary and public health agencies at the community, state, and national levels and across a broad spectrum of public health issues. Although courts have historically been vital protectors of the public's health (e.g., authorizing sanitary inspections, enjoining nuisances, enforcing vaccination requirements), relationships between public health agencies and the judiciary remain rare. In this new era of bioterrorism, emerging infectious diseases, and potential pandemics, courts play an even more critical role in protecting the public’s health. This Bench Book is a reference tool that judges may use as they confront the range of public health issues that come to their courtrooms. We recognize that it would be impracticable to address each and every aspect of the legal system potentially impacted by public health concerns. Bench books are not tomes of law; rather, they are readily accessible legal references for judges to use in the courtroom, providing, for example, procedural frameworks, statutory texts, summaries of relevant case law, and model orders. We have chosen, therefore, to focus this Bench Book on four topical areas in which the intersection of public health and the law is particularly salient: (1) searches, seizures, and other such government actions to ensure the public health; (2) judicial proceedings centered around the permissibility of limiting certain individual liberties in order to protect the public health; (3) operation of the courts amid public health threats; and (4) the role of the courts during a state of emergency triggered by public health concerns. As such, this Bench Book will not address in detail the important, regulatory functions undertaken by many state and local public health departments (e.g., licensing of health care institutions, Medicaid administration, provision of clinical services). Before delving into these four topical areas, we have devoted the opening chapters of the Bench Book to an overview of issues regarding the legal nature and authority of each of the institutions whose intersection is at the heart of this document – the Indiana judiciary and the Indiana public health system. These introductory chapters consider questions such as: Which Indiana courts have jurisdiction over public health matters? What does the public health system in Indiana look like? and Who are the leaders of the Indiana public health system and what authority do they have? The Bench Book concludes with a series of model court orders to implements key public health
Load more

Recommended publications
  • State Court Caseload Statistics: Annual Report 1988 Xi FIGURE D: Criminal Case Unit of Count Used by the State Trial Courts
    AJIIL State court T caseload statistics: Annual Report 1988 Wyoming Conference of State Court Administrators Alabama Alaska Arizl :alifornia Colorado Connecticut Delaware District of Columbia Florida laho Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maine Mary1 Michigan Minnesota Mississippi Missouri Montana Nebraska Nevad; ew Jersey New Mexico New York North Carolina North Dakota Ohia C 'ennsylvania Puerto Rico Rhode Island South Carolina South Dakota ' tah Vermont Virginia Washington West Virginia Wisconsin Wyoming ourt Administrators Alabama Alaska Arizona Arkansas California Coll elaware District of Columbia Florida Georgia Hawaii Idaho Illinois In Kentucky Louisiana Maine Maryland Massachusetts Michigan Mint lissouri Montana Nebraska Nevada New Hampshire New Jersey New orth Carolina North Dakota Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania Pui ;land South Carolina South Dakota Tennessee Texas Utah Vermont West Virginia Wisconsin Wyoming Conference of State Court Administratc Arizona Arkansas California Colorado Connecticut Delaware District1 1 NCSC 1 KF i A joint effort of the Conference of State Court Administrators i 180 , .c74 I and the National Center for State Courts : 1988 I c. 2 I bu .CT q IC1 bS glib state court c ,a-- T caseload statistics: Annual Report, 1988 Funding Provided by the STATE JUSTICE INSTITUTE Grant Number SJI 88-07X-067 ~pdcJ-3-clO A joint effort of the Conference of State Court Administrators, State Justice Institute, and the National Center for State Courts’ Court Statistics Project February 1990 Library National Center for State Courts 300 Newport Av~. WilIiarnsburg, VA 231 87-8798 Copyright@by The National Center for State Courts ISBN 0-89656-097-X National Center Publication No. R-115 This report was developed under Grant SJI-88-07X-067 from the State Justice Institute.
    [Show full text]
  • Petition for Certiorari
    No. 17-________ ================================================================ In The Supreme Court of the United States --------------------------------- --------------------------------- TYSON TIMBS AND A 2012 LAND ROVER LR2, Petitioners, v. STATE OF INDIANA, Respondent. --------------------------------- --------------------------------- On Petition For A Writ Of Certiorari To The Indiana Supreme Court --------------------------------- --------------------------------- PETITION FOR A WRIT OF CERTIORARI --------------------------------- --------------------------------- DARPANA M. SHETH WESLEY P. H OTTOT* SAMUEL B. GEDGE INSTITUTE FOR JUSTICE INSTITUTE FOR JUSTICE 10500 NE 8th Street, 901 North Glebe Road, Suite 1760 Suite 900 Bellevue, WA 98004 Arlington, VA 22203 (425) 646-9300 (703) 682-9320 [email protected] [email protected] *Counsel of Record [email protected] Counsel for Petitioners ================================================================ COCKLE LEGAL BRIEFS (800) 225-6964 WWW.COCKLELEGALBRIEFS.COM i QUESTION PRESENTED Whether the Eighth Amendment’s Excessive Fines Clause is incorporated against the States under the Fourteenth Amendment. ii PARTIES TO THE PROCEEDINGS Petitioners are Tyson Timbs and his 2012 Land Rover LR2. Respondent is the State of Indiana. Addi- tional plaintiffs before the trial court were the J.E.A.N. Team Drug Task Force, the Marion Police Department, and the Grant County Sheriff ’s Department. iii TABLE OF CONTENTS Page QUESTION PRESENTED................................... i PARTIES TO THE PROCEEDINGS
    [Show full text]
  • NDLS Update 10/1995 Notre Dame Law School
    Notre Dame Law School NDLScholarship NDLS Updates Law School History 10-1-1995 NDLS Update 10/1995 Notre Dame Law School Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarship.law.nd.edu/ndls_updates Part of the Law Commons Recommended Citation Notre Dame Law School, "NDLS Update 10/1995" (1995). NDLS Updates. Paper 34. http://scholarship.law.nd.edu/ndls_updates/34 This Newsletter is brought to you for free and open access by the Law School History at NDLScholarship. It has been accepted for inclusion in NDLS Updates by an authorized administrator of NDLScholarship. For more information, please contact [email protected]. C'- .f) 1 1995 NDLSUpdate New~framthe Nctre Dame Law Schaal .- Vol. V,No.3 TEXDUllLE October, 1995 EDITOR PRESIDENT CLINTON NOl\fiNATES private law practice. They have two NDLS ALUM FOR children, Brett, 6, and Kathryn, 5. FEDERAL DISTRICT COURT *** President Clinton has announced that he would nominate Cuyahoga County (Ohio) NDLS ALUM NAMED Judge Patricia A. Gaughan, NDLS '78, for a PRESIDENT OF THE ACADEMY judgeship in the United States District Court OF FLORIDA TRIAL LAWYERS for the Northern District of Ohio. An honors graduate of St. Mary's College in At its annual convention in Orlando, 1975, Patricia has served on the county-court the Academy of Florida Trial Lawyers bench for eight years. At NDLS, she won named Richard W. Slawson, NDLS '70, the Edward F. Barrett Award for outstanding President of the Tallahassee-based trial advocacy. organization, which represents over 3,500 Admitted to both the Ohio and trial attorneys statewide. For the last five Indiana Bars, she worked seven years for the years, Slawson has been listed in "Best Cuyahoga County Prosecutor's Office in its Lawyers in America," a publication based on major-trial division.
    [Show full text]
  • Appellate Court Performance Standards and Measures
    APPELLATE COURT PERFORMANCE STANDARDS AND MEASURES Appellate Court Performance Standards Commission and the National Center for State Courts APPELLATE COURT PERFORMANCE STANDARDS COMMISSION MEMBERS The Honorable Carl West Anderson Dominick J. Graziano Retired Presiding Justice Bavol, Bush, and Sisco California Court of Appeal Tampa, Florida First District San Francisco, California Phillip A. Lattimore, III Office of Corporation Counsel The Honorable Joseph F. Baca Appellate Division Associate Chief Justice Washington, DC New Mexico Supreme Court Santa Fe, New Mexico John E. Mueller Nielsin, Merksamer, Parrinello, Robert N. Baldwin Mueller & Naylor State Court Administrator Mill Valley, California Supreme Court of Virginia Richmond, Virginia Larry L. Sipes President Emeritus The Honorable Wallace P. Carson, Jr. National Center for State Courts Chief Justice Williamsburg, Virginia Supreme Court of Oregon Salem, Oregon Ella M. Williams Retired Chief Clerk The Honorable Martha Craig Daughtrey Michigan Court of Appeals U.S. Circuit Judge Lansing, Michigan U.S. Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit Nashville, Tennessee Catherine O’Hagan Wolfe, Clerk of the Court The Honorable Martin M. Doctoroff New York Supreme Court Judge Appellate Division Michigan Court of Appeals New York, New York Southfield, Michigan The Honorable Sarah D. Grant Judge, Arizona Court of Appeals Division One Phoenix, Arizona APPELLATE COURT PERFORMANCE STANDARDS AND MEASURES National Center for State Courts and the Appellate Court Performance Standards Commission ROGER A. HANSON Project Director June 1999 ã 1999 National Center for State Courts P.O. Box 8798 Williamsburg, VA 23187-8798 Publication Number R-213 ISBN 0-89656-198-4 This report was developed under a grant from the State Justice Institute, grant numbers SJI-93-091-B-261 and SJI-93-091-B-261-P96-1.
    [Show full text]
  • INDIANA SUPREME COURT ANNUAL REPORT 2004-2005 Indiana’S Court of Last Resort: the Indiana State Supreme Court Front Row Left to Right: Justice Robert D
    INDIANA SUPREME COURT ANNUAL REPORT 2004-2005 Indiana’s court of last resort: the Indiana State Supreme Court Front Row Left to right: Justice Robert D. Rucker, Justice Theodore R. Boehm. Back Row Left to right: Justice Frank Sullivan, Jr., Chief Justice Randall T. Shepard, Justice Brent E. Dickson The cover photograph depicts historical restoration work completed on the Supreme Court’s Courtroom ceiling in late summer 2004. This cover photo, as well as the others in the Annual Report, are by John Gentry. INTRODUCTION This Annual Report provides information about the work of the Indiana Supreme Court. Included with the statistical data is an overview of the significant events of fiscal year 2004-2005 (July 1, 2004 through June 30, 2005) and a description of the activities of the Court and its affiliated agencies. Section II, Significant Events of Fiscal Year 2004-2005, includes brief highlights from the past fiscal year. Additional details on many of the programs listed in Section II can be found in the sections that follow. For more information about the Court, its history, and its various agencies and programs, visit our web site, www.IN.gov/judiciary. ■ TABLE OF CONTENTS I. Introduction . .1 H.Judicial Conference of Indiana /Indiana Judicial Center . .23 II. Significant Events of Fiscal Year 2004-2005 . .2 I. Indiana State Public Defender’s Office . .27 III. The Indiana Supreme Court . .6 J. Indiana Supreme Court Law Library . .27 A. Brief History . .6 K. Indiana Judges and Lawyers Assistance Program . .28 B. The Case Work of the Indiana Supreme Court . .6 Appendix –Statistical Analysis C.Biographies of the Justices .
    [Show full text]
  • 2003-2004 Annual Report
    Indiana’s court of last resort: the Indiana State Supreme Court Left to right: Justice Frank Sullivan, Jr., Justice Brent E. Dickson, Chief Justice Randall T. Shepard, Justice Robert D. Rucker, Justice Theodore R. Boehm Cover photograph by Greta Scodro; photograph on page 16 by Elizabeth Osborn. All other photos by John Gentry. INTRODUCTION This Annual Report provides information about the work of the Indiana Supreme Court. Included with the statistical data is an overview of the significant events of fiscal year 2003-2004 (July 1, 2003 through June 30, 2004) and a description of the activities of the Court and its affiliated agencies. Section II, Significant Events of Fiscal Year 2003-2004, includes brief highlights from the past fiscal year. Additional details on many of the programs listed in Section II can be found in the sections that follow. For more information about the Court, its history, and its various agencies and programs, visit our web site, www.IN.gov/judiciary.• I. INTRODUCTION . .1 H. Indiana Judicial Conference/Indiana Judicial Center . .24 II. SIGNIFICANT EVENTS OF FISCAL YEAR 2003-2004 . .2 I. Indiana State Public Defender’s Office . .26 III. THE INDIANA SUPREME COURT . .6 J. Indiana Supreme Court Law Library . .27 A. Brief History . .6 K. Indiana Judges and Lawyers Assistance Program . .27 B. The Case Work of the Indiana Supreme Court . .6 APPENDIX –STATISTICAL ANALYSIS . .30 C. Biographies of the Justices . .7 Fiscal 2003-2004 Case Inventories & Dispositions . .30 IV. BUDGETARY MATTERS . .8 Total Dispositions . .31 V. ACTIVITIES OF THE AFFILIATED AGENCIES . .8 Majority Opinions and Published Dispositive Orders .
    [Show full text]
  • Indiana Supreme Court 2017-2018 Annual Report
    2017 - 2018 INDIANA SUPREME COURT Annual Report 2017 - 2018 PUBLISHED BY THE Indiana Supreme Court Office of Communication, Education, and Outreach 251 North Illinois Street, Suite 1600 Indianapolis, Indiana 46204 (317) 234-4722 courts.in.gov PHOTOGRAPHY: Rachel Anderle Lindsey Borschel Chris Bucher Don Distel Kathryn Dolan Nathaniel Edmunds Jonathan Hawkins Sarah Kidwell Marc Lebryk Haley Loquercio Patrick McCauley John McGauley Vincent Morretino The Justices of the Indiana Supreme Court during Justice Goff's investiture ceremony in September 2017. Elizabeth Randolph Jessica Strange Mike Wolanin, The Republic Nita Wright ... and Other Friends of the Court Icons made by Freepik from www.flaticon.com FROM YOUR ndiana upreme ourt On behalf of myI Supreme Court colleagues and our staff,S I am pleased to present our 2017-2018C annual report. It provides detailed information about the work of the Court and our agencies. Thanks to the dedication of our staff, judicial officers across the state, and partners in all branches of government, we celebrate a year of success and look toward a hope-filled future. The fiscal year began with the commemoration of 20 years of the Indiana Conference for Legal Education Opportunity, bringing diversity to the legal profession. In July, Wabash County Judge Christopher Goff joined the Court as the 110th Justice. We closed the 2017 calendar year with 23 counties participating in National Adoption Day, where 220 children joined forever families. 2018 began with a renewed focus on how Indiana could lead the way to combat the opioid epidemic, including hosting the National Judicial Opioid Task Force. Throughout the year, over 400 new lawyers were admitted to the bar.
    [Show full text]
  • State Court Organization, 1998 Conference of State Court Administrators, Court Statistics Committee
    U.S. Department of Justice Office of Justice Programs Bureau of Justice Statistics State Court Organization 1998 Victim-offender relationship in violent crimes (rape/sexual assault, robbery, and assault) by sex of victim Courts and judges Judicial selection and service Judicial branch Appellate courts Trial courts The jury The sentencing context Court structure U.S. Department of Justice Office of Justice Programs Bureau of Justice Statistics State Court Organization 1998 By David B. Rottman Carol R. Flango Melissa T. Cantrell Randall Hansen Neil LaFountain A joint effort of Conference of State Court Administrators and National Center for State Courts June 2000, NCJ 178932 U.S Department of Justice Office of Justice Programs Bureau of Justice Statistics Jan M. Chaiken, Ph.D. Director, BJS This Bureau of Justice Statistics report was prepared by the National Center for State Courts under the Supervision of Steven K. Smith and Marika F.X. Litras of the Bureau of Justice Statistics. The project was supported by BJS grant number 98-BJ-CX-K002. Principle staff for the project at the National Center for State Courts were David B. Rottman, Ph.D., Carol R. Flango, Melissa T. Cantrell, Randall Hansen, and Neil LaFountain. Tom Hester and Carol DeFrances of BJS provided editorial review. Jayne Robinson administered final production. This report was made possible by the support and guidance of the Court Statistics Committee of the Conference of State Court Administrators. Please bring suggestions for information that should be included in future editions to the attention of the Director of the Court Statistics Project, National Center for State Courts, 300 Newport Avenue, Williamsburg, Virginia 23187-8798.
    [Show full text]
  • Developments in Indiana Appellate Procedure: Appellate Rule Amendments, Remarkable Case Law, and Refining Our Indiana Practice
    DEVELOPMENTS IN INDIANA APPELLATE PROCEDURE: APPELLATE RULE AMENDMENTS, REMARKABLE CASE LAW, AND REFINING OUR INDIANA PRACTICE BRYAN H. BABB* STEPHEN A. STARKS** INTRODUCTION This Article will briefly explain the 2007 amendments to the Indiana Rules of Appellate Procedure (the “Rules”). This Article will also undertake a retrospective look at remarkable cases from this past reporting period, which specifically address intricacies of the Rules as they are applied in everyday appellate practice. This Article will conclude by highlighting appellate orders that provide practitioners with tips on how to refine their appellate practices. I. APPELLATE RULE AMENDMENTS This past year the Indiana Supreme Court amended Rules 14, 15, 22, 23, 43, 57, and 63.12 The new rules were effective as of January 1, 2008. A. Rules 14, 15, and 57(B) Jurisdiction over Interlocutory Order in Class Action Certification Under new Rule 14, the court of appeals may, in its discretion, accept jurisdiction over an appeal from an interlocutory order granting or denying class action certification under Indiana Trial Rule 23.3 A motion requesting the court * Partner, Bose McKinney & Evans LLP; co-chair of the firm's Appellate Practice Group; B.S., 1989, United States Military Academy; M.S., 1994, Boston University; J.D., cum laude, 1999, Indiana University School of Law—Bloomington; Editor-in-Chief, Volume 74, Indiana Law Journal; law clerk to Justice Frank Sullivan of the Indiana Supreme Court (1999-2000); Indiana State Bar Association Appellate Practice Section (Council member: 2005-2007); Indianapolis Bar Association Appellate Practice Section (Chief-Elect; Chair, Amicus Curiae Committee, 2007). I would like to thank Stephen Starks for shouldering the great majority of work needed to produce this report.
    [Show full text]
  • 2006-2007 Annual Report
    Indiana’s court of last resort: the Indiana Supreme Court Front Row left to right: Justice Robert D. Rucker, Justice Theodore R. Boehm Back Row left to right: Justice Frank Sullivan, Jr., Chief Justice Randall T. Shepard, Justice Brent E. Dickson The front cover depicts the stained glass windows of the Supreme Court Courtroom on the north side of the State House. Photograph by Greta Scodro. The photograph of the Court on this page and the ones on pages 2, 10, 21, 23, 44 and the inside of the back cover are by John Gentry. All others are by various friends of the Court and Court staff. TABLE OF CONTENTS I. Introduction . .1 II. Significant Events of Fiscal Year 2006-07 . .2 III. The Indiana Supreme Court . .8 Brief History . .8 Indiana’s “Court of Last Resort” . .9 Biographies of the Justices . .10 IV. Budgetary Matters . .11 V. Activities of the Affiliated Agencies . .12 Division of Supreme Court Administration . .12 Courts in the Classroom . .14 Division of State Court Administration . .16 Indiana Supreme Court Disciplinary Commission . .23 Board of Law Examiners . .24 Commission For Continuing Legal Education . .27 Indiana Judicial Nominating Commission/Indiana Commission on Judicial Qualifications . .29 Judicial Conference of Indiana / Indiana Judicial Center . .30 Indiana State Public Defender’s Office . .34 Indiana Supreme Court Law Library . .34 The stained glass windows of the Courtroom above the north entrance to the Indiana Judges and Lawyers Assistance Program . .35 State House. Appendix –Statistical Analysis Fiscal Year 2006-07 Case Inventories and Disposition Summary . .39 I. Introduction This Annual Report provides information about the work of the Total Dispositions .
    [Show full text]
  • Judicial Selection and Tenure in Indiana: a Critical Analysis and Suggested Reform
    Indiana Law Journal Volume 39 Issue 2 Article 6 Winter 1964 Judicial Selection and Tenure in Indiana: A Critical Analysis and Suggested Reform Follow this and additional works at: https://www.repository.law.indiana.edu/ilj Part of the Election Law Commons, and the Judges Commons Recommended Citation (1964) "Judicial Selection and Tenure in Indiana: A Critical Analysis and Suggested Reform," Indiana Law Journal: Vol. 39 : Iss. 2 , Article 6. Available at: https://www.repository.law.indiana.edu/ilj/vol39/iss2/6 This Note is brought to you for free and open access by the Law School Journals at Digital Repository @ Maurer Law. It has been accepted for inclusion in Indiana Law Journal by an authorized editor of Digital Repository @ Maurer Law. For more information, please contact [email protected]. 364 INDIANA LAW JOURNAL If attorneys conclude after thoughtfully considering the present and proposed Treasury Regulations that they can ethically practice in business trust form and achieve the tax benefits of corporate organization, the State Bar Association should be urged to petition the supreme court for a rule change. The bar association of one state has taken this approach, thus recognizing that the matter falls within the constitutional authority of a state's highest court." 5 This course of action resulted in that in- stance in a critical analysis and ultimate approval of the proposal. A great responsibility has been placed upon Indiana's judiciary and legal profession to critically evaluate in light of the Canons of Profes- sional Ethics the business trust as an organization for the practice of law.
    [Show full text]
  • CURRICULUM VITAE 1421 East Washington Avenue South Bend
    Updated March 8, 2010 CURRICULUM VITAE J OHN ERIC SMITHBURN 1421 East Washington Avenue South Bend, Indiana 46617 Telephone: 574-234-1315 (Home) 574-631-5865 (Work) 574-631-4197 (FAX) e-mail [email protected] EDUCATION: School Location Major Degree Indiana University Bloomington Biological Science B.S. 1966 Indiana University Bloomington History and African Studies M.A. 1970 Indiana University Bloomington Law J.D. 1973 BAR ADMISSIONS: Indiana Supreme Court (1974) United States District Court for the Southern District of Indiana (1974) United States District Court for the Northern District of Indiana (1979) England and Wales (Called to the Bar 1989) Senior Judge (Certified 2001 by Indiana Supreme Court – Indiana Judicial Nominating Commission) PROFESSIONAL ORGANIZATIONS -- MEMBERSHIPS: American Bar Association (1987-present) Family Law Section Custody Committee Legal Education Section American Judicature Society (1977-78; 1989-1994) American Law Institute (ALI) (2003-present) Family Law Bar Association (England and Wales) (1993-2000) Grandparents Association - U.K. (2001-present) Indiana Advocates for Children (1990-present) Indiana Juvenile Justice Task Force, Inc.--Board of Directors (1975-2000) Annual Meeting Committee--Chairman (1977) Legislative Steering Committee-Chairman (1977) Research Committee--Chairman (1977-78) Public Issues Committee (1980-83) Indiana Juvenile Justice Task Force - Board of Advisors (2000-present) Indiana State Bar Association (1974-present) Family and Juvenile Section Probate Section Indiana Correctional
    [Show full text]