IU Trustees Request Release of State Appropriation for Evansville Medical Education Facility

The Indiana University Board of Trustees has voted to officially request the release of previously appropriated state funds so work on a multi-institutional health education facility in downtown Evansville, Ind., can move forward.

A similar vote is expected by the University of Southern Indiana Board of Trustees for USI’s portion of the project at its July meeting.

“This project will significantly increase the opportunities for medical and health-related education in Evansville and across southwestern Indiana, and we hope also will serve as a catalyst for continued economic development in downtown Evansville,” said Tom Morrison, IU’s vice president for facilities and capital planning. “We are very appreciative of the support shown by the city of Evansville and the General Assembly for this project and are looking forward to breaking ground within the coming months.”

The 145,000-square-foot facility will house expanded IU School of Medicine operations in the city as well as health-related education programs from the University of Southern Indiana and the University of Evansville, with IU using about 87,000 square feet of the space. It is expected to be completed by the start of the 2017-18 academic year.

Dave Stafford for www.theindianalawyer.com

Two trial court judges with a breadth of experience hearing criminal and civil matters and a public defender who’s tried hundreds of appeals are finalists to be the next Indiana Court of Appeals judge.

Marion Superior Judge Robert R. Altice Jr., Wabash Superior Judge Christopher M. Goff and Marion County public defender Patricia C. McMath prevailed from eight candidates interviewed June 10 by the Indiana Judicial Nominating Commission.

For Altice and McMath, it’s the second time they’ve been finalists for appointment to the appellate bench. Both of their names were forwarded as finalists to Gov. Mitch Daniels in 2012, when he appointed Judge Rudolph R. Pyle III to the COA.

Gov. Mike Pence has 60 days after officially receiving the list of finalists to make his first appointment to the appellate bench. The person selected will replace Judge Ezra Friedlander, who will retire from the court in August.

Here’s a look at what Altice, Goff and McMath told the commission.

Robert R. Altice Jr.

Altice (IL Photo/Eric Learned)

Having served as a judge overseeing major felony cases and a civil docket, Altice recalled being reversed when one of his first criminal trials on the bench went to the Court of Appeals. It was a learning experience. “You call balls and strikes” as a judge, he said. “You’re not the pitcher.”

Altice cited his work with now-COA Judge Cale Bradford leading the Marion Superior Executive Committee in expanding the Juvenile Detention Alternatives Initiative as an innovation that made a difference, cutting by more than half the number of juveniles in detention.

He said Indiana had been locking up too many youths for minor offenses and that the JDAI initiative is now available to about 75 percent of youths statewide.

Altice also said he’d like to see a judicial performance commission in Indiana that evaluates the work of trial court and appellate judges and makes recommendations on retention. He’s seen how a model program works in Colorado to weed out judges whose performance is rated negatively by lawyers, jurors and litigants who appear before them.

When asked about the value of oral arguments, Altice said he’s found them useful in his court and for the COA. “I can read all the briefs I want,” he said, but it’s helpful to be able to question attorneys who argue before him.

Altice was also asked about what he would like his legacy to be. He said some 30 to 40 interns have worked in his court over the years. “What I hope my legacy is, is that I’ve been a great mentor for law students and young lawyers,” he said.

Christopher M. Goff

Goff (IL Photo/Eric Learned)

The lone candidate from outside metro Indianapolis, Wabash Superior Judge Christopher Goff said serving as a lawyer and judge in a small county would be an advantage if appointed to the Court of Appeals since he’s tried about every kind of case in 15 years in a court of general jurisdiction.

He said his courthouse staff in Wabash is underfunded and overworked, but they innovate and serve the community well. “I think the way we do things in Wabash County is a model of how we administer justice in a small county.”

Goff said problem-solving courts in his county have proved effective in reducing recidivism and helping people get over drug abuse and reuniting families. Recounting a case in which a child was being raised by drug-abusing parents, Goff said through problem-solving courts the parents saw a paradigm shift.

“They started seeing us not as someone who was out to get them, but as someone who was out to help them,” he said. The parents turned their lives around and are working, productive members of the community. “I can tell you with some degree of confidence (their child) is now in a good home.”

Goff said he would plan to move to Indianapolis if selected for the court, and he would focus on building relationships with the court and seek out other opportunities to serve in various ways.

When asked about his legacy, Goff said he has hoped to leave every place he’s been a better place than it was before, and that would be the same if selected for the Court of Appeals. He said he would hope in a few decades to leave the court with people believing, “Indiana is, in fact, a place where people have confidence in the judiciary.”

 Patricia C. McMath 

McMath (IL Photo/Eric Learned)

Marion County public defender Patricia McMath said her voluminous experience of having tried hundreds of cases to the appellate bench and a level of mutual respect between her and judges would enable her to easily transition to the court, if appointed.

“I would have credibility immediately with the other judges on the Court of Appeals,” she said. “There wouldn’t be a whole lot of getting to know each other.”

Several commission members asked whether McMath’s vast experience in criminal cases may limit her in hearing the broad array of cases that come before the court. But she noted prior experience in transactional and bankruptcy law.

“As a judge, it’s not substantive law that is your skill set, it’s the ability to see the issues and understand what the issues and ramifications are,” she said.

McMath said she’s worked with bar associations to make sure professionalism was stressed in continuing legal education, and she’s been a consensus builder. She would try to do that as a COA judge, she said. Bringing access and representation to low-income and pro se litigants also is something she hopes to facilitate.

On the legacy question, McMath noted the Court of Appeals’ mission statement, “To serve all people by providing equal justice under law.” She said, “I would tack on to that mission statement, ‘We do it with civility and professionalism.’”

_________________

Other candidates

Here are highlights from the five other candidates’ interviews:

Bryan L. Ciyou

Ciyou (IL Photo/Eric Learned)

The Ciyou & Dixon P.C. attorney said he’s most noted for family law and firearms law and educating the public in these areas. He said as a judge, he’d work to educate the public about the judiciary. Ciyou also said he’d explore use of Anders briefs in some criminal cases and the possibility of five-judge “superpanels”in divisive cases. “If I’m appointed to the Court of Appeals, I have an incredible work ethic and I will do my best to understand the process … and any efficiencies that can be gained.”

Stephen R. Creason

Creason (IL Photo/Eric Learned)

The Indiana deputy attorney general told the commission he would bring a conservative approach to reviewing cases that come before the Indiana Court of Appeals. “The role of courts in society should be limited,” he said, especially appellate courts. This, he said, “leaves a lot of room for the democratic branches to do the job of finding out what society wants.” Creason said he is a quiet leader, team player and early adopter of technology who could help move the court forward.

Gary L. Miller

Miller (IL Photo/Eric Learned)

The Marion Superior judge offered a bit of trickery as an example of innovation. He recalled a case in which young parents of a 3-year-old kept filing petty motions to the point that he threatened to call the Department of Child Services and stormed off the bench. When he returned, the tearful couple had reconciled, he said. “They needed something to get their attention.” Miller urged that more COA opinions be categorized as for publication.

David L. Pippen

Pippen (IL Photo/Eric Learned)

The Bose McKinney & Evans LLP partner has had a successful career in private practice and as general counsel to former Gov. Mitch Daniels. The Court of Appeals, he said, “has a fabulous reputation throughout the country and I want to be a part of that.” He said it was important for private practitioners to be appointed to the bench, noting Friedlander was among just four of 15 on the COA. He said he’d strive for equitable and consistent opinions, and “to be seen as a judge that engaged.”

Joel M. Schumm

Schumm (IL Photo/Eric Learned)

The Indiana University Robert H. McKinney School of Law professor highlighted his prolific writing, research and establishment of the Appellate Practice Institute in making his case for appointment to the court. Because COA opinions often will be the final word on legal issues, he said, “The most important thing the Court of Appeals can do is bring stability and predictability to lawyers and litigants in the state of Indiana.”•

Sends letter to President Obama announcing opposition to Clean Power Plan

 

Indianapolis – Governor Pence sent a letter today to President Obama informing him that unless the federal Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) Clean Power Plan is demonstrably and significantly improved before being finalized Indiana will not comply. The Governor’s letter in full can be found attached.

“As I wrote to Administrator McCarthy on December 1, 2014, the proposed rules are ‘ill-conceived and poorly constructed’ and they exceed the EPA’s legal authority under the Clean Air Act,” wrote Pence. “If your administration proceeds to finalize the Clean Power Plan, and the final rule has not demonstrably and significantly improved from the proposed rule, Indiana will not comply. Our state will also reserve the right to use any legal means available to block the rule from being implemented.”

“Our nation needs an ‘all of the above’ energy strategy that relies on a variety of different energy sources,” said Pence. “Energy policy should promote the safe, environmentally responsible stewardship of our natural resources with the goal of reliable, affordable energy. Your approach to energy policy places environmental concerns above all others.”

In addition Pence noted, “Higher electricity prices brought by the EPA’s plan will inhibit our ability to advance our manufacturing base and the jobs it creates.”

The EPA’s Clean Power Plan calls for a 20 percent reduction in carbon dioxide emissions from 2005 levels in Indiana by the year 2030. The proposed rules do not dictate how states achieve reduction.  Instead, the rule suggests four building blocks as guidelines for compliance. The rules will increase the cost of electricity and force the premature closure of coal-fired power plants, leading to concerns of electricity shortages. On December 1, 2014, Governor Pence and Indiana State agencies submitted letters to EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy detailing the proposed rules’ impact on Indiana and urging their immediate withdrawal.

More than 26,000 Hoosiers are employed in the coal industry in Indiana. Governor Pence has pledged to fight the EPA’s regulations with all legal means at Indiana’s disposal.  Governor Pence’s comments today come on the heels of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia dismissing State of West Virginia et al v. Environmental Protection Agency, Case No. 14-1112. Indiana was one of fourteen petitioners in the case, which asked the Court to review the legality of the EPA’s proposed regulations limiting carbon dioxide emissions from existing power plants. The Court of Appeals’ decision was based on procedural, not substantive, issues and does not preclude future litigation challenging the regulation.  Indiana intends to renew its challenge in the courts following the release of the final rule.

The EPA is expected to release the final rule in August.

Jennifer Nelson for www.theindianalawyer.com

A northern Indiana attorney who stole trust account funds belonging to his former law partner and that partner’s clients, and embezzled hundreds of thousands of dollars from a receivership, has been disbarred by the Indiana Supreme Court.

Robert E. Stochel faced three disciplinary counts. Count I deals with his time as receiver in a dispute involving joint owners of a supermarket. The receivership assets totaled about $330,000 in a bank account, which Stochel depleted. He lied and covered up his theft. Count II stems with his theft of money from his former law partner, Thomas Hoffman. The two shared a trust account from which Stochel withdrew $30,000; only $5,600 belonged to Stochel.

Stochel has not returned funds to his ex-partner and still owes at least $230,000 to the receivership. h

The third count is based on Stochel’s noncooperation with the disciplinary investigation.

The justices found 9 aggravating facts and no mitigating facts. They found he violated Indiana Professional Conduct Rules: 1.5(a): making an agreement for, charging or collecting an unreasonable fee; 1.15(a): failure to hold property of clients properly in trust; failure to safeguard property of clients; treating client funds as his own; failure to maintain and preserve complete records of client trust account funds; 1.15(d): failure to deliver promptly to clients and third parties funds they are entitled to receive and failure to render promptly a full accounting of those funds; 1.16(d): failure to refund an unearned fee promptly upon termination of representation; 3.3(a)(1): knowingly making false statements of fact or law to a tribunal or failing to correct false statements of material fact or law previously made to the tribunal by the lawyer; 3.4(c): knowingly disobeying court orders; 4.1(a): knowingly making a false statement of material fact to a third person in the course of representing a client;  8.1(b): knowingly failing to respond to a lawful demand for information from a disciplinary authority; 8.4(b): committing criminal acts (conversion, theft, deception, and criminal mischief) that reflect adversely on the lawyer’s honesty, trustworthiness, or fitness as a lawyer; and 8.4(c): engaging in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit or misrepresentation.

“Respondent stole hundreds of thousands of dollars from the receivership and tens of thousands of dollars from his former law partner and that partner’s clients. In the receivership case, Respondent covered up his theft for nearly a decade, lied to all comers, deceived the court and later defied its orders, and actively obstructed the disciplinary process. Respondent throughout has expressed absolutely no remorse or intent to make restitution. In addition, he has neither challenged the hearing officer’s report nor argued any mitigating facts. Under these circumstances, the Court unhesitatingly concludes that disbarment is warranted,” the per curiam opinion states.