01061997 - News Article - Rules keep order in the court

Rules keep order in the court
NWI Times
Jan 6, 1997
http://www.nwitimes.com/uncategorized/rules-keep-order-in-the-court/article_a5014039-7ec0-5b97-8fe2-c0b1cc02b06e.html
For there to be order in the court, there must be rules.

In the most litigious nation in the world, there are quite naturally rivers of rules: federal, state and local.

Some Indiana counties, like Marion, plunge right into the practical.

The very first of Marion County's dozens of rules orders attorneys to give clients 10 days' notice of their intention to withdraw from a case. Others, like St. Joseph County, preface their rules with thoughtful reminders like that of former U.S. Supreme Court Justice Warren Burger: "... The ablest lawyers and judges have found that certain quite fixed rules of etiquette and manners are the lubricant to keep the focus of the courtroom contest on issues and facts and away from distracting personal clashes and irrelevancies."

Shortly thereafter the court begins its rules with: "Lawyers and litigants shall not lean on the bench. Lawyers shall not sit on counsel tables." Eight years ago, Porter County had barely three legal-size pages of skeletal rules.

Until two months ago, when the court adopted a new rule establishing a guardian ad litem program, the three pages were the county's last rules, yellowing in a file drawer in the office of the local court administrator. Last week, the Porter County court released revamped rules in a 68-page, simple but handsome, bound blue booklet.

The project has been in the works for at least two years. The result largely sets to writing the practices that have become established among judges, lawyers and litigants over the years.

But it also includes some significant changes. Among them:
* Like criminal prosecutors for the last year, civil attorneys will no longer be able to "shop" for the judge of their choice.

* Some less serious criminal cases will be decided by Circuit Judge Mary Harper and Superior Court judges Thomas Webber and Roger Bradford. Meanwhile Superior Court judges Nancy Vaidik and Jeffrey Thode will get to try their hand at more serious civil cases.

* Family court litigants will experience a more structured guardian ad litem program, a less adversarial information-gathering process, and visitation guidelines.

* And it contains the beginning, if only a single sentence, of a movement toward alternative dispute resolution in family law matters.

Also, at least one new local rule goes against the grain of a state statute that decrees the court will have a presiding judge.

Under the 1989 local rules, the court's then five judges selected the now deceased Bruce Douglas as their presiding judge.

The new local rules, however, say the county's six judges will make decisions in concert and not elect a presiding judge.

Nevertheless, a state statute provides should the judges fail to agree on a matter, the decision belongs to the senior judge, who will act as presiding judge. That judge is now Bradford, replacing former Circuit Court Judge Raymond Kickbush who stepped down last month.

State Court Administrator Bruce Kotzan said it is unique for a county like Porter to have a presiding judge.

There is a greater effort to place presiding judges in counties that have a judiciary named by a merit or other non-political system, according to Kotzan. "In counties where judges are elected, the legislature tends not to want to hold one elected official over another elected official," Kotzan said. The benefit of a presiding judge is having responsibility fixed on one person "to see that certain things are accomplished."

On the other hand, according to Kotzan, decisions by consensus are more willingly accepted "when you're dealing with six individuals with (equal) inherent authority."

Bradford, like Webber, did not return phone calls.

Judges Vaidik, Harper and Thode, however, all agreed the new rules offer consistency for lawyers and litigants and more comprehensive caseloads for judges.


"Generally we gave direction to attorneys about practices we've observed but haven't put into writing," Vaidik said last week about the new rules.

Vaidik said it was important for rules to be as consistent among the six courts as possible. The rules tell attorneys "how to get in and out" of court.

Specifically, Vaidik said, there are now rules exerting more control over gathering information in divorce cases "so everyone has to fill out forms on assets and liabilities before we even get into court."

Families will benefit from the new rules, but so will judges, according to Vaidik, who will get to add some major civil cases to her current largely criminal misdemeanor caseload.

A new case assignment system, in which the clerk's office uses color-coded marbles to assign cases randomly, will more evenly distribute the caseloads, Vaidik said.

In addition, the superior courts of Webber and Bradford will absorb all Class D felonies except for driving-related offenses.

"There will be variety for the judges, and it will help equalize the caseload," Vaidik said.

The rules also add some uniformity to the orders issued by the six judges. "The lack of uniformity and consistency hurts the bar and the public,"Vaidik said. "This makes it easier for the litigants to use our system."

As for the judges' consensual administrative style, Vaidik said it has worked since she took the bench in 1992. "My theory is, if it's not broken, don't fix it."

Harper said the most significant outcome of the project has been coming up with a standard set of rules that "eliminate uncertainties and variations" for lawyers as they go from court to court.

And the new case assignment system eliminates "forum shopping" by attorneys. While not a problem in Porter County, Harper said it was not unusual for prosecutors elsewhere to refuse to file cases in certain judges' courts.

With the Indiana Supreme Court rectifying that problem by mandating random case assignment last year, the judges extended the practice to civil cases here.

Porter County Prosecuting Attorney James Douglas said his office will experience some substantial changes because of the reallocation of some Class D felony cases to different courts.

"It will take a little bit to get on line," Douglas said.

Harper estimated the change could add some 200 cases to herself, Webber and Bradford.

Harper, like Vaidik, approves of the court's consensual decision-making. "A presiding judge carries a huge amount of administrative work that keeps you out of the courtroom," Harper said. "Basically (consensus) has eliminated competitiveness among the judges, with which many years ago there were difficulties."

Thode is especially pleased with the expanded role to be played by the superior court's county division judges like himself and Vaidik. A third judge, who replaces Harper at the county level, is expected to be named this week.

"It gives us a break from the day-in, day-out work," Thode said.

He also expects some "big changes" for the county's two magistrates who currently handle the county's domestic relations cases. The rules contain various forms and procedures for the magistrates to absorb.

William Alexa, an attorney as well as state senator, said he is pleased to "have written rules so everyone knows where they stand."

He is particularly pleased with changes in domestic relations procedures. "Now we're under duty to supply information from the top. That makes a lot of sense. This is not supposed to be trial by ambush."