10101997 - News Article - Judges seek family court

Also See:

09242007 - Terror in Porter County Divorce Court - 1990's - Magistrate James Johnson and Judge Thomas Webber at the helm

Judges seek family court
NWI Times
Oct 10, 1997
http://www.nwitimes.com/uncategorized/judges-seek-family-court/article_cd528124-fe14-5593-a9edb23feea23c5c.html
Porter County caseloads
                                        1994        1995       1996
Pending divorces              911          943         924
Delinquency referrals*   1,123      1,187      1,337
Child abuse, neglect*     1,616      1,482      1,333
* About 30 to 35 percent of cases ultimately come before the court.
Sources: Indiana Family and Social Services Administration,
Porter County Juvenile Probation, Porter County Court Administrator.


A family court is in the wind in Porter County even though the prospect didn't survive the last General Assembly.

Porter Superior Court Judge Thomas Webber said he's not sure a unified family court system can work here, but the judges will apply for a grant to the Indiana Supreme Court to find out.

The state Supreme Court has earmarked $250,000 for trial court judges working with families at risk, according to Larry Grau, director of the Indiana Court Improvement Project.

The money originally was awarded to the high court under a nationwide federal initiative to improve court services to children. The Supreme Court decided to redistribute the funds to the lower courts through 10 to 15 grants with $25,000 limits.

Besides Porter County's family court proposal, the project will consider plans for improving coordination of services and the training of court personnel and support services.

Judges are placing more emphasis on family issues, according to Grau, on the theory it's preventative medicine. "They're seeing it as a way to stop court procedures later on by addressing family situations early," he said.

The county's proposal, drawn by Porter Circuit Court Judge Mary Harper, must reach the Indiana Supreme Court by Oct. 17, although Grau said the deadline may be extended because of the many inquiries about the project.

Grau said the successful applicants may be contacted as early as Nov. 3.

Webber said the county's six judges will take up the issue at today's regular judges' meeting.

"We'll fine-tune or approve Judge Harper's proposal," said Porter Superior Court Judge Roger Bradford, the court's senior judge.

Bradford added the judges hope to use a grant to help them gather information.

"We don't know how many cases would need to be funneled one way or another to one judge," Bradford said. "We don't know if it's five or 500."

A unified family court system assigns families in crisis, from child abuse to divorce to domestic battery, to a single judge.

Currently, it's not unusual for members of the same family to have related cases in three or four courts, and it's not unusual for the fates of children in abuse, divorce or other crisis situations to linger with the courts for years.

An effort by Supreme Court Chief Justice Randall Shepard to get the legislature to approve a family court pilot program failed during the last General Assembly. Some $300,000 would have been divided among three courts to test the waters.

State Sen. William Alexa, D-Valparaiso, said this week the Commission on Courts has voted to support another legislative effort, but the reality is the judges are free to restructure their courts without a legislative initiative.

"The money was an incentive to come up with something creative," Alexa said.

"There's really nothing they need from the legislature to authorize that kind of an experiment. They could do it with local funds, government funds, donated funds, or they could do it for no money by just changing the way they do things."

If the Porter County judges' proposal to the Supreme Court is denied, Bradford said he still sees benefit in going through the process. Although he doesn't foresee the legislature coming through with a family court program for at least two years. Bradford believes the county will be ready when the legislature does approve the program.

In the interim, Harper, who also oversees juvenile court, said the process has forced the judges to consider many questions. Among their queries: Does every dissolution case go into family court? Does it need to happen in a childless marriage? And how does the court track extended or step-families who often have significant impact on a child?

09141997 - News Article - Bogus divorce rates fuel new laws

Also See:

09242007 - Terror in Porter County Divorce Court - 1990's - Magistrate James Johnson and Judge Thomas Webber at the helm

Bogus divorce rates fuel new laws
NWI Times
Sep 14, 1997
http://www.nwitimes.com/uncategorized/bogus-divorce-rates-fuel-new-laws/article_cf6acc03-326a-5237-9c24-f6cb24259af3.html
State's rates
The last year in which divorce figures for Indiana were consistently collected was 1990 and the numbers for the state were called incomplete. The state and national median rates per thousand population that year were:
Indiana - 6.3
United States - 4.7

The numbers say Indiana's divorce rate is among the nation's highest, perhaps even the second worst.

As a result, some state legislators are trying to make it harder for couples to get a divorce.

"Every year we want to tinker with (divorce laws) without actually knowing the breadth of the problem. Everyone just assumes it's a large problem," said state Sen. William Alexa, D-Valparaiso, who supports the establishment of a unified family court system in Indiana.

But the data being used to support such changes offer only snapshots.

The big picture is elusive because Indiana is the only state not even trying to count the actual number of marriage dissolutions.

Moreover, what numbers the National Center for Health Statistics did manage to gather for Indiana were so unreliable the federal agency stopped collecting them in 1990.

Second-highest divorce rate?
The omission of a statewide method for tracking final divorce decrees came to light when a popular national magazine, George, recently ranked Indiana's divorce rate just behind Nevada's.

"You wonder how they measured that," said state Rep. Michael Dvorak, D-Granger, a member of the Indiana House Standing Committee on Families, Children and Human Affairs.

The answer is they really couldn't. George's researchers relied on statistics provided by a private agency, the Indiana Family Institute.

The agency supports several pieces of legislation aimed at tightening the state's divorce laws. Prominent among its goals is lengthening the minimum waiting period before a final hearing from 60 to 120 days under certain conditions.

The legislation also affects matters related to visitation, child support and spousal maintenance.

Dvorak said legislators have to be concerned about the divorce rate and balance it against the privacy issues of a failed marriage.

"It doesn't help when we get false information about the divorce rate," he said.

Adding it up
Since Indiana has no statewide central repository for divorce figures, federal researchers were forced to gather the information county by county through the state's trial courts.

In some cases, such as Lake County, the information had to be gathered "not just county by county but courthouse by courthouse," according to Sherry Murphy, a data collector for the center.

And, according to Murphy and others, not only were the numbers cumbersome to gather, they were also inaccurate.

The agency stopped its efforts altogether in 1990 when it realized the courts were providing numbers that included an array of family court actions, not final divorce decrees.

"It's not a reliable way to get the data," agreed Sally Curtin, who wrote many of the reports for the federal agency.

A review by The Times found that with the exception of a handful of states, most keep tabs of final divorce decrees through their department of public health.

But James Kosowski, a spokesman for the Indiana State Department of Health, hasn't done so in at least 18 years.

"What it boils down to is it's not one of the things the legislature has asked us to do," Kosowski said.

Federal researchers say the state never has provided divorce figures.

The issue becomes even more significant since federal budget cuts forced the National Center for Health Statistics to stop gathering the data in 1995, shifting the chore to the states.

Measuring the problem
Micah Clarke, associate director for the Indiana Family Institute, however, said his agency did provide George with government figures.

But those figures came from a 1994 judicial report designed to track judges' caseloads, not divorce statistics.

A spokesman for the Indiana Legislative Services Agency confirmed a staff person with its Office of Fiscal and Management Analysis tabulated divorce rates using the number of dispositions in domestic relations cases as provided by the trial courts to the Indiana State Court Administrator.

The results led George's researchers to rank Indiana just behind Nevada.

The problem with that method is that dispositions include cases dismissed by the judges. Those cases include couples who may have changed their minds.

In addition, depending on how each court tracks its cases, the numbers may include a variety of litigation related to the divorce, separation or annulment.

"Our figures were not designed to track divorces," said Lilia Judson, acting director for the office of the Indiana State Court Administrator. "Somebody could massage them and get a general idea."

The last figures for Indiana collected by the National Center for Health Statistics were gathered in 1990. Indiana's rate of 6.3 per thousand was well above the then-national median of 4.7 divorces per thousand in population. Indiana's rate had been 7.1 in 1989.

In both years, the data was noted as being "incomplete," according to federal researchers.

Change called for
Clarke and Dvorak were surprised by George magazine's ranking, which was higher than even they suspected.

Clarke said figures he collected in the early 1990s indicated the state was fifth- or sixth-highest in the nation.

"Even if Indiana was in the top 15, I'd be concerned," said Clarke, who believes part of the explanation for the state's high numbers was Indiana's liberal divorce laws.

"What troubles me is someone made a representation on statistics that don't support it," Dvorak said about George's conclusions.

Dvorak said what's needed is cooperation among the state's county clerks, the courts and the health department to compile the numbers so legislators can analyze them correctly.

He would support such an effort, either through an administrative act or legislation, but only if found necessary. "The best thing to do is simply ask the agency head to do it," he said.

But Alexa said improvement is unlikely without legislation.

Alexa believes the data can be obtained only through mandating the county clerks to collect it and then depositing it with a central agency, whether the state health department or the Indiana Family and Social Service Administration.

Alexa added he will support legislation to collect accurate data. "I'd rather see what we're dealing with and craft a solution than the other way around. (The legislature) is good for crafting a solution and then looking for a problem."

05081997 - News Article - Judges bid farewell to Lightfoot

Judges bid farewell to Lightfoot
Post-Tribune (IN)
May 8, 1997
www.newsbank.com
Porter County judges took a break from court schedules Wednesday to bid farewell to retiring guardian ad litem Bea Lightfoot.

For the past seven years, it has been Lightfoot's role to make sure the children are heard over the commotion of parents and attorneys duking it out in divorce and custody battles. "The judges only know what the two attorneys tell them. I speak for the child," the Burns Harbor resident once said of her role.

Lightfoot was one of seven Porter County guardian ad litems.

What sets Lightfoot apart from the rest is she alone offers her time and assistance free of charge. The others, all attorneys, receive $65 an hour for their court advocacy of the child. If the parents are unable to pay, fees are paid out of county funds.

"There is no way we could begin to count the hours she has donated to the courts and to the children of Porter County," said Judge Roger Bradford.

Lightfoot, leaning on a cane during the honorary presentation, said health concerns prompted her retirement. She declined to discuss her service further, citing the stress she has suffered over parents' criticism.

Three vocal parents who had lost custody of their children focused the blame on Lightfoot rather than the judges deciding their cases. It was Lightfoot's job to advise the judges on the best solution for the children.

In their letter of commendation, three judges and two magistrates acknowledged the complaints.

"Every contested court case results in at least one disgruntled person unhappy with the results and too often some people are willing to listen to parental failures grumble without checking the facts," the judges wrote.

After her husband's death, Lightfoot two years ago created a safe home for children caught in parental disputes.

The neutral zone offered supervised visitation for parents who had not won custody. The Children/Family Center in Chesterton, financed by Lightfoot despite attempts by some judges to gain county subsidy, closed in April.

04241997 - News Article - Lightfoot quits, closes center

Also See:

09242007 - Terror in Porter County Divorce Court - 1990's - Magistrate James Johnson and Judge Thomas Webber at the helm

Lightfoot quits, closes center
NWI Times
Apr 24, 1997
http://www.nwitimes.com/uncategorized/lightfoot-quits-closes-center/article_70cbd372-cf24-54be-9112-c4811a7eb950.html
VALPARAISO - Beatrice Lightfoot, a court-appointed guardian ad litem for children enmeshed in domestic relations disputes, has resigned from every case in the court of her primary supporter, Porter Superior Court Judge Thomas Webber.

Additionally, Lightfoot's Children-Parent Center, a visitation facility for troubled families, will close May 1.

Lightfoot declined comment, but Webber and Karen Klein, the center's manager, said Lightfoot's decision was based on ill health.

"We're sorry to lose her services," Webber said Wednesday. "She saved us a lot of money. Her services will be sorely missed."

Webber said Lightfoot recently had been resigning from every case in his court. In a letter to the court, Lightfoot said her decision was based on health reasons, according to Webber.

Webber said while Lightfoot, currently the only non-attorney guardian ad litem, won't be available, 23 volunteers trained by Indiana Advocates for Children are expected to be certified upon completion of the court's new training requirements.

Klein also pointed toward health issues as the reason for Lightfoot's closing the visitation center, which had opened its doors in October 1995.

"I think it's sad the center is closing," Klein said. "Bea has health problems and is unable to continue with the operations of the center."

Klein said she learned of the closing only last week.

Webber said his staff is reviewing Lightfoot's caseload. He said families under Lightfoot's jurisdiction will receive either new court orders or be advised to consult their attorneys.

Meanwhile, Valparaiso's Family House Executive Director Ruth Massmann said her facility is expected to be able to accommodate the affected families.

"They're going to have to have some kind of a modification of their court order," Massmann said. "I assume the judges will be able to process those ... so there's not a lapse in their visitation."

Lightfoot, the widow of an early Portage developer, had been criticized by a citizen's group composed of child advocates and parents led by Helen Boothe of Dune Acres.

The group questioned Lightfoot's neutrality and opposed Lightfoot's seeking Porter County dollars to help fund her Chesterton center, which they said duplicated services offered by Family House.

"This does not change the proclivity courts seem to have for placing unqualified people in positions of power over other people," Boothe said.

04091997 - News Article - Governor O'Bannon supports family court project

Governor O'Bannon supports family court project
NWI Times
April 09, 1997
http://www.nwitimes.com/uncategorized/governor-o-bannon-supports-family-court-project/article_c7228a99-d17c-5401-8c91-64a8f65c252c.html
VALPARAISO - During his first teleconference with reporters from around the state since his election, Gov. Frank O'Bannon said he supports family courts to help families in distress.

If the family court bill pending before the General Assembly makes its way to his desk, O'Bannon said Tuesday he will review the legislation to make sure it provides adequate funding.

"I'm not going to approve a bill that's not adequately funded, even for a pilot program," O'Bannon said in response to judicial criticism of the program's $300,000 price tag.

The family court legislation provides for a two-year pilot program to explore the feasibility of establishing family courts in Indiana.

Porter Superior Court Judge Roger Bradford and Porter Circuit Court Judge Mary Harper have said the county will apply for the project if the bill passes the General Assembly.

Under a family court structure, most legal issues affecting a family will be heard by a single court. Currently, it is not unusual for family members to find themselves in three or four different courts, resulting in conflicting court orders regarding such issues as juvenile matters, domestic violence, divorce, child custody and support.

O'Bannon, who campaigned on putting Hoosier families first, said the legislation "moves us in the right direction."

Among the governor's top priorities for the state are alternative schools, which remove troubled youngsters from regular schools to "help turn them around."

O'Bannon favors such school reform early on in youngsters' lives rather than see them "on public assistance or in prison later on," he said.

Many such students come from the dysfunctional families seen by family courts. The governor said he welcomes the "institutional help" family courts can provide, particularly in light of recent research that pinpoints the critical nature of early childhood development.

The governor made his remarks during a conference call with reporters from 17 news organizations throughout the state.

Spokesman Phil Bremen said the governor wanted to reach outlying news organizations "on issues of importance to them."

In his opening remarks, O'Bannon stressed his top three priorities: a balanced budget, alternative schools and safe streets.

By far, however, media queries about taxes outdistanced those on school reform or crime.

The governor said his opponents' frequent criticism of his tax plans is unearned.

Contrary to contentions, O'Bannon said, his tax bill does provide some immediate tax breaks to taxpayers through such features as renters' relief and earned income tax credits to workers earning less than $10,000.

However, such popular tax proposals as removing welfare or schools from property tax funding require comprehensive, rather than piecemeal, planning because of shifting burdens.

"It sounds good until you (ask) who's going to pay for it," O'Bannon said. Replacing the loss from property taxes with local county income taxes sounds good, according to the governor, "but smaller counties can't afford it."

02211997 - News Article - Family court bill passes finance committee

Also See:

09242007 - Terror in Porter County Divorce Court - 1990's - Magistrate James Johnson and Judge Thomas Webber at the helm

Family court bill passes finance committee
NWI Times
Feb 21, 1997
http://www.nwitimes.com/uncategorized/family-court-bill-passes-finance-committee/article_4507535c-f37d-563a-889e-913f80eeb66e.html
VALPARAISO - In preparation for the anticipated passage of a family court pilot program, Porter Circuit Court Judge Mary Harper is studying courts who have successful programs.

Harper learned Thursday the family court proposal before the state Senate has passed another test. The Senate Finance Committee voted unanimously the same day to recommend the passage of the legislation.

Because the bill requires an appropriation by the General Assembly, the finance committee must pass the bill before the entire Senate may vote upon it. The bill is expected to reach the Senate floor next week.

If the bill becomes law, Porter County judges have expressed their interest in applying for the project, which will establish a minimum of three such courts on a trial basis at state cost.

Sen. William Alexa, D-Valparaiso, a sponsor of the bill, has said the county's chances of landing one of the courts are increased if the judges have a plan in place at the time of application.

Harper, who as circuit and juvenile court judge is the most likely to obtain family court jurisdiction, said she has obtained information from family court judges in Hawaii and Florida, two of the country's most successful.

The purpose of a family court is to treat all court cases affecting a family as one unit.

For example, a family's divorce proceedings, juvenile offenses and abuse cases would be heard by a single judge instead of three.

With a family court program, a single judge would oversee each of these cases or at least have a strong information network enabling the judge to recognize the connection between them.

Lake and Porter counties have volunteered to be a part of the program if the bill passes, according to Indiana Supreme Court Chief Justice Randall Shepard, who strongly supports the program.

In Porter County's case, it may hold the dubious distinction of being the last of Indiana's 92 counties to computerize, but that development may prove lucky in the county's bid for a family court.

The county's new case management system is the latest in technology, according to Porter County Commissioner Karen Hughes.

"It's the most integrated system in the state," Hughes said in recent weeks.

A case management system is considered integral to the success of any family court, according to numerous sources.

Making the county's bid even stronger, according to Hughes, is a clause written into the county's contract with its software provider.

Hughes said if the county's current software cannot handle family court requirements, the software company is obligated to write the program because it must provide all functions mandated by Indiana law.

01161997 - News Article - Family court plan clears first hurdle

Also See:

09242007 - Terror in Porter County Divorce Court - 1990's - Magistrate James Johnson and Judge Thomas Webber at the helm

Family court plan clears first hurdle
NWI Times
Jan 16, 1997
http://www.nwitimes.com/uncategorized/family-court-plan-clears-first-hurdle/article_ede183e4-3e2f-51d2-854bd4db1b057b16.html
About the bill Amended family court legislation would:
* Increase funding to $300,000 over two years.
* Restrict creating new judgeships.
* Require approval of county councils or commissions.
* Create pilot programs in at least three counties of any size.

What's next
The bill is expected to be heard by the Senate Finance Committee within one week. That panel will decide whether to send the legislation to the Senate for its second reading.

Indiana Supreme Court Chief Justice Randall Shepard told the 10-member Senate Judiciary Committee on Wednesday that the most important thing about the family court proposal before them "was to give it a try."

The committee heeded Shepard by unanimously passing family court legislation that has been a topic among legislators for five years.

"The idea behind family court is consolidating before one judge all those different kinds of cases that arise from a particular family," Shepard said.

Lawyers and judges throughout the state have told Shepard it is all too common to find members of a single family in three or four courts at the same time.

Three of four counties interested in the concept are from Northwest Indiana: Porter, Lake and LaPorte. The fourth is Allen County.

"We really are not in a bad position to do this," said Porter Circuit Court Judge Mary Harper after Wednesday's hearing.

If the bill passes the legislature and the county successfully applies for the pilot program, Harper, as circuit and juvenile court judge, is the most likely of the county's six judges to assume family court jurisdiction.

Four of the county's six judges have indicated support of the concept.

The bill is co-sponsored by Sen. William Alexa, D-Valparaiso, and Sen. Richard Bray, R-Martinsville.

Alexa said Wednesday that besides the Chief Justice, the bill was supported at the committee hearing by Indiana Advocates for Children Inc., an influential non-profit children's advocacy organization based in Indianapolis.

The group has sought the legislation for five years, according to Alexa.

Wednesday's committee hearing addressed funding and other concerns expressed by Harper and three colleagues, Porter Superior Court Judges Nancy Vaidik, Jeffrey Thode and newly appointed Julia Jent.

Porter Superior Court Judges Roger Bradford, the court's senior judge, and Thomas Webber refused to comment.

An amendment proposed by Alexa restored the funding to $300,000 as originally proposed by the Commission on Courts.

"It's a lot more feasible," Harper said. "Porter County is really fortunate to have legislators with seniority and who are listened to."

Another amendment to the bill restricts counties from creating new judgeships to assume family court jurisdiction, although some judges fear the burden may be too much for one judge.

"This proposal is about effective use of resources, not necessarily about the need for more resources," Shepard said.

Shepard said establishing a court in which judges do not need to be re-educated on a family's problems each time a member appears in court saves time and resources.

"That means less of a burden, not more," he said.

"This is an organizational proposal," Shepard said. "We're already doing the work. The question is how do you do it best."

While Shepard said four counties have expressed interest in the project, he cautioned the experiment will be taken slowly.

"I candidly admit to you," Shepard told the committee, "we haven't gotten very far in the (details of the selection process)."

"Our posture is (the judiciary) is making the offer," Shepard said after the hearing. "We're willing to be part of it."

01161997 - News Article - Family court plan clears first hurdle

Family court plan clears first hurdle
NWI Times
Jan 16, 1997
http://www.nwitimes.com/uncategorized/family-court-plan-clears-first-hurdle/article_ede183e4-3e2f-51d2-854bd4db1b057b16.html
About the bill Amended family court legislation would:
* Increase funding to $300,000 over two years.
* Restrict creating new judgeships.
* Require approval of county councils or commissions.
* Create pilot programs in at least three counties of any size.

What's next
The bill is expected to be heard by the Senate Finance Committee within one week. That panel will decide whether to send the legislation to the Senate for its second reading.

Indiana Supreme Court Chief Justice Randall Shepard told the 10-member Senate Judiciary Committee on Wednesday that the most important thing about the family court proposal before them "was to give it a try."

The committee heeded Shepard by unanimously passing family court legislation that has been a topic among legislators for five years.

"The idea behind family court is consolidating before one judge all those different kinds of cases that arise from a particular family," Shepard said.

Lawyers and judges throughout the state have told Shepard it is all too common to find members of a single family in three or four courts at the same time.

Three of four counties interested in the concept are from Northwest Indiana: Porter, Lake and LaPorte. The fourth is Allen County.

"We really are not in a bad position to do this," said Porter Circuit Court Judge Mary Harper after Wednesday's hearing.

If the bill passes the legislature and the county successfully applies for the pilot program, Harper, as circuit and juvenile court judge, is the most likely of the county's six judges to assume family court jurisdiction.

Four of the county's six judges have indicated support of the concept.

The bill is co-sponsored by Sen. William Alexa, D-Valparaiso, and Sen. Richard Bray, R-Martinsville.

Alexa said Wednesday that besides the Chief Justice, the bill was supported at the committee hearing by Indiana Advocates for Children Inc., an influential non-profit children's advocacy organization based in Indianapolis.

The group has sought the legislation for five years, according to Alexa.

Wednesday's committee hearing addressed funding and other concerns expressed by Harper and three colleagues, Porter Superior Court Judges Nancy Vaidik, Jeffrey Thode and newly appointed Julia Jent.

Porter Superior Court Judges Roger Bradford, the court's senior judge, and Thomas Webber refused to comment.

An amendment proposed by Alexa restored the funding to $300,000 as originally proposed by the Commission on Courts.

"It's a lot more feasible," Harper said. "Porter County is really fortunate to have legislators with seniority and who are listened to."

Another amendment to the bill restricts counties from creating new judgeships to assume family court jurisdiction, although some judges fear the burden may be too much for one judge.

"This proposal is about effective use of resources, not necessarily about the need for more resources," Shepard said.

Shepard said establishing a court in which judges do not need to be re-educated on a family's problems each time a member appears in court saves time and resources.

"That means less of a burden, not more," he said.

"This is an organizational proposal," Shepard said. "We're already doing the work. The question is how do you do it best."

While Shepard said four counties have expressed interest in the project, he cautioned the experiment will be taken slowly.

"I candidly admit to you," Shepard told the committee, "we haven't gotten very far in the (details of the selection process)."

"Our posture is (the judiciary) is making the offer," Shepard said after the hearing. "We're willing to be part of it."

01151997 - News Article - Family court bill faces first hurdle

Also See:

09242007 - Terror in Porter County Divorce Court - 1990's - Magistrate James Johnson and Judge Thomas Webber at the helm

Family court bill faces first hurdle
NWI Times
Jan 15, 1997
http://www.nwitimes.com/uncategorized/family-court-bill-faces-first-hurdle/article_b5894c58-9d93-5f64-bfc7-81ea8e016bc7.html
About the bill Preliminary family court legislation would:
* Establish a voluntary pilot project.
* Operate Jan. 1, 1998 through Dec. 31, 1999.
* Grant funds to the counties selected to participate.
* Consist of one rural, one medium-size and one urban county.
* Requires applicants to submit plans by Sept. 30.

Although concerned about funding, four of Porter County's six judges support the concept of family court legislation being heard today before the Senate Judiciary Committee.

The legislation provides for the establishment of three family court systems of varying size for a period of two years.

The pilot program would explore the feasibility of such court restructuring in Indiana, where no true unified family court system exists.

The innovation is an alternative to present court systems, where increasingly families in crisis have members in several courts at the same time.

Under a family court structure, cases involving family matters will be heard by the same judge.

According to state Supreme Court Chief Justice Randall Shepard, the legislation is a response by the Commission on Courts to the high interest lawmakers have shown in the concept.

"This will show people how it can work in an Indiana setting," Shepard said last month.

"My proposal was that the ideal way of exploring these issues was to create a pilot project to try techniques in a variety of settings and examine the advantages and disadvantages," Shepard said.

Sen. William Alexa, D-Valparaiso, a sponsor of the resulting legislation, said he believes Porter County is a good candidate for the pilot program.

Alexa, who has sponsored multiple pieces of legislation designed to combat domestic violence and related issues, sees the project as a way for courts to handle family matters in a less adversarial way.

The adversarial system used by the court system, according to Alexa, is "ill-equipped to handle domestic cases."

Should the bill pass the legislature, it will be up to a county's judges to make an application.

Alexa said he forwarded information on the pending legislation to all six of the county's judges.

Porter Superior Court Judges Roger Bradford, the court's senior judge, and Thomas Webber expressed interest in the project, according to Alexa.

While Bradford and Webber refused to comment, Porter Superior Court Judge Nancy Vaidik said the judges have not held their regular monthly meeting where the issue usually would be discussed.

"I'm interested in it as well," Vaidik said, "but I am concerned that the funding is so low."

Aside from funding concerns, Vaidik said, "This will take brainstorming and innovative thinking in order to develop a system for Porter County, and (it will take) the cooperation of all the judges."

The current proposal allocates $150,000 to the project, which breaks out to only $25,000 per county each year of the project.

"That concerns me when you're talking about reorganizing a system and adding officiating officers and court personnel," Vaidik said.

Alexa, however, said funding may well be restored to its original $300,000 or even better during today's committee hearing.

"We may just bump that up," Alexa said. "It's a reach and grab figure. No one knows how much they may need to set up this demonstration."

While the legislature will not write "a blank check," according to Alexa, the funding can be modified according to a county's needs.

Should the bill survive today's hearing as he expects, the bill moves to the Senate Finance Committee, Alexa said.

The family court concept is also supported by Circuit Court Judge Mary Harper, Superior Court Judge Jeffrey Thode, and newly appointed Superior Court Judge Julia Jent, who will be sworn in Monday.

"If the legislature can give us a model or set some parameters within which we can develop a model ... it's important for us to see if it's workable in Porter County," Harper said.

Harper, as circuit and juvenile court judge, would be the most likely judge to assume family court jurisdiction.

"I'd be real willing to help," said Harper, who took the circuit court bench only this month. "We're looking at a lot of new things.

"If Porter County were interested, we'd work with the legislation," Thode said. "I'm in favor of any additional tools to simplify the process and streamline the litigation process."

"It would really require our judges to sit down and come up with implementation procedures," Thode said, adding the caseload could well require the services of more than one judge.

Thode also believed, however, a family court structure might not be necessary if the county's computerized case management system helps judges track an individual's involvement in other courts.

The county is investigating computer software for such a system, which is expected to improve much of the court's current communication problems.

Jent, meanwhile, said the family court legislation holds a lot of appeal for her, but "the funding is ridiculous even for a pilot program."

01121997 - News Article - Visclosky pledges action on issues

Also See:

09242007 - Terror in Porter County Divorce Court - 1990's - Magistrate James Johnson and Judge Thomas Webber at the helm

Visclosky pledges action on issues
NWI Times
Jan 12, 1997
http://www.nwitimes.com/uncategorized/visclosky-pledges-action-on-issues/article_01a52469-e131-5708-bb71-00dfc5ab8ed9.html
U.S. Rep. Pete Visclosky collected a list of needs his Porter County constituents want addressed, from securing funding for an erosion study, to getting Illinois to lower the Skyway toll fee, to child custody disputes.

Visclosky, D-1st District, who was re-elected in November to his seventh term, held sessions Saturday in Valparaiso, Chesterton and Portage.

The issue of child custody in Valparaiso, where about 35 people showed up, drew perhaps the most fervent discussion of the day.

"What we need is an emergency court system" to deal with crises in child custody cases, Kimberly Cole of Chesterton told Visclosky. A year ago, Cole's husband was granted custody of the couple's son, Andrew, now 3.

Cole and other parents have challenged the impartiality and fitness of Judge Thomas Webber's appointment of guardian Beatrice Lightfoot of Portage. Cole also is among those who advocate a family court system that would have handle custody and other family issues.

Edward Frankiewicz, 81, of Highland also asked Visclosky to address a custody-related issue. He came to the Valparaiso forum because of his unhappiness with the actions of judges in a case involving his grandchildren, whose parents live in Porter County.

"I've tried to safeguard my grandchildren for eight years. ... This is about ... how much power the judges have," Frankiewicz said.

Visclosky could offer little assistance.

"Custody has always been considered a prerogative of the states and the judicial system. I can't conceive of anyone hurting a child, but this is not a federal issue."


Visclosky promised to have his staff members hold follow-up discussions with Cole and Frankiewicz.

The congressman's main thrust at his forums was to discuss events coming up in this year's session. He said he will, in the 105th Congress:
* Pursue $100,000 in funding for a study of erosion along Beauty Creek in Valparaiso.

* Continue efforts to work with Chicago Mayor Richard Daley and Illinois legislators to reduce the $2 toll on the Chicago Skyway.

* Continue efforts to obtain funds for Northwest Indiana's High Intensity Drug Trafficking Area, for which $3 million was allocated last year.

* Take up again the issue of a constitutional amendment requiring a balanced budget. "I'm hopeful we can finally get it out of both chambers and send it to the states for ratification," Visclosky said. He also plans to reintroduce the balanced budget enforcement act.

* Pursue measures making it easier for small businesses to offer pension funds.

* Continue the fight against "corporate welfare" in which federal tax funds are used to aid Fortune 500 companies.

* Reform campaign financing by requiring absolute disclosure, even of indirect donations made by special interest groups on the candidates' behalf.

Health care, particularly Medicare benefits, drew interest in both Portage and Valparaiso, with Visclosky predicting Medicare would be the only area of health care reform to be debated this year.

01081997 - News Article - A step in right direction - New Porter County Court Rules

Also See:
09242007 - Terror in Porter County Divorce Court - 1990's - Magistrate James Johnson and Judge Thomas Webber at the helm

Also See:

09182008 - May 2008 property settlement vacated - Porter County Local Court Rule 2100 not adhered to by Attorneys Shaw and Rice -- Porter County Indiana -- Cause No. 64D01-0708-DR-7804

A step in right direction - New Porter County Court Rules
NWI Times
Jan 8, 1997
http://www.nwitimes.com/uncategorized/a-step-in-right-direction/article_6cdde9c4-35bd-5e9c-b773-36a288c3116f.html
The issue: New court rules

Our opinion: The Porter County judges have shown good faith by adopting written rules for the operation of its courts.

While 1996 had not been a particularly positive year for the Porter County courts and its six judges amid controversy over several issues, 1997 appears to be off to a good start.

At least two years in the making, a set of new court rules establishing how the court will function has been released by the judges.

They should be commended for finally putting into place a number of specific rules, some based upon how the courts had operated in the past, and others making significant changes.

Puzzling however, is why the judges in the opening of their 68-page booklet of published rules, specifically addressed the issue of not having a presiding judge in Porter County.

The six judges apparently agree a presiding judge is not necessary and one will not be selected in Porter County.

Even though the State Court Administrator says it is unusual for a county like Porter to have a presiding judge, state codes provide that when judges fail to select a chief judge, the duty and responsibilities fall to the senior judge.

It is important, if not critical, that a presiding judge - one with at least administrative authority over the other judges - be named.

How else can it be assured the new rules will be implemented and followed? Can you imagine running the sheriff's department without a sheriff? Or, the county council without a chairperson?

Nonetheless, it is apparent the judges have displayed good faith in even adopting these rules.

And they even took a surprising step forward by alluding to possible movement toward family court reform.

Sen. William Alexa, D-Valparaiso, is planning to introduce legislation in Indiana calling for the establishment of a unified family court system in the state.

Initially the bill will ask for money to fund the family court system in three Indiana counties for two years beginning Jan. 1, 1998.

As we've stated before, we believe Porter County is a prime candidate for the progressive program.

And, based on their most recent actions, it appears the Porter County judges may also be leaning toward taking this positive step.

So, while 1996 is probably a year our judges want to forget, they have also begun the process of making 1997 a banner year and have our support at this early stage of renaissance.

01061997 - News Article - Rules keep order in the court

Also See:
09242007 - Terror in Porter County Divorce Court - 1990's - Magistrate James Johnson and Judge Thomas Webber at the helm

Also See:

09182008 - May 2008 property settlement vacated - Porter County Local Court Rule 2100 not adhered to by Attorneys Shaw and Rice -- Porter County Indiana -- Cause No. 64D01-0708-DR-7804

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."