Unfit, Incompetent, Biased? Should Welch CE Count?

I know, I said a post per week. This is a special post. It is less fact specific and more philosophical.

Right now, from 1:45pm to 5:15 pm, attorneys at the Indiana Bar Association Annual Conference in French Lick Indiana are sitting in a CE session on Rule 702 hearings. No idea what that is. But I do want to offer a question:

Are there minimum standards for someone to present continuing education to attorneys?

Here we have Judge Welch, who failed not once but twice to properly handle an Indiana Trial Rule 53.1 Precipe for transfer from her failure to rule in August / September of 2017. The second time, she denied a motion to correct error, which attached the exact instructions from the Supreme Court that the trial judge is not allowed to rule on this request. The detail and filings are in this previous post.

Is Fraud Legal? Maybe...

...if you are the one determining the law.

Today begins a new direction for this blog. I didn't plan this, especially on the first day of the Indiana State Bar Association annual meeting. But after reading Isaiah 58 this morning, and considering my need to refocus attention towards a personal matter, I will let official matters play out without trying too hard. But I scheduled previously prepared posts to be published each week for the next few months. I may accelerate or slow that down. We'll see.

So let's dig in.

Mary Willis, in her capacity as Chief Administrative Officer of the Indiana Appellate and Supreme Court, appears to have committed fraud. She backdated an order! The proof is still available!

TR 53.1 and 53.2 - Missed the memo...

Much to say on this issue and my experience.

Let me again caution here that I am not an attorney by education or licensed to practice law. So if you find yourself in any legal conflict, please talk to someone who can appropriately guide you. Hopefully the following will encourage you even more to seek qualified representation.

About the Rules

Indiana Trial Rules 53.1 and 53.2, are commonly called "The Lazy Judge Rule[s]." They are simply meant to give clear guidance for next steps to parties before a court that is not providing a timely ruling. If a judge has not ruled on a motion within 30 days, or determined an issue held under advisement within 90 days, or has other waivers of the deadlines, a party can request transfer out of that court, which I did. Welch's response, according to the Indiana Supreme Court, constitute breach of judicial conduct, maybe even breaking the law. And she did it twice!