16 / 98
16
BizVoice/Indiana Chamber – May/June 2016
litigation and intellectual property groups at
Ice Miller in Indianapolis. He affirms the
current lengthy time frames.
“A lot depends on where a case is filed.
For example, if you have a case in Marion
County or Hamilton County, the dockets
there are crowded and it could certainly take
two or three years to get through these types
of disputes,” he shares. “In federal court, it’s
the same kind of thing. I think what we put
together with the commercial court, I would
classify it as a nice start.”
Granger, the Floyd County judge, confirms
a caseload of close to 1,000 – “maybe 1,200”
– for her and her colleagues. “The downside
to not managing these cases effectively is that
the costs just become exorbitant.”
Las Vegas judges did receive a significant
reduction in the other types of cases they handle
as part of the business court restructuring.
That was to allow those judges more time to
deal with the preliminary injunctions and
other motions that are so prevalent in these
types of cases.
Certainty is so important for businesses,
Christian adds. “You can take bad news; you
can take good news; you just can’t take no news.”
Decision quality
The second advantage is predictability.
Sullivan, pointing to Delaware as one of the
models, describes it this way:
“We will be developing a much greater
body of corporate and commercial precedent
here in Indiana than we have at present to
consult,” he claims. “Almost without
exception, the decisions of Indiana state
courts are really ‘one-offs’ – made only for
the lawyers or litigants in that particular case.
And they don’t stand as precedent for future
cases until they get to the appellate level,
which only a fraction of disputes do.”
David agrees, citing problem-solving,
drug and veterans courts as some examples of
current specialization. “At a minimum, it’s
going to be nice for these judges to have the
benefit of each other’s orders and rationale. It
won’t control decisions that will be made,
but hopefully help judges make more
informed, more timely decisions. It will
minimize situations where those judges have
to go back to square one.”
Again, we go west for confirmation.
Gonzalez says, “In our jurisdiction, it’s that
specialized knowledge you get by handling
that case type over and over again. For me to
deal with issues like trade secrets and
confidentiality is pretty easy and doesn’t take
me a lot of lead time. But a judge who is not
hearing those cases on a regular basis, there is
going to be a very steep learning curve for
them.”
How it will work
The Indiana Supreme Court order
established the following pilot projects,
beginning June 1 and not exceeding three
years. The judges will be:
• Craig Bobay, Allen Superior Court – Civil
Division
• Stephen Bowers, Elkhart Superior Court
• Richard D’Amour, Vanderburgh Superior
Court
• Granger, Floyd Superior Court 3
• John Sedia, Lake Superior Court
• Heather Welch, Marion Superior Court,
Civil Division 1
In the pilot stage, all parties must agree
to utilization of the commercial court.
“The implication, of course, is that
everyone who is there wants to be there,”
Sullivan explains. “That will be extremely
conducive to the courts achieving their objective
of resolving cases very expeditiously. The
litigant who is there for purposes of delay or
gaining some type of advantage is probably
not going to be somebody who is going to opt
into the system in the first place.”
David speculates on the types of cases
that likely will land in the specialized courts.
“We’re not talking about classic or
traditional tort cases or contract disputes.
Indiana Supreme Court Chief Justice Loretta Rush praises the efforts of the Indiana Commercial
Court Working Group during January’s State of the Judiciary address.
“It’s acquisition, divestiture, allegations
of insider trading, sophisticated transactions,
trade secrets litigation – those types of
things. These are the types of cases
where discovery is very important; there
are often significant issues related to
discovery, motions to dismiss, motions
for summary judgements. You are in
court more often prior to an actual
trial than you might otherwise be.”
Steven David
Indiana Supreme Court justice