« Ind. Gov't. - "Northwest Indiana corruption thrives in Chicago's shadow: Nearly 50 officials have been sent to prison in the last decade in neighboring Lake County " | Main | Ind. Courts - Is notice by publication in the Indianapolis Recorder sufficient? [Updated] »

Thursday, August 26, 2010

Ind. Courts - "Judge Peter J. Nemeth made it clear this week he intends to pursue the construction of an additional courtroom at the Juvenile Justice Center, despite a recent state Supreme Court decision stating such a space is not 'reasonably necessary"

Erin Blasko reports in the South Bend Tribune in a story that begins:

SOUTH BEND — St. Joseph County Probate Judge Peter J. Nemeth made it clear this week he intends to pursue the construction of an additional courtroom at the Juvenile Justice Center, despite a recent state Supreme Court decision stating such a space is not "reasonably necessary" to the court's operation.

Presented to county officials during a budget meeting, Nemeth's 2011 budget request includes about $300,000 for repairs, including $210,000 to convert a space at the JJC formerly occupied by the Court Appointed Special Advocates Program into a fifth courtroom.

Nemeth is offering to take the money out of the court's Probation User Fees Fund, a non-reverting fund that currently contains about $600,000, rather than the county general fund.

County Council members approved a similar request by Nemeth in 2008, but commissioners, including current President Bob Kovach, D-District 3, refused to release the money, leading Nemeth to issue a mandate order that, on automatic appeal, reached the state Supreme Court earlier this year.

In an order dated June 22, the court ruled that evidence Nemeth presented to support the new courtroom — mostly caseload numbers for 2007 through 2009 — was "insufficient to establish ... that a new courtroom is reasonably necessary to the court's operation." Here is the SBT report on the ruling, also from June 22nd.

The court also ruled on several other mandates. It agreed with Nemeth on the need for certain purchases and renovations, and a $2,709 pay increase for the court bookkeeper, but disagreed on the need for seven other pay increases, including $20,000 for the court's executive secretary.

During a heated exchange Tuesday, Kovach, speaking to Nemeth, said of his request for money for a new courtroom, "I guess you have not accepted the (Supreme Court) verdict ... So now you're going to pursue it again."

"The world doesn't stop, Bob," Nemeth replied, adding the court is "a hell of a lot busier" now than in 2009, creating stronger evidence this time around, should the case again end up in court, of the need for an additional courtroom.

Here is the June 22, 2010 Supreme Court ruling in the mandate case.

Posted by Marcia Oddi on August 26, 2010 12:46 PM
Posted to Indiana Courts