The Indianapolis times. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1922-1965, 1930-12-19
lawyers ACT
TO Simplify
court RULES
Bar Discusses Plans for
Revisions in Law to
Speed Justice.
RAPS TECHNICALITY USE
Trial Is Game of Chance
Under Old Procedure,
Willis Charges.
RAPS TECHNIcALITY USE

%~~%~N+-A 40 40 hCNGg A-O0C~0
proposals which. their authors de-
clared, would remove the technical
tiles now 'clogging the wheels of
justice in all courts of the state.
If they disagreed on what revi-
sion should be made in Indiana
legal procedure. they did agree that
antiquated procedure in the courts
has been an important factor in
delayed administration Of justice.
In convention at the Columbia
Club, the Indiana Bar Association
pondered three proposals, each re-
moving from the legislature the
power to create or change legal
procedure and placing it instead in
the hands Of the states high courts.
Proposals finally approved By the
bar association will be presented
the 1881 legislature.
Willis Presents Plan
One proposal drafted by Profess
sor Hugh Willis Of the Indiana uni
versity law school would give the
supreme and appellate courts power
to draft and simplify rules of legal
procedure; empower judges to
direct trials. assist ernpaneling
juries, question witnesses and sum-
mon to the stand witnesses not
called by the parties.
The Willis plan also provides that
no case shall be reversed for vio-
lation of rules of court or any other
technicalities, which in effect
changes the entire scheme OF ap-
peals in ti1a state.
tt also proposes tsaat a decision
ny any oouEt2 On Q Doiilt Of pro-
Cedure never shall be regarded as
2 binding precedent for the decision
o. procedural point in later case
An advisory council of fifteen
members to aid the court in for1nu-
lating rules is advocated.
Substitute Withdrawn
A substitute proposal presented
by Walter Arnold, South Bend,
which would not specify any Of the
judicial powers, was withdrawn by
Arnold after some discussion.
Fred Cause, former supreme
court judge and a member Of the
legislative committee of the state
crime conference, joined Judge
Julian Sharpnack of Bartholomew
circuit court i'll another proposal
IL would give the supreme court
alone the right to change the rules,
hut does not specify what changes
shall be made; provides that the
attorney general, Chairmen OF the
judiciary committees of both houses
Of the general assembly and two
circuit judges appointed by the
Governor shall form the advisory
council on the rules.
IF we don't make some changes
the legislature, urged on by an irate
public, is going to pass measures
which will cause changes we may
not like" Cause pointed out.
Just Game of Chance"
Declaring the present system
makes a trial really an attorney
trial. in which lawyers play a game
with each other, Willis said: "A jury
trial today really is game of
chance Just as was the Anglo-Saxon
trial by ordeal and the Norman
wager by battle"
The one point which Willis at
tempted to drive home was that no
reversals may be obtained upon
technicalities of procedure, declar-
ing: In many cases lawyers pur-
posely attempt to set errors into
the record in order to win their
cases in courts of appeal"
B. F. Small, Terre Haute, took
issue with the charge and declared
Indiana procedure is the outgrowth
of seventy EIGHT years Of collective
thought; while w. B. Carlisle, South
Bend, heartily Endorsed the Willis
plan and urged a committee be ap-
pointed; empowered to present it TO
the legislature for action.
Opposed. by Lockyear
our cumbersome procedure pro-
vides for absolute denial of justice
in small matters was the charge Of
William Fox. Jeffersonville. I'VE
could have shorter trials and less
expense to the litigant and by dis
carding our present rules 1t viii be
possible to do this"
On the other hand, B. NJ. Owen,
Scottsburg, proposed criminal pro-
cedure alone he reformed and that
for civil cases be left untouched.