“A judge shall not abuse the prestige of judicial office to advance the personal or economic interests of the judge or others, or allow others to do so.”  Code of Judicial Conduct R. 1.3.

“The duties of judicial office, as prescribed by law, shall take precedence over all of a judge’s personal and extrajudicial activities.”  Code of Judicial Conduct R. 2.1.

I never met Judge Redding. In nearly 20 years of practice, I never heard a story about him. Yet in February 2022, I read an online article from the archives of a local library that stirred the conscious. From 1976 through 1979, Judge David Redding’s time on the bench shook the Elkhart County bar to its core. It caused controversies that spilled into the public. And, perhaps more importantly, it shaped the minds of brilliant young attorneys that would go on to become some of Elkhart County's most respected and revered attorneys and judges; attorneys who I have learned invaluable lessons from over the past 20 years. 

This writing is only partly based on the article. If you read the article, keep in mind that it does not address the full story. Talking with those who lived through and practiced in Elkhart at the time, the full story highlights the necessity of our rules of professional and judicial conduct. In 1976, a much younger David Redding took the bench after defeating Circuit Court Judge Aldo Simpson. Aldo Simpson was highly respected and on the Circuit Court bench in Elkhart County from 1932-1976, a record holding 44 years. Born in 1892, Judge Simpson was 84 in 1976. He was on the bench for the end of the Great Depression, all of WWII, a man landing on the moon, and Vietnam. He almost made it to Rocky I and Star Wars. Judge Simpson was competent, wise, but slow on adopting change. Redding ran on change. 

While many of the attorneys I spoke with thought Redding had some good ideas, he had a temper and treated many who interacted with him with hostility. He abused his power. In one example, I was told he threatened to throw one man in jail for contempt for not wearing a necktie in court. As hinted at in the article, he blurred the lines between the roles of judges, attorneys, prosecutors, and witnesses. In fact, a former judge who witnessed the events told me that the “simple moral of the story is that judges need to be judges. Attorneys need to be attorneys. Prosecutors need to be prosecutors. And public defenders need to be public defenders.” The system works best when everyone is focused on their jobs.

“A judge shall perform the duties of judicial office, including administrative duties, without bias or prejudice.” Code of Judicial Conduct R. 2.3(A).

“A judge shall not practice law.” Code of Judicial Conduct R 3.10.   

In Elkhart County, attorneys choose where they file civil cases. They did in the late 1970s as well. Though Redding was considered intelligent and competent by most, attorneys chose to file civil cases in other Elkhart courts rather than deal with the atmosphere surrounding the Circuit Court. After issues came to a head involving a confrontation with Elkhart’s well-respected prosecutor, where Judge Redding threatened to find him in contempt, Judge Redding chose to resign. According to the article, Judge Redding himself is quoted as admitting that he may have “spoken a little harshly with certain individuals outside of the courtroom.”

“A judge shall be patient, dignified, and courteous to litigants, jurors, witnesses, lawyers, court staff, court officials, and others with who the judge deals in an official capacity . . .” Code of Judicial Conduct R. 2.8(A)

Judge Redding’s short tenure on the bench shaped the attorneys of the time, especially the judiciary. Judge Redding’s replacement was Circuit Court Judge Gene Duffin, who I have never heard speak harshly to anyone. Judge Duffin was appointed after Redding’s resignation and served Elkhart County as Circuit Court Judge for 18 years. He is soft-spoken and one of the best mediators you will ever find in the state of Indiana. His skill in settling cases is legendary. Judge Terry Shewmaker, who proceeded Judge Duffin for another 3 terms on the bench, is also one of Indiana’s best mediators and has a wealth of knowledge about the blend of art, science, and the process of conflict resolution. Both are problem solvers. Both quietly acknowledge and treat all parties and attorneys they encounter with respect. They also welcome new attorneys. The first time I went to Circuit Court to have Judge Shewmaker review a routine order prepared by a senior partner, he spent a few minutes with me and just had a conversation with me in chambers. When I got back to the office and the senior partner asked me how it went, I handed him the executed documents and said, “I think it went well, he called me dude.”

“A judge shall accord to every person who has a legal interest in a proceeding, or that person’s lawyer, the right to be heard according to law.” Code of Judicial Conduct, R. 2.6(A).

“A judge shall act at all times in a manner that promotes public confidence in the independence, integrity, and impartiality of the judiciary, and shall avoid impropriety and the appearance of impropriety.” Code of Judicial Conduct R. 1.2

As attorneys, lawyers are the face of the legal system. Whether judge or not, we are all attorneys and have a duty to conduct ourselves professionally. The first paragraph of the preamble of the Rules of Professional Conduct states: “A lawyer, as a member of the legal profession, is a representative of clients, an officer of the legal system and a public citizen having special responsibility for the quality of justice. Whether or not engaging in the practice of law, lawyers should conduct themselves honorably.” Additionally, lawyers “should demonstrate respect for the legal system and for those who serve it, including judges, other lawyers and public officials.”  In our dealings with the court, Rule 3.5(d) states that a lawyer shall not: “engage in conduct intended to disrupt a tribunal.” Additionally, Rule 4.4(a) states that lawyers “shall not use means that have no substantial purpose other than to embarrass, delay, or burden a third person, or use methods of obtaining evidence that violate the legal rights of such a person.”

Recently I met an attorney for a case in the attorney’s lounge in a nearby county. It was full . . . not a single attorney was present, but there were volunteers preparing ballots for absentee voters.  Even before the pandemic, my own county attorneys’ lounges have slowly been reduced to emergency waiting rooms. When I started practicing, new attorneys were sent to court to check mailboxes, get routine orders signed, and file documents with the courts. In that process you met other attorneys, witnessed other attorneys practice in court, and made mistakes that would teach you how to practice law. You received instant feedback that if you treated the clerk’s office with respect when you forgot a summons, a form of notice, or a minute entry while trying to file a packet of information, the hard-working people that worked in that office would treat you with respect. Meaning that they would hold your filing, not reject it, while you ran back to your office to correct the mistake. 

We are coming out of a pandemic. While different counties are emerging at different speeds, one thing is consistent in all 92 counties. In one way or another, the practice of law has changed and will continue to change. This is especially true for those of us who represent clients in courts, whether you call yourself a litigator, a trial lawyer, or just a lawyer. Some of the changes, like virtual status conferences and e-filing, save clients time and money, are highly efficient, and benefit society. They are good changes. But even with the good changes, we need to acknowledge the downside. There are entire articles written on present day attorney well-being, due in part to increased isolation. With electronic filing, a new attorney will get less opportunities to have those micro touches that are invaluable early on in learning how to practice law. 

As our profession evolves, it is important to keep in mind the words of President Harry Truman: “There is nothing new in the world except the history you do not know.” The history of Judge Redding’s short tenure on the Court is directly applicable to the social media influenced world we live in today. There are no shortcuts to learning to practice law; our craft is learned by hard work, perseverance, and experience. We learn from those before and around us. Our ethics rules and our history should be kept in mind as we emerge from this collective experience with the pandemic.

Andrew Hicks is a partner at Warrick & Boyn, LLP, located in Elkhart, Indiana. Andrew has been a member of the Indiana Bar since graduating Notre Dame Law School in 2002. Andrew has served as a member of the Indiana Bar Association’s House of Delegates on behalf of Elkhart County since 2003, as a result of which he has had the privilege of meeting some of the amazing lawyers who provided the background information for this article.