IBJNews

First woman named to Indiana Supreme Court since 1999

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Gov. Mitch Daniels on Friday named a Tippecanoe County judge as the first woman on the bench of the Indiana Supreme Court in 13 years.

The appointment of Loretta Rush ends Indiana's distinction as one of only three states will all-male high courts, and makes Rush the state's first female justice since Myra Selby stepped down in 1999.

Rush is the third justice Daniels has appointed to the five-member court in the past two years. She replaces Justice Frank Sullivan who stepped down after 19 years.

Rush, 54, is a Republican who was born in Scranton, Pa., and moved to Indiana in 1976. After graduating from Purdue University in 1980, she washed dishes and did other jobs to work her way through the Indiana University Maurer School of Law.

In November 1998, before her first term as judge for the county that includes Lafayette, a 27-year-old former juvenile client kicked in the front door of her home and tried to kill her husband. Rush hid their children and tried to get help, but she and her husband both were injured and she later had to have surgery. The attacker was convicted of attempted murder and burglary.

"I look at the children that find themselves in our court system and see the long-standing toll that child abuse, neglect, and untreated mental health can have on their adult lives," Rush wrote in her application for the court seat.

Only three states — Idaho, Indiana, and Iowa — currently have no women on their court of last resort, according to the National Center for State Courts.

"As a woman, as a lawyer, and a Hoosier I am delighted that now the highest court in the land — Indiana — will be representative of the state of Indiana," said Indianapolis attorney Karen Celestino-Horseman. "The three candidates were excellent, but given that there was no woman on the court, it was time."

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
 
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. How can any company that has the cash and other assets be allowed to simply foreclose and not pay the debt? Simon, pay the debt and sell the property yourself. Don't just stiff the bank with the loan and require them to find a buyer.

  2. If you only knew....

  3. The proposal is structured in such a way that a private company (who has competitors in the marketplace) has struck a deal to get "financing" through utility ratepayers via IPL. Competitors to BlueIndy are at disadvantage now. The story isn't "how green can we be" but how creative "financing" through captive ratepayers benefits a company whose proposal should sink or float in the competitive marketplace without customer funding. If it was a great idea there would be financing available. IBJ needs to be doing a story on the utility ratemaking piece of this (which is pretty complicated) but instead it suggests that folks are whining about paying for being green.

  4. The facts contained in your post make your position so much more credible than those based on sheer emotion. Thanks for enlightening us.

  5. Please consider a couple of economic realities: First, retail is more consolidated now than it was when malls like this were built. There used to be many department stores. Now, in essence, there is one--Macy's. Right off, you've eliminated the need for multiple anchor stores in malls. And in-line retailers have consolidated or folded or have stopped building new stores because so much of their business is now online. The Limited, for example, Next, malls are closing all over the country, even some of the former gems are now derelict.Times change. And finally, as the income level of any particular area declines, so do the retail offerings. Sad, but true.

ADVERTISEMENT