Madison County judge serves 45-day suspension

INDIANAPOLIS – A Madison County judge is scheduled to serve a 45-day suspension starting next month.

According to an Indiana Supreme Court ruling, Judge Scott A. Norrick will be suspended without pay from June 3 to July 18. The court’s opinion was issued on Friday – about four months after charges were formally filed against Norrick.

Norrick has been accused of various counts of misconduct in connection with his role as a Madison County judge. The court found that Norrick improperly issued a custody order and failed to supervise his staff in handling some criminal cases.

The Indiana Supreme Court found that Norrick presided over cases in which he and his son were the attorneys of record. Before being elected as a Madison County judge, Norrick represented Landmark Accounts Inc., a company that engages in accounting, tax preparation, payroll and commercial property management, according to its website.

Court documents show that after Norrick’s election, his son began representing Landmark Accounts in its legal matters. Norrick’s son became a member of Norrick’s firm after he was admitted to the bar in September 2020.

An investigation by the Indiana Commission on Judicial Qualifications found that from January 2021 to April 2022, Norrick presided over 27 cases in which his son acted as counsel and Landmark Accounts was a party. Court records show Norrick issued 66 signed orders in those cases, including orders withdrawing his own appearance as attorney for Landmark Accounts.

Norrick later filed a report and admitted that he led cases related to Landmark Accounts. In the report, Norrick noted that the measures he took to ensure he was not assigned to cases related to Landmark Accounts resulted in “errors by his court staff.”

Further investigation by the Indiana Commission on Judicial Qualifications also found that from January 2021 to March 2023, approximately 40 cases handled by Norrick and his staff were missing entries. Court documents show that Norrick’s office failed to properly update warrants, failed to set specific dates for jury trials, failed to accurately reflect the conduct of some hearings and failed to always indicate whether future hearing dates were necessary in some cases.

The Indiana Supreme Court’s ruling found that 16 of the cases overseen by Norrick were dismissed under Indiana Criminal Rule 4(C), which requires timely processing of defendants’ cases. The regulation stipulates that a defendant may not be held for more than one year after his or her arrest or criminal charge.

In one particular case, Norrick’s staff mistakenly attached his signature to an order changing custody of a minor. The flawed order granted an urgent modification to a custody agreement without allowing all parties to comment on the matter.

According to court documents, urgent changes to custody arrangements are only permitted in cases where the dependent person could be harmed if the custody arrangements are not changed before both parties can comment on the case.

Norrick later rescinded the erroneous emergency order. He himself stated that in this case two orders were issued incorrectly.

The Indiana Supreme Court found that Norrick’s activities violated at least three provisions of the Indiana Judicial Code of Conduct:

• Rule 1.2: Obligation of judges to avoid impropriety and to act at all times in a manner that promotes public confidence in the integrity of the judiciary.
• Rule 2.5(A): Judges are required to discharge their judicial and administrative duties competently, diligently and expeditiously
• Rule 2.12(A): Obligation of judges to supervise court personnel to act in accordance with the judge’s duties under the Code of Conduct for Judges.

Four of the five Indiana Supreme Court justices agreed with the court’s opinion in the case. Judge Geoffrey G. Slaughter dissented, believing that more severe discipline of Norrick was warranted.