Supreme Court of Ohio 2006 Annual Report - Supreme Court - State ...

Pro Se & Indigent
Litigants Task Force
Jo Ellen Cline, staff liaison
Hon. John Adkins, chair
Mary Asbury
Beth Bray
Hon. Marc Dann
Hon. Lenny Elison
Hon. William Harsha
Hon. Jim James
Hon. Mary Kovack
Kent Markus
Lynne Mazeika
Laura Restivo
Kimberly Shumate
David Bodiker
Becky Carpenter
Hon. Timothy DeGeeter
R. Daniel Hannon
Phyliss Henderson
Hon. Jim Jordan
Hon. Paul Kutscher
Hon. William Mason
Hon. Sharon Ray
Hon. Nancy Margaret
Russo
Hon. Mark Wall
Thomas Weeks
Hon. John Willamowski
Commission on
the Rules of
Superintendence
for Ohio Courts
Jo Ellen Cline, staff liaison
Hon. Deborah A. Alspach
Hon. Patricia Ann
Blackmon
Hon. Janet R. Burnside
Hon. Patricia A. Cosgrove
Hon. Theresa Dellick
Hon. Charlotte Coleman
Eufinger
Hon. William H. Harsha III
Hon. Gary W. Herman
Steven C. Hollon, secretary
Hon. James M. Hughes
Hon. Judith Ann Lanzinger
Hon. David Lewandowski
Nancy G. McMillen
Robert G. Palmer
Hon. J. Bernie Quilter
Hon. Kenneth J. Spicer
Elizabeth W. Stephenson
Adrian D. Thompson
Hon. Jennifer P. Weiler
Hon. Mary Pat Zitter
Office of the administrative director
The principal administrative office at the Supreme
Court, the Office of the Administrative Director provides
leadership and guidance to the divisions, offices, sections
and programs through which the Court executes its judicial
and administrative functions. In addition, the administrative
director oversees the assistance that Court staff provide to
Ohio trial and appellate courts.
The Court saw a number of significant administrative and
organizational accomplishments in 2006 under the leadership
and direction of the Administrative Division.
The administrative director led efforts to move forward
the Court’s overall legislative agenda. Chief Justice Thomas
J. Moyer testified before the House Judiciary Committee in
favor of judicial reform legislation, and worked with legislative
leaders on the bill, which would increase qualifications for
judicial office, increase the length of judicial terms and make
other reforms. The package did not pass, but is expected to
be reintroduced in 2007 with the support of the Chief Justice.
Also on the legislative front, the budget proposals for fiscal
years 2008 and 2009 were prepared and submitted to the
General Assembly.
An important administrative priority for 2006 was the
final consolidation of the regulation of the pre-admission and
post-admission phases of the practice of law into one division
at the Court, the Attorney Services Division. To achieve this,
the necessary preparations were undertaken throughout 2006
to transition the Office of Bar Admissions from the Clerk’s
Division to the Attorney Services Division effective Jan. 1,
2007. The division will administer registering for the bar
exam, the bar exam, attorney registration, continuing legal
education and professionalism. The disciplinary process will
remain a separate, independent function.
A number of revisions and improvements were made to
Court Administrative Policies and Procedures, including the
adoption of revised records management policies and a set
of revised policies governing employment. In addition, the
Court approved the Code of Ethics for Court Appointees.
The code contains simple, easy-to-understand language that
sets forth the Court’s expectations for its appointees and
provides guidance on topics such as undue influence, gifts,
impartiality, confidential information, bias and prejudice.
The Commission on the Rules of Superintendence
for Ohio Courts, which was established by the Court in
September 2005 to assist the Court in the exercise of its rulemaking
powers and general superintendence over all courts
in Ohio, held its first meeting in June.
20