On Friday, December 16, 2022, the Indiana Commission on Judicial Qualifications filed formal charges of Judicial Misconduct against Decatur Circuit Court Judge, Hon. Timothy B. Day before the Supreme Court of Indiana. The case is entitled “In the matter of Hon.Timothy B. Day” with case no. 22S-JD-412.

The charges cited Code of Judicial Conduct 1.1, 1.2,2.2, 2.9(a), and 2.9(b) which require:

Judges to comply with the law.

Judges to act at all times in a manner that promotes public confidence in the independence, integrity, and impartiality of the judiciary.

Judges to uphold the law and to perform all duties of judicial office fairly and impartially.

Judges to not initiate, permit, or consider ex parte communications; and committed conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice.

Judges to make prompt provisions to notify the parties of the substance of any unauthorized ex parte communications bearing upon the substance of the matter and to provide the parties with an opportunity to respond, and commit conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice.

The Code of Judicial Conduct can be found here

The respondent, during the pendency of one of the clients, engaged in a pattern or practice of not including the Guardian ad Litem (GAL)/Court Appointed Special Advocates (CASA) at hearings and in-chambers meetings with the respondent and other parties.

The filing states:

“Respondent’s Order from the April 4, 2019, Periodic Case Review in R.P.’s CHINS case does not reflect that a GAL/CASA was present for the hearing, and the chronological case summary reflects that no GAL/CASA filed a report prior to the hearing. During the April 4, 2019 hearing, Respondent declined to follow DCS’s recommendation regarding a proposed visitation plan for R.P. and threatened that if R.P. continued to refuse to go on visits with her Father, Respondent would change her placement from her current foster home.”

The filing continues:

“Respondent did not appoint a GAL for R.P. in either of the two guardianship cases. Respondent excluded R.P.’s GAL in the CHINS matter from participation in all of the guardianship hearings, leaving R.P. without representation in the proceedings. In his April 20, 2022 deposition, Respondent offered that his reason for not appointing a GAL for R.P. in the guardianship proceedings was that: “I’m representing the best interests of that child, that is the overarching issue in guardianships, what is in the child’s best interests, and it was very squarely presented to me by all sides.”

With all the facts and allegations, the Commission respectfully requests that, upon the filing of Respondent’s Answer, the Indiana Supreme Court appoint three Masters to conduct a public hearing on the charges that Respondent committed judicial misconduct as alleged, and further prays that the Supreme Court find that Respondent committed misconduct and that it imposed upon him the appropriate sanction.

The Judge earned a law degree from Indiana University’s School of Law.

The Judge’s courtroom is located at 253 E Wood St. in Decatur and can be reached at 1 217 425 7098. His bio can be found on ballotpedia.com.  

A copy of the original filing can be found here.