Subscriber Benefit
As a subscriber you can listen to articles at work, in the car, or while you work out. Subscribe NowThe dismissal of a suit brought against Indiana Court of Appeals Chief Judge Nancy Vaidik, the clerk of Indiana’s appellate courts and two Department of Correction employees has been affirmed, with a panel of the COA finding judicial immunity and insufficient facts bar the case from proceeding.
Carlisle resident Kevin Martin, who is serving murder and battery sentences, sued Vaidik, clerk Greg Pachmayr and DOC employees Charles Dugan and Makenzy Gilbert in June 2018 after his appeal of the denial of his post-conviction relief petition was dismissed. The PCR appeal was dismissed after Martin filed several defective appellate briefs, and the dismissal order was signed by Vaidik.
Martin filed his complaint against Vaidik, Pachmayr and the DOC employees in Sullivan Circuit Court, alleging he had given Dugan a brief and a motion for a new trial, and that Gilbert could corroborate that allegation. His complaint further alleged Pachmayr rejected the brief and motion and that Vaidik “misused the power of the court and was biased against him because he had filed a complaint against her.”
Martin’s complaint sought his release from prison and punitive damages, but the trial court granted the defendant-appellees’ motion to dismiss pursuant to Indiana Trial Rules 12(B)(1) and (6). An appellate panel consisting of judges John Baker, Melissa May and Elizabeth Tavitas upheld the dismissal in a memorandum decision Monday, finding no abuse of the trial court’s discretion.
Turning first to the allegations against Dugan and Gilbert, the appellate panel agreed with the trial court that Martin failed to allege facts against them upon which relief could be granted. The panel likewise found insufficient factual allegations against Pachmayr.
Turning then to the allegations against the chief judge, the appellate panel agreed with the lower court that Vaidik is protected from Martin’s complaint by judicial immunity.
“It seems that Martin alleges that Chief Judge Vaidik misused the power of the court and was biased against him,” Baker wrote for the unanimous panel. “We note that Martin offers no facts to substantiate his allegation. Regardless, Chief Judge Vaidik has judicial immunity.”
The case is Kevin L. Martin v. Hon. Nancy Vaidik, Charles Dugan, Makenzy Gilbert, and Greg Pachmayr, 18A-CT-1980.
Please enable JavaScript to view this content.