Special judge accepts jurisdiction in challenge to AG Hill’s eligibility to remain in office

A special judge has accepted jurisdiction over a civil lawsuit challenging Indiana Attorney General Curtis Hill’s ability to remain in office after his law license was suspended. The case is now beginning to move forward, with a status conference set for this week.

Judge Gary L. Miller of Marion Superior Court Civil Division 3 on Friday accepted his appointment to the case of Perron, et al. v. Hill, et al., 49D03-2005-PL-016774. The case was originally assigned to Judge Marc Rothenberg, but he recused, leaving Clerk Myla Eldridge to appoint a special judge.

In the lawsuit, four Indianapolis residents – James and Kathy Perron, Julia Vaughn and John Windle – argue the 30-day license suspension Hill is currently serving creates a “vacancy” in his elected position that the governor must fill.

Hill has been suspended since May 18 for Professional Conduct Rules violations related to allegations that he drunkenly groped four women at a March 2018 party. He will be automatically reinstated June 17.

In the interim, Hill appointed his chief deputy, Aaron Negangard, to oversee the legal operations of the Office of the Attorney General. But, the plaintiffs argue, the AG did not have the authority to make that appointment.

“Curtis Hill currently lacks the ability to practice law in the state — the most basic qualification for the job of Attorney General,” Vaughn said when the lawsuit was announced. “He has been found guilty of criminal acts and used his office to intimidate his accusers. Allowing him to handpick his successor and reassume the office in thirty days undermines respect for both the law and our state government.”

Hill was not criminally charged in the March 2018 incident, but the Supreme Court in its disciplinary order said he was guilty of misdemeanor battery against the four accusers.

Before the Marion County case was filed, Indiana Republican Gov. Eric Holcomb unsuccessfully sought intervention into Hill’s disciplinary action for clarification on whether the suspension created a “vacancy.”

Holcomb is named as a defendant in the Marion County suit alongside Hill and Negangard. The plaintiffs say he has a claimed interest in the litigation.

A status conference is set for 11 a.m. Friday via the WebEx conferencing software.

Meanwhile, the defendants have moved for an enlargement of time to respond to the complaint, seeking an extension to July 10. By that time, Hill will have been reinstated to the practice of law.

The plaintiffs had previously moved for summary judgment on their claims, but later moved to withdraw. Miller, who like Hill is a Republican, has not made any rulings in the case other than setting the status conference.

The defendants, including Holcomb, are represented by lawyers within the OAG. The plaintiffs are represented by William Groth of Macey Swanson LLP.