A prominent labor and employment attorney from Fort Wayne, Holly Brady is an unusual nominee for the federal bench, given her frequent representation of plaintiffs and victims of discrimination.
A native Hoosier, Brady was born Holly Ann Winkeljohn in Fort Wayne on August 14, 1969. After getting an B.A. from Indiana University in 1991, Brady attended Valparaiso University School of Law, graduating in 1994. Following her graduation, Brady joined the Fort Wayne law firm Gallucci Hopkins & Theisin P.C. which later merged into Barnes & Thornburg LLP. In 2002, she moved to the firm Theisen Bowers & Brady LLC as a Member.
In 2007, Brady joined Haller & Colvin P.C. as a Member. She has served as President at the firm from 2012 to 2018.
History of the Seat
Brady has been nominated for a seat on the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Indiana. This seat was vacated on September 29, 2017, when Judge Joseph Van Bokkelen moved to senior status.
Brady was approached by Sen. Todd Young (R-Ind.) for the seat in early June 2017. While she interviewed with Young in July, she wasn’t selected as the primary candidate by the White House until December 2017. Brady interviewed with Sen. Joe Donnelly (D-Ind.) and his staff early in 2018 and was nominated on April 10, 2018.
Brady began her legal career as an Associate at Gallucci, Hopkins & Theisen, which later merged into Barnes & Thornburg. While there, Brady primarily represented employees in discrimination and wrongful termination cases. During her time there, Brady represented Monte Sieberns, who was blind, in a discrimination suit against Wal-Mart, who declined to hire him. Brady argued that Wal-Mart discriminated by failing to hire Sieberns as a telephone operator, while Wal-Mart countered that their phone system could not have been operated by Sieberns. Brady ultimately lost the argument before Judge William Lee at the trial level and the Seventh Circuit. In another unique case, Brady represented the Estate of a police officer who was shot and killed by a fugitive. Brady and her fellow attorneys sued the fugitive’s parents for negligent storage of the firearm, permitting the fugitive to access and use it, successfully persuading the Indiana Supreme Court to recognize a statutory duty of care by firearm owners to store their weapons appropriately.
In 2002, Brady joined Theisen Bowers & Brady, a boutique employment law firm. At the firm, she represented current and former employees in a labor and breach of contract suit against DaimlerChrysler.
In 2007, Brady moved to the Haller & Colvin, where she currently serves. While she continued her work on labor and employment issues, she also handled other civil litigation. Notably, Brady represented members of the House Democratic Caucus challenging the collection of fines imposed upon them by the Republican majority. The suit arose from two incidents in 2011 and 2012, when Indiana State House Democrats fled the state to prevent a legislative quorum and block anti-union legislation. In response, Republican Speaker Brian Bosma imposed fines on the absent lawmakers, and Democratic lawmakers, represented by Brady, challenged the collection of the fines by garnishing their wages. The Indiana Supreme Court ultimately dismissed the suit in a 3-2 decision, finding that courts had no jurisdiction over the issue.
Generally speaking, regardless of the administration, attorneys practicing civil defense are more likely to become federal judges than those primarily representing plaintiffs. As such, the nomination of Brady, who has primarily represented plaintiffs, is refreshingly different. While Brady is a Republican, her representation of Democrats, labor plaintiffs, and the victims of discrimination is likely to deem her a consensus nominee.
 Sen. Comm. on the Judiciary, 115th Cong., Holly A. Brady: Questionnaire for Judicial Nominees 1.
 Id. at 2.
 Id. at 25-26.
 Id. at 26.
 See id.
 Sieberns v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., 946 F. Supp. 664 (N.D. Ind. 1996).
 See id. at
 Sieberns v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., 125 F.3d 1019 (7th Cir. 1997).
 Estate of Eryn T. Heck v. Stoffer, 786 N.E.2d 265 (Ind. 2003).
 Id. at 269.
 Bell v. DaimlerChrysler Corp., 547 F.3d 796 (7th Cir. 2008).
 See Berry v. Crawford, 990 N.E.2d 410 (Ind. 2013).
 Frank James, Indiana Democratic Lawmakers Imitate Wisconsin, Flee State, NPR, Feb.. 22, 2011, https://www.npr.org/sections/itsallpolitics/2011/02/22/133966237/indiana-democratic-lawmakers-imitate-wisconsin-flee-state.
 See Berry, supra n. 13 at 413.
 Id. at 422.
 See Brian Francisco, City Lawyer Picked for Federal Post, Fort Wayne Journal Gazette, Apr. 11, 2018, http://www.journalgazette.net/news/local/20180411/city-lawyer-picked-for-federal-post (citing Mark Gia-Quinta).
Pingback: JP Hanlon – Nominee for the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Indiana | The Vetting Room
Even with that record, and your concession that she ought to be a consensus nominee, only 3 democrat senators voted for her confirmation.
With that outcome, what possible incentive do the Republicans have for seeking “consensus?” If the other side is going to oppose whoever you come up with, you might as well pick the most aggressive partisan you can and get that person confirmed.