ILNews

AG uses new law to freeze employee's assets

Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

The Indiana Attorney General is using a new public-accountability law to freeze the assets of the Brownstown clerk-treasurer accused of overpaying herself more than $360,000 in taxpayer money.

Attorney General Greg Zoeller announced Monday he obtained a temporary restraining order in Jackson Circuit Court to prevent Rebecka Ann Fee from disposing or transferring any financial assets during the embezzlement investigation.

A State Board of Accounts field examiner auditing the town's finances between January 2006 and October 2009 found Fee had allegedly doctored computer records to conceal the misuse from town council members when they reviewed the claims. Fee, who handled Brownstown government payroll, had allegedly been overpaying herself by $1,000 to $4,000 biweekly.

The temporary restraining order is the first use of House Enrolled Act 1514, a public-accountability law. Under the law, the State Board of Accounts alerts the AG's office to potential fraud on public funds much earlier than before, allowing the attorney general to intervene in court to prevent suspects from hiding or getting rid of assets.

Zoeller is seeking a pre-judgment attachment of Fee's financial assets - including a personal bank account and proceeds of a sale of a house - and garnishment of her wages. A hearing has been scheduled on the motion for Dec. 14 before Judge William Vance. Once the State Board of Accounts' final audit is complete, the AG's office plans to file a civil collections lawsuit and seek a judgment against Fee to recover public funds from her.

According to the attorney general's office, Fee is still the elected clerk-treasurer, but she hasn't performed the duties of the office since October. An interim clerk-treasurer has been appointed.

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. CCHP's real accomplishment is the 2015 law signed by Gov Pence that basically outlaws any annexation that is forced where a 65% majority of landowners in the affected area disagree. Regardless of whether HP wins or loses, the citizens of Indiana will not have another fiasco like this. The law Gov Pence signed is a direct result of this malgovernance.

  2. I gave tempparry guardship to a friend of my granddaughter in 2012. I went to prison. I had custody. My daughter went to prison to. We are out. My daughter gave me custody but can get her back. She was not order to give me custody . but now we want granddaughter back from friend. She's 14 now. What rights do we have

  3. This sure is not what most who value good governance consider the Rule of Law to entail: "In a letter dated March 2, which Brizzi forwarded to IBJ, the commission dismissed the grievance “on grounds that there is not reasonable cause to believe that you are guilty of misconduct.”" Yet two month later reasonable cause does exist? (Or is the commission forging ahead, the need for reasonable belief be damned? -- A seeming violation of the Rules of Profession Ethics on the part of the commission) Could the rule of law theory cause one to believe that an explanation is in order? Could it be that Hoosier attorneys live under Imperial Law (which is also a t-word that rhymes with infamy) in which the Platonic guardians can do no wrong and never owe the plebeian class any explanation for their powerful actions. (Might makes it right?) Could this be a case of politics directing the commission, as celebrated IU Mauer Professor (the late) Patrick Baude warned was happening 20 years ago in his controversial (whisteblowing) ethics lecture on a quite similar topic: http://www.repository.law.indiana.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1498&context=ilj

  4. I have a case presently pending cert review before the SCOTUS that reveals just how Indiana regulates the bar. I have been denied licensure for life for holding the wrong views and questioning the grand inquisitors as to their duties as to state and federal constitutional due process. True story: https://www.scribd.com/doc/299040839/2016Petitionforcert-to-SCOTUS Shorter, Amici brief serving to frame issue as misuse of govt licensure: https://www.scribd.com/doc/312841269/Thomas-More-Society-Amicus-Brown-v-Ind-Bd-of-Law-Examiners

  5. Here's an idea...how about we MORE heavily regulate the law schools to reduce the surplus of graduates, driving starting salaries up for those new grads, so that we can all pay our insane amount of student loans off in a reasonable amount of time and then be able to afford to do pro bono & low-fee work? I've got friends in other industries, radiology for example, and their schools accept a very limited number of students so there will never be a glut of new grads and everyone's pay stays high. For example, my radiologist friend's school accepted just six new students per year.

ADVERTISEMENT