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

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Indiana State Bar Association

Indianapolis Bar Association

Evansville Bar Association

Allen County Bar Association

Indiana Lawyer on Facebook

facebook
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Such things are no more elections than those in the late, unlamented Soviet Union.

  2. It appears the police and prosecutors are allowed to change the rules halfway through the game to suit themselves. I am surprised that the congress has not yet eliminated the right to a trial in cases involving any type of forensic evidence. That would suit their foolish law and order police state views. I say we eliminate the statute of limitations for crimes committed by members of congress and other government employees. Of course they would never do that. They are all corrupt cowards!!!

  3. Poor Judge Brown probably thought that by slavishly serving the godz of the age her violations of 18th century concepts like due process and the rule of law would be overlooked. Mayhaps she was merely a Judge ahead of her time?

  4. in a lawyer discipline case Judge Brown, now removed, was presiding over a hearing about a lawyer accused of the supposedly heinous ethical violation of saying the words "Illegal immigrant." (IN re Barker) http://www.in.gov/judiciary/files/order-discipline-2013-55S00-1008-DI-429.pdf .... I wonder if when we compare the egregious violations of due process by Judge Brown, to her chiding of another lawyer for politically incorrectness, if there are any conclusions to be drawn about what kind of person, what kind of judge, what kind of apparatchik, is busy implementing the agenda of political correctness and making off-limits legit advocacy about an adverse party in a suit whose illegal alien status is relevant? I am just asking the question, the reader can make own conclsuion. Oh wait-- did I use the wrong adjective-- let me rephrase that, um undocumented alien?

  5. of course the bigger questions of whether or not the people want to pay for ANY bussing is off limits, due to the Supreme Court protecting the people from DEMOCRACY. Several decades hence from desegregation and bussing plans and we STILL need to be taking all this taxpayer money to combat mostly-imagined "discrimination" in the most obviously failed social program of the postwar period.

ADVERTISEMENT