ILNews

Valpo attorney charged with $1.6M theft held in contempt in civil suit

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

A Porter County lawyer allegedly stole more than $1.6 million from four companies owned by a client he represented for decades, according to criminal charges filed against him.

Meanwhile, the companies that Clark W. Holesinger of Valparaiso represented have filed separate civil tort and malpractice suits against him, and a judge this month held him in direct contempt for failing to appear at a hearing.

Holesinger, 52, was charged Feb. 12 with four counts of Class C felony theft in excess of $100,000. The charges were filed after the companies he represented – ITF LLC, Maridor LLC, North Star Stone Inc., and RBF Island Investment LLC – sued him in Porter Superior Court.

Charging information accuses Holesinger of stealing $817,962 from North Star Stone; $233,410 from RBF; $215,406 from ITF; and $371,736 from Maridor, with the earliest alleged thefts taking place in February 2011. All of the companies are located in Valparaiso and owned by Chris Andrews, according to the probable cause affidavit, which says Holesinger also had been Andrews’ family attorney since the mid-1990s.

Holesinger was the business attorney for North Star Stone, responsible for calculating tax liability and filing returns, among other things. North Star would provide checks on a monthly basis for Holesinger to cover tax liabilities and attorney fees.

But North Star, a maker of manufactured stone and fireplaces, late last year received a notice of levy for unpaid taxes and its business account was frozen. A forensic accountant discovered that for almost two years Holesinger had been cashing checks that North Star wrote to cover sales, payroll and corporate income taxes. Those taxes had gone unpaid, according to the probable cause affidavit.

With respect to the other companies Holesinger represented as a business attorney, he is accused of writing more than 68 unauthorized checks to himself as well as making unauthorized wire transfers.  

The civil tort suit details the numerous checks that were written to pay taxes but instead were allegedly converted to Holesinger’s use, including 97 exhibits of alleged misappropriation. The suit seeks treble damages, attorney fees and accounting costs.

The suit also names a fifth company, MLA LLC, that Holesinger is accused of stealing from while serving as business counsel. He allegedly stole $43,554 from that company by using personal computer transfer debits from the company’s bank account.

Porter Superior Judge William Alexa on Feb. 6 issued an ordered in the civil suit finding Holesinger in direct contempt of court for failing to appear at a Jan. 24 hearing on the plaintiffs’ petition for accounting.

Holesinger’s attorney in the civil action, Patrick Devine of Schererville, did not respond Monday to a message seeking comment. Calls to Holesinger’s law firm on Monday were directed to voice mail, and a message wasn’t immediately returned.

Holesinger was admitted to practice in 1987 and is listed on the Indiana Roll of Attorneys as active in good standing with no prior discipline.
 

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. "So we broke with England for the right to "off" our preborn progeny at will, and allow the processing plant doing the dirty deeds (dirt cheap) to profit on the marketing of those "products of conception." I was completely maleducated on our nation's founding, it would seem. (But I know the ACLU is hard at work to remedy that, too.)" Well, you know, we're just following in the footsteps of our founders who raped women, raped slaves, raped children, maimed immigrants, sold children, stole property, broke promises, broke apart families, killed natives... You know, good God fearing down home Christian folk! :/

  2. Who gives a rats behind about all the fluffy ranking nonsense. What students having to pay off debt need to know is that all schools aren't created equal and students from many schools don't have a snowball's chance of getting a decent paying job straight out of law school. Their lowly ranked lawschool won't tell them that though. When schools start honestly (accurately) reporting *those numbers, things will get interesting real quick, and the looks on student's faces will be priceless!

  3. Whilst it may be true that Judges and Justices enjoy such freedom of time and effort, it certainly does not hold true for the average working person. To say that one must 1) take a day or a half day off work every 3 months, 2) gather a list of information including recent photographs, and 3) set up a time that is convenient for the local sheriff or other such office to complete the registry is more than a bit near-sighted. This may be procedural, and hence, in the near-sighted minds of the court, not 'punishment,' but it is in fact 'punishment.' The local sheriffs probably feel a little punished too by the overwork. Registries serve to punish the offender whilst simultaneously providing the public at large with a false sense of security. The false sense of security is dangerous to the public who may not exercise due diligence by thinking there are no offenders in their locale. In fact, the registry only informs them of those who have been convicted.

  4. Unfortunately, the court doesn't understand the difference between ebidta and adjusted ebidta as they clearly got the ruling wrong based on their misunderstanding

  5. A common refrain in the comments on this website comes from people who cannot locate attorneys willing put justice over retainers. At the same time the judiciary threatens to make pro bono work mandatory, seemingly noting the same concern. But what happens to attorneys who have the chumptzah to threatened the legal status quo in Indiana? Ask Gary Welch, ask Paul Ogden, ask me. Speak truth to power, suffer horrendously accordingly. No wonder Hoosier attorneys who want to keep in good graces merely chase the dollars ... the powers that be have no concerns as to those who are ever for sale to the highest bidder ... for those even willing to compromise for $$$ never allow either justice or constitutionality to cause them to stand up to injustice or unconstitutionality. And the bad apples in the Hoosier barrel, like this one, just keep rotting.

ADVERTISEMENT