ILNews

Behind the News: Vaunted attorney Conour has lots of explaining to do

Greg Andrews
May 23, 2012
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share
Indiana Lawyer Commentary

For years, Bill Conour has been among the highest-profile attorneys in Indiana representing individuals seriously injured or killed in construction accidents. He’s won big settlements and judgments for his clients and been recognized by various organizations as a leader in personal-injury law.

So a large question looms in the wake of the April 27 announcement that Conour has been charged in a federal criminal complaint with misappropriating more than $2.5 million in client funds from December 2000 to March 2012. If the 64-year-old is indeed guilty of the wire-fraud charge he faces, where did all the money go?

To be sure, things look tight for Conour these days. On March 21, Salin Bank & Trust Co. sued Conour and his law firm in Hamilton Superior Court, seeking to foreclose on his home in Carmel’s swanky Bridlebourne subdivision, another home in Carmel’s Village of West Clay, and a farm in Sheridan.

The suit says Conour and his firm borrowed $950,000 from Salin in January 2011 and had ceased making payments by last fall. Including interest, Conour owes $1.06 million, the lawsuit alleges.
 

conour-bill-mug Conour

On May 1, four days after Conour surrendered to authorities and made his initial court appearance, Conour’s wife, Jennifer Conour, filed for divorce in Kosciusko Superior Court.

Richard Cox, an assistant U.S. attorney based in Urbana, Ill., leading the government’s case, declined to comment in detail. But an FBI affidavit filed in federal court accuses Conour of improperly shifting client funds for years to make ends meet.

The affidavit, signed by Special Agent Douglas Kasper, alleges a pattern of Conour’s using “newly obtained settlement funds to pay old settlements and debts. I believe this conduct is akin to a Ponzi scheme because Conour’s scheme to defraud is dependent on new settlement funds to provide funds for clients whose cases were previously settled and whose money was unlawfully converted by Conour for his own use and benefit.”

Conour did not return a message left at his law office in Parkwood Crossing on 96th Street. His attorney, Jim Voyles, declined to comment.

In his affidavit, Kasper said he received information in July 2011 that Conour was misappropriating client settlements by failing to fully fund trusts he had established for their benefit at Reliance Financial Services in Ohio.

Conour would put into a trust only enough to provide payments to his client for one year, according to Kasper’s affidavit, and would retain the bulk of the settlements “for his own purposes.”

In other instances, Conour kept client funds without even setting up a trust, according to the affidavit. As an example, Kasper describes at length Conour’s dealings with a man who was severely injured in a July 2010 construction accident.

In September 2011, Conour called the client and asked how a net settlement of $250,000 sounded to him. According to the affidavit, the client responded that he wasn’t interested in settling until his medical prognosis was fully determined.

Despite that guidance, the next month Conour left the client a voice mail saying “he believed a settlement of $250,000 was a fair amount” and that if Conour could negotiate that amount he would accept it on the client’s behalf, the affidavit says. Conour said on the call that the client should call him back if that was a problem.

The client did call back a few days later and reiterate he didn’t want to settle. But according to the affidavit, Conour had gone ahead and settled for $450,000 a few hours after leaving the voice mail. The check deposited into a Conour account at Stock Yards Bank bore the client’s purported endorsement, though the client denies signing it and didn’t even know the check existed, the affidavit said.

To this day, the affidavit says, the client has not received a penny from the settlement. Kasper said the Stock Yards account had only $3,640 in it before the $450,000 deposit. Within days, Conour transferred $168,000 into his law firm’s operating account and used $138,000 to pay American Express credit card bills.

The affidavit said other money went toward paying a settlement owed another client and to a law firm owed fees on an unrelated case.

Magistrate Judge Debra McVicker Lynch has released Conour on his own recognizance, on the condition that he not sell, transfer or dispose of personal or business assets without court approval.

If convicted, Conour faces up to 20 years in prison and a fine of up to $250,000.•

__________

This story was originally published in Indianapolis Business Journal, a sister publication to Indiana Lawyer.

ADVERTISEMENT

  • Horrible news!
    This man is a wolf in sheeps clothing! He deserves to spend the rest of his life behind bars. While he spent money that didn't belong to him, the victims had no idea what was in their future. Mr. Conour, you have ruined the lives of many people, including my sons! The Lord will take care of you when he is ready, until then please continue to remember your bad choices and suffer through each day knowing you stole the dreams of so many people!

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. I have been on this program while on parole from 2011-2013. No person should be forced mentally to share private details of their personal life with total strangers. Also giving permission for a mental therapist to report to your parole agent that your not participating in group therapy because you don't have the financial mean to be in the group therapy. I was personally singled out and sent back three times for not having money and also sent back within the six month when you aren't to be sent according to state law. I will work to het this INSOMM's removed from this state. I also had twelve or thirteen parole agents with a fifteen month period. Thanks for your time.

  2. Our nation produces very few jurists of the caliber of Justice DOUGLAS and his peers these days. Here is that great civil libertarian, who recognized government as both a blessing and, when corrupted by ideological interests, a curse: "Once the investigator has only the conscience of government as a guide, the conscience can become ‘ravenous,’ as Cromwell, bent on destroying Thomas More, said in Bolt, A Man For All Seasons (1960), p. 120. The First Amendment mirrors many episodes where men, harried and harassed by government, sought refuge in their conscience, as these lines of Thomas More show: ‘MORE: And when we stand before God, and you are sent to Paradise for doing according to your conscience, *575 and I am damned for not doing according to mine, will you come with me, for fellowship? ‘CRANMER: So those of us whose names are there are damned, Sir Thomas? ‘MORE: I don't know, Your Grace. I have no window to look into another man's conscience. I condemn no one. ‘CRANMER: Then the matter is capable of question? ‘MORE: Certainly. ‘CRANMER: But that you owe obedience to your King is not capable of question. So weigh a doubt against a certainty—and sign. ‘MORE: Some men think the Earth is round, others think it flat; it is a matter capable of question. But if it is flat, will the King's command make it round? And if it is round, will the King's command flatten it? No, I will not sign.’ Id., pp. 132—133. DOUGLAS THEN WROTE: Where government is the Big Brother,11 privacy gives way to surveillance. **909 But our commitment is otherwise. *576 By the First Amendment we have staked our security on freedom to promote a multiplicity of ideas, to associate at will with kindred spirits, and to defy governmental intrusion into these precincts" Gibson v. Florida Legislative Investigation Comm., 372 U.S. 539, 574-76, 83 S. Ct. 889, 908-09, 9 L. Ed. 2d 929 (1963) Mr. Justice DOUGLAS, concurring. I write: Happy Memorial Day to all -- God please bless our fallen who lived and died to preserve constitutional governance in our wonderful series of Republics. And God open the eyes of those government officials who denounce the constitutions of these Republics by arbitrary actions arising out capricious motives.

  3. From back in the day before secularism got a stranglehold on Hoosier jurists comes this great excerpt via Indiana federal court judge Allan Sharp, dedicated to those many Indiana government attorneys (with whom I have dealt) who count the law as a mere tool, an optional tool that is not to be used when political correctness compels a more acceptable result than merely following the path that the law directs: ALLEN SHARP, District Judge. I. In a scene following a visit by Henry VIII to the home of Sir Thomas More, playwriter Robert Bolt puts the following words into the mouths of his characters: Margaret: Father, that man's bad. MORE: There is no law against that. ROPER: There is! God's law! MORE: Then God can arrest him. ROPER: Sophistication upon sophistication! MORE: No, sheer simplicity. The law, Roper, the law. I know what's legal not what's right. And I'll stick to what's legal. ROPER: Then you set man's law above God's! MORE: No, far below; but let me draw your attention to a fact I'm not God. The currents and eddies of right and wrong, which you find such plain sailing, I can't navigate. I'm no voyager. But in the thickets of law, oh, there I'm a forester. I doubt if there's a man alive who could follow me there, thank God... ALICE: (Exasperated, pointing after Rich) While you talk, he's gone! MORE: And go he should, if he was the Devil himself, until he broke the law! ROPER: So now you'd give the Devil benefit of law! MORE: Yes. What would you do? Cut a great road through the law to get after the Devil? ROPER: I'd cut down every law in England to do that! MORE: (Roused and excited) Oh? (Advances on Roper) And when the last law was down, and the Devil turned round on you where would you hide, Roper, the laws being flat? (He leaves *1257 him) This country's planted thick with laws from coast to coast man's laws, not God's and if you cut them down and you're just the man to do it d'you really think you would stand upright in the winds that would blow then? (Quietly) Yes, I'd give the Devil benefit of law, for my own safety's sake. ROPER: I have long suspected this; this is the golden calf; the law's your god. MORE: (Wearily) Oh, Roper, you're a fool, God's my god... (Rather bitterly) But I find him rather too (Very bitterly) subtle... I don't know where he is nor what he wants. ROPER: My God wants service, to the end and unremitting; nothing else! MORE: (Dryly) Are you sure that's God! He sounds like Moloch. But indeed it may be God And whoever hunts for me, Roper, God or Devil, will find me hiding in the thickets of the law! And I'll hide my daughter with me! Not hoist her up the mainmast of your seagoing principles! They put about too nimbly! (Exit More. They all look after him). Pgs. 65-67, A MAN FOR ALL SEASONS A Play in Two Acts, Robert Bolt, Random House, New York, 1960. Linley E. Pearson, Atty. Gen. of Indiana, Indianapolis, for defendants. Childs v. Duckworth, 509 F. Supp. 1254, 1256 (N.D. Ind. 1981) aff'd, 705 F.2d 915 (7th Cir. 1983)

  4. "Meanwhile small- and mid-size firms are getting squeezed and likely will not survive unless they become a boutique firm." I've been a business attorney in small, and now mid-size firm for over 30 years, and for over 30 years legal consultants have been preaching this exact same mantra of impending doom for small and mid-sized firms -- verbatim. This claim apparently helps them gin up merger opportunities from smaller firms who become convinced that they need to become larger overnight. The claim that large corporations are interested in cost-saving and efficiency has likewise been preached for decades, and is likewise bunk. If large corporations had any real interest in saving money they wouldn't use large law firms whose rates are substantially higher than those of high-quality mid-sized firms.

  5. The family is the foundation of all human government. That is the Grand Design. Modern governments throw off this Design and make bureaucratic war against the family, as does Hollywood and cultural elitists such as third wave feminists. Since WWII we have been on a ship of fools that way, with both the elite and government and their social engineering hacks relentlessly attacking the very foundation of social order. And their success? See it in the streets of Fergusson, on the food stamp doles (mostly broken families)and in the above article. Reject the Grand Design for true social function, enter the Glorious State to manage social dysfunction. Our Brave New World will be a prison camp, and we will welcome it as the only way to manage given the anarchy without it.

ADVERTISEMENT