Brizzi hit with another legal malpractice suit

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Defrocked Secretary of State Charlie White has sued Carl Brizzi, the former Marion County prosecutor who represented White during a criminal case that led to his removal from office. White's lawsuit makes a claim of legal malpractice.

White hired Brizzi in August 2011 to represent him in his criminal trial in Hamilton County, where he was convicted in Feburary 2012 of six of seven charges, including false registration, voting in another precinct and theft. The jury acquitted him of fraud on a financial institution. White subsequently was removed from office.

A 31-page complaint filed last week in Marion Superior Court claims Brizzi was ignorant of several areas of law and failed to mount a defense. The suit also claims Brizzi and his mother were experiencing health problems that delayed the trial, but he didn’t inform White.

Brizzi did not return a telephone message seeking comment.

The complaint filed by attorney Andrea L. Ciobanu mirrors many of those made in White’s petition for post-conviction relief. The complaint alleges legal malpractice, breach of contract, neglect or reckless infliction of emotional distress, constructive fraud, fraud and negligence.

According to the complaint, Brizzi pursued a jury nullification strategy and chose not to present a defense without White’s blessing.

“It does not meet the professional standard of care to wait until the night before and the day of the close of the state of Indiana’s case to become frantic and aggressive with the plaintiff in front of two other witnesses,” about not putting on evidence, the complaint alleges.

“Several of (White’s) witnesses were waiting to testify at the courthouse or a nearby vicinity, and (Brizzi) abruptly and mid-trial decided ‘not to put on a case’ even though Brizzi was paid in full to put on a trial,” the complaint asserts. “And he always led (White) to believe, up to that point, that he would put on a case.”
The suit seeks award of damages for those equal to White’s claim of harm to reputation, loss of employment, mental anguish, and attorney fees and costs for his post-conviction action and his disciplinary action, in which his license to practice law was suspended.

Ciobanu’s complaint also alleges, “Brizzi engaged in irrational action such as slamming doors, cursing and yelling at lay persons in the judicial center conference room, making fantastic boasts as well as using degrading language to an already exhausted (White) to wear him down.”

The malpractice claim is the second that a former central Indiana officeholder has brought against Brizzi. Former Hancock County Coroner Tamara Vangundy sued Brizzi in May, claiming his faulty legal advice cost her an opportunity to seek re-election after she pleaded guilty to a felony count of official misconduct.



Post a comment to this story

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
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. I think the cops are doing a great job locking up criminals. The Murder rates in the inner cities are skyrocketing and you think that too any people are being incarcerated. Maybe we need to lock up more of them. We have the ACLU, BLM, NAACP, Civil right Division of the DOJ, the innocent Project etc. We have court system with an appeal process that can go on for years, with attorneys supplied by the government. I'm confused as to how that translates into the idea that the defendants are not being represented properly. Maybe the attorneys need to do more Pro-Bono work

  2. We do not have 10% of our population (which would mean about 32 million) incarcerated. It's closer to 2%.

  3. If a class action suit or other manner of retribution is possible, count me in. I have email and voicemail from the man. He colluded with opposing counsel, I am certain. My case was damaged so severely it nearly lost me everything and I am still paying dearly.

  4. There's probably a lot of blame that can be cast around for Indiana Tech's abysmal bar passage rate this last February. The folks who decided that Indiana, a state with roughly 16,000 to 18,000 attorneys, needs a fifth law school need to question the motives that drove their support of this project. Others, who have been "strong supporters" of the law school, should likewise ask themselves why they believe this institution should be supported. Is it because it fills some real need in the state? Or is it, instead, nothing more than a resume builder for those who teach there part-time? And others who make excuses for the students' poor performance, especially those who offer nothing more than conspiracy theories to back up their claims--who are they helping? What evidence do they have to support their posturing? Ultimately, though, like most everything in life, whether one succeeds or fails is entirely within one's own hands. At least one student from Indiana Tech proved this when he/she took and passed the February bar. A second Indiana Tech student proved this when they took the bar in another state and passed. As for the remaining 9 who took the bar and didn't pass (apparently, one of the students successfully appealed his/her original score), it's now up to them (and nobody else) to ensure that they pass on their second attempt. These folks should feel no shame; many currently successful practicing attorneys failed the bar exam on their first try. These same attorneys picked themselves up, dusted themselves off, and got back to the rigorous study needed to ensure they would pass on their second go 'round. This is what the Indiana Tech students who didn't pass the first time need to do. Of course, none of this answers such questions as whether Indiana Tech should be accredited by the ABA, whether the school should keep its doors open, or, most importantly, whether it should have even opened its doors in the first place. Those who promoted the idea of a fifth law school in Indiana need to do a lot of soul-searching regarding their decisions. These same people should never be allowed, again, to have a say about the future of legal education in this state or anywhere else. Indiana already has four law schools. That's probably one more than it really needs. But it's more than enough.

  5. This man Steve Hubbard goes on any online post or forum he can find and tries to push his company. He said court reporters would be obsolete a few years ago, yet here we are. How does he have time to search out every single post about court reporters and even spy in private court reporting forums if his company is so successful???? Dude, get a life. And back to what this post was about, I agree that some national firms cause a huge problem.