ILNews

Conour has until week’s end to recoup missing assets

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Former personal injury attorney William Conour on Monday was granted a few more days to comply with a court order to reacquire assets he dissipated in violation of bond conditions pending his federal wire fraud trial.

Conour has through Friday to reacquire and place back in his possession an array of assets that federal authorities could not locate during a recent re-inventory of his home and law office. Richard Young, chief judge for the U.S. District Court of the Southern District of Indiana, had ordered agents to re-inspect Conour’s property to assess how much was gone after a federal prosecutor asked Young to revoke Conour’s bond.

Conour is accused of defrauding more than 25 clients of at least $4.5 million. After his arrest in April 2012, he was ordered not to dissipate property federal agents inventoried.

On May 10, Young granted Conour seven days to reacquire the missing assets, but Conour’s federal public defender, James Donahoe, asked for more time and the government didn’t object. Young issued an order Monday giving Conour through Friday to resecure missing assets.

Donahoe “represented that most of the missing assets were transferred to (Conour’s) ex-wife pursuant to an uncontested divorce decree,” Young wrote in the May 10 entry. “…(T)he inventoried assets were not to be transferred without permission of the court.”

Weeks after Conour was charged and bond conditions set, his then-wife Jennifer Conour filed a divorce action in Kosciusko County. In December, a judge in Warsaw approved a dissolution of marriage that divided the couples’ assets, awarding Jennifer a Sheridan horse farm, among other things.

Conour’s trial is scheduled for Sept. 9.

 
 

 

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

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. KUDOS to the Indiana Supreme Court for realizing that some bureacracies need to go to the stake. Recall what RWR said: "No government ever voluntarily reduces itself in size. Government programs, once launched, never disappear. Actually, a government bureau is the nearest thing to eternal life we'll ever see on this earth!" NOW ... what next to this rare and inspiring chopping block? Well, the Commission on Gender and Race (but not religion!?!) is way overdue. And some other Board's could be cut with a positive for State and the reputation of the Indiana judiciary.

  2. During a visit where an informant with police wears audio and video, does the video necessary have to show hand to hand transaction of money and narcotics?

  3. I will agree with that as soon as law schools stop lying to prospective students about salaries and employment opportunities in the legal profession. There is no defense to the fraudulent numbers first year salaries they post to mislead people into going to law school.

  4. The sad thing is that no fish were thrown overboard The "greenhorn" who had never fished before those 5 days was interrogated for over 4 hours by 5 officers until his statement was illicited, "I don't want to go to prison....." The truth is that these fish were measured frozen off shore and thawed on shore. The FWC (state) officer did not know fish shrink, so the only reason that these fish could be bigger was a swap. There is no difference between a 19 1/2 fish or 19 3/4 fish, short fish is short fish, the ticket was written. In addition the FWC officer testified at trial, he does not measure fish in accordance with federal law. There was a document prepared by the FWC expert that said yes, fish shrink and if these had been measured correctly they averaged over 20 inches (offshore frozen). This was a smoke and mirror prosecution.

  5. I love this, Dave! Many congrats to you! We've come a long way from studying for the bar together! :)

ADVERTISEMENT