ILNews

Conour's colleagues questioned behavior

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

William Conour, until recently, was one of Indiana’s most respected and powerful personal injury attorneys, his name prominent enough to grace a law school atrium. Now he faces a federal charge that could send him to prison for much of the rest of his life.

Conour, 65, stole $4.5 million from more than 25 clients whose settlement money was entrusted to him, according to information filed Aug. 14 in U.S. District Court, Southern District of Indiana. The wire fraud charge against Conour carries a possible prison term of 20 years and fines.

“We will be committed to seeking full restitution for the victims,” said Richard Cox, a special U.S. attorney from the Central District of Illinois who is prosecuting the case against Conour in Indianapolis. But Cox acknowledges victims might not be made whole.
 

conour-bill-mug Conour

“We hope there are assets out there,” Cox said. “What we’re essentially alleging is that money does not exist.”

People familiar with the case say they believe a guilty plea is imminent. Conour’s attorney, Richard Kammen, did not return telephone and email messages seeking comment. Telephone lines at the Conour Law Firm were temporarily disconnected, according to a recorded message.

Since Conour came to the attention of federal authorities, the scope of his alleged crimes has widened. He initially was accused of misappropriating or converting for his own use $2.5 million from client trust funds. Conour resigned from the bar this year after the Indiana Supreme Court Disciplinary Commission filed a verified complaint against him because of the federal charge.

The charge against Conour is partially the result of suspicions brought to light by former colleagues who saw firsthand Conour’s behaviors and actions.

“The problem we have here is it takes a person who knows the system to abuse the system,” said attorney Timothy Devereux of Ladendorf & Ladendorf in Indianapolis, who compared Conour to disgraced financial titan Bernie Madoff.

“I think because of his reputation in the community, people were hesitant to acknowledge or they didn’t want to believe what he was doing,” Devereux said.

Devereux worked with Conour for four years until last December. “After I left, I was contacted by law enforcement to ask if I could help them,” Devereux said.

When Devereux cut his professional ties with Conour, he said numerous clients followed, but Conour wouldn’t release case files. In some cases, Devereux said Hamilton County sheriff’s officers had to be called to execute court orders requiring Conour to hand them over.

“At times he could be very generous and gregarious, but he was a perfectionist and very controlling,” Devereux said. “He could be great, and at the same time turn around and show great anger within seconds. In hindsight, I look back and it’s almost like he did have a split personality. … There were days when the staff would look at each other and say, ‘What set him off?’”

One of the clients Devereux represented was Gracelynn Harrison, who was injured in a car crash when she was about 18 months old. When questions arose about her $62,000 settlement trust, Devereux won a court order requiring Conour to appear in Decatur County, and Conour was later arrested and charged with failure to appear.

“I don’t believe there’s any sufficient funds,” Devereux said. “That’s my fear … I hope to God I’m wrong, but I’m not holding my breath.”

John Daly, a partner at Golitko & Daly P.C., said he alerted the disciplinary commission in July 2008 that Conour wasn’t paying a client in a nursing home from a six-figure special-needs trust that was supposed to be set up to compensate for injuries she sustained falling down an elevator shaft.

“To me, the ‘A’ story is the tremendous delay between the time I made the initial complaint to … this year,” said Daly, who stopped working with Conour in February 2008.

“Bill did a lot of mayhem in the meantime,” Daly said.

Disciplinary Commission Executive Director G. Michael Witte said the commission’s confidentiality rules restrict him from confirming or denying complaints against Conour prior to the filing of the verified complaint against him in May.

But Witte said building a case against Conour took time, as evidenced by the federal court information alleging that Conour’s actions date to 1999. It took years for the FBI to make the case, he said, and the commission has far fewer resources.

“This case is one that’s frustrating to a lot of lawyers because Mr. Conour was a go-to lawyer for a lot of lawyers around the state,” Witte said. “Because he was this go-to person for lots of referrals, he engaged in more deceit and cover-ups to hide things from those other attorneys.

“He had to avoid the suspicion of all the lawyers who sent him work,” Witte said.

“The most difficult part about this is that the rules of confidentiality sometimes hamstring us from being able to use outside resources and exchange information,” he said. “I can’t just pick up the phone and call the FBI and say, ‘We’ve got a case against a lawyer.’

“The only thing we can do is utilize our own investigation resources to pursue our own independent investigation,” Witte said. That includes one full-time investigator and 12 staff attorneys who handle about 1,200 complaints per year.

Devereux said Conour betrayed a profession that typically is protective of clients and fights to see their needs are attended to. “To see someone do this to clients is just gut-wrenching,” he said.
 

15col-ConourAtrium.jpg The William and Jennifer Conour Atrium at the I.U. McKinney School of Law in Indianapolis is named after the Conours, who dedicated a gift to the school of $450,000. An IUPUI spokeswoman said it was premature to discuss what will happen with the name before the federal wire fraud charge against William Conour is resolved. (IL Photo/ Perry Reichanadter)

“The tragedy is when people in a position of trust stop thinking that the money entrusted with them doesn’t belong to somebody else,” Daly said. “They’re entrusted with millions of dollars, and they rationalize it.

“There’re a lot of sad parts to this,” Daly said. “The saddest part is these are widows and orphans and people who are paralyzed. These aren’t your fender-bender cases.”

Meanwhile, the Indiana University Robert H. McKinney School of Law faces the difficult prospect of deciding what to do about the William and Jennifer Conour Atrium that is the focal point of the Indianapolis school, and what to do about the $450,000 Conour paid to have his name attached to it.

“We are following this very closely and will take action at the appropriate time,” said Margie Smith-Simmons, director of news and media at Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis. “Until the case is resolved, we’re not in a position to discuss details.”•

ADVERTISEMENT

  • 1999???
    If my newborn grandson's father had the occasion to know about the 1999 complaint, maybe he would still have his 1.7 million dollar today! Not only has he lost every dime he was awarded for his father's death, he also has to take out student loans for his education thereby actually COSTING him money in the long run. Conour is a miserable jackass and so is his wife if she doesn't return her portion of her recent divorce settlement because it didn't belong to either of them.
  • Attorney
    If Disciplinary Commission Executive Director, G. Michael Witte, is correct that the confidentiality rules prohibit the Disciplinary Commission from referring criminal activity to the FBI, Indiana State Police, or other criminal authorities then the Indiana Supreme Court needs to step in and change its rules. Mr. Witte indicates that the Disciplinary Commission does not have the resources or maybe even the expertise to uncover sophisticated financial crimes. If that is the case the Supreme Court needs to permit referrals of criminal activity, so that the public is protected from lawyers who abuse their fiduciary activity. I recently spoke to a CPA-Attorney, who in 1999 discovered and reported to the Indiana Disciplinary Commission, about the criminal conduct of Mr. Conour. This gentleman told me, he gave the Commission significant details about how Conour defrauded his clients and yet, Indiana Disciplinary Commission never issued any disciplinary charges and was unable to tell the CPA-Attorney what the Commission's investigation discovered.

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. You can put your photos anywhere you like... When someone steals it they know it doesn't belong to them. And, a man getting a divorce is automatically not a nice guy...? That's ridiculous. Since when is need of money a conflict of interest? That would mean that no one should have a job unless they are already financially solvent without a job... A photographer is also under no obligation to use a watermark (again, people know when a photo doesn't belong to them) or provide contact information. Hey, he didn't make it easy for me to pay him so I'll just take it! Well heck, might as well walk out of the grocery store with a cart full of food because the lines are too long and you don't find that convenient. "Only in Indiana." Oh, now you're passing judgement on an entire state... What state do you live in? I need to characterize everyone in your state as ignorant and opinionated. And the final bit of ignorance; assuming a photo anyone would want is lucky and then how much does your camera have to cost to make it a good photo, in your obviously relevant opinion?

  2. Seventh Circuit Court Judge Diane Wood has stated in “The Rule of Law in Times of Stress” (2003), “that neither laws nor the procedures used to create or implement them should be secret; and . . . the laws must not be arbitrary.” According to the American Bar Association, Wood’s quote drives home this point: The rule of law also requires that people can expect predictable results from the legal system; this is what Judge Wood implies when she says that “the laws must not be arbitrary.” Predictable results mean that people who act in the same way can expect the law to treat them in the same way. If similar actions do not produce similar legal outcomes, people cannot use the law to guide their actions, and a “rule of law” does not exist.

  3. Linda, I sure hope you are not seeking a law license, for such eighteenth century sentiments could result in your denial in some jurisdictions minting attorneys for our tolerant and inclusive profession.

  4. Mazel Tov to the newlyweds. And to those bakers, photographers, printers, clerks, judges and others who will lose careers and social standing for not saluting the New World (Dis)Order, we can all direct our Two Minutes of Hate as Big Brother asks of us. Progress! Onward!

  5. My daughter was taken from my home at the end of June/2014. I said I would sign the safety plan but my husband would not. My husband said he would leave the house so my daughter could stay with me but the case worker said no her mind is made up she is taking my daughter. My daughter went to a friends and then the friend filed a restraining order which she was told by dcs if she did not then they would take my daughter away from her. The restraining order was not in effect until we were to go to court. Eventually it was dropped but for 2 months DCS refused to allow me to have any contact and was using the restraining order as the reason but it was not in effect. This was Dcs violating my rights. Please help me I don't have the money for an attorney. Can anyone take this case Pro Bono?

ADVERTISEMENT