ILNews

Disbarred attorney accused of forgery

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Rodney P. Sniadecki, a sole practitioner in South Bend who was disbarred by the Indiana Supreme Court in 2010, has been indicted on three counts of forgery.

A grand jury in South Bend indicted Sniadecki May 3 on the Class C felony charges. He turned himself in and was released on bond.

The indictment says that on Nov. 27, 2007, Sniadecki, with the intent to defraud, created an appearance form, minute entry and waiver of extradition on behalf of Michael DeMeester that bore a signature purporting to have been made by Michael Wandling.

On Dec. 5, 2007, Sniadecki allegedly made a guardianship information form and petition of appointment for a temporary guardian for a minor bearing a signature purported to have been made by Angela Russo.

Count III alleges that on April 21 and 30, 2008, Sniadecki made U.S. income tax return documents on behalf of St. Joseph Valley Mortgage Corp. or Caterina M. Sergio in such a manner that the instruments purported to have been made at another time.

Sniadecki was disbarred in 2010 for violating the terms of a previous suspension, entering into an improper business transaction with a client and engaging in dishonest conduct by falsifying loan documents when trying to get a loan to repay the client through mortgages on his law offices.

He was suspended in 2007 for having a sexual relationship with a client and initially lying to the commission about when it started; for hiring a suspended attorney to perform administrative, secretarial, and paralegal duties; and for representing a wife in a divorce action while still representing the wife and husband in a joint bankruptcy petition.

Sniadecki’s initial hearing on the forgery charges is May 7.

 

ADVERTISEMENT

  • Too much tolerance?
    On October 17, 2007, this Court issued an order in a prior disciplinary case against Respondent under Cause Number 71S00-0512-DI-627, suspending him from the practice of law for six months with automatic reinstatement, effective November 26, 2007 (“Order of Suspension”). See Matter of Sniadecki, 875 N.E.2d 22 (Ind. 2007). SNIADECKI's "priors" still allowed for automatic reinstatement in 2007, upon which time he immediately began engaging in misconduct again, which was not ended until the system disbarred him three years later. http://www.in.gov/judiciary/opinions/pdf/04011001per.pdf
  • Justice
    It has taken five years for me to resolve and validate this man's actions done knowing and on purpose. He could have made his money legally if he brought cases to trial. Why study all those years to lose your license? I will never get back what all he took from me mentally and financially. Lying for all those years. Thank you for bringing closure and peace to this betrayal of trust ex-client.

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. Just an aside, but regardless of the outcome, I 'm proud of Judge William Hughes. He was the original magistrate on the Home place issue. He ruled for Home Place, and was primaried by Brainard for it. Their tool Poindexter failed to unseat Hughes, who won support for his honesty and courage throughout the county, and he was reelected Judge of Hamilton County's Superior Court. You can still stand for something and survive. Thanks, Judge Hughes!

  2. CCHP's real accomplishment is the 2015 law signed by Gov Pence that basically outlaws any annexation that is forced where a 65% majority of landowners in the affected area disagree. Regardless of whether HP wins or loses, the citizens of Indiana will not have another fiasco like this. The law Gov Pence signed is a direct result of this malgovernance.

  3. I gave tempparry guardship to a friend of my granddaughter in 2012. I went to prison. I had custody. My daughter went to prison to. We are out. My daughter gave me custody but can get her back. She was not order to give me custody . but now we want granddaughter back from friend. She's 14 now. What rights do we have

  4. This sure is not what most who value good governance consider the Rule of Law to entail: "In a letter dated March 2, which Brizzi forwarded to IBJ, the commission dismissed the grievance “on grounds that there is not reasonable cause to believe that you are guilty of misconduct.”" Yet two month later reasonable cause does exist? (Or is the commission forging ahead, the need for reasonable belief be damned? -- A seeming violation of the Rules of Profession Ethics on the part of the commission) Could the rule of law theory cause one to believe that an explanation is in order? Could it be that Hoosier attorneys live under Imperial Law (which is also a t-word that rhymes with infamy) in which the Platonic guardians can do no wrong and never owe the plebeian class any explanation for their powerful actions. (Might makes it right?) Could this be a case of politics directing the commission, as celebrated IU Mauer Professor (the late) Patrick Baude warned was happening 20 years ago in his controversial (whisteblowing) ethics lecture on a quite similar topic: http://www.repository.law.indiana.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1498&context=ilj

  5. I have a case presently pending cert review before the SCOTUS that reveals just how Indiana regulates the bar. I have been denied licensure for life for holding the wrong views and questioning the grand inquisitors as to their duties as to state and federal constitutional due process. True story: https://www.scribd.com/doc/299040839/2016Petitionforcert-to-SCOTUS Shorter, Amici brief serving to frame issue as misuse of govt licensure: https://www.scribd.com/doc/312841269/Thomas-More-Society-Amicus-Brown-v-Ind-Bd-of-Law-Examiners

ADVERTISEMENT