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. Hmmmmm ..... How does the good doctor's spells work on tyrants and unelected bureacrats with nearly unchecked power employing in closed hearings employing ad hoc procedures? Just askin'. ... Happy independence day to any and all out there who are "free" ... Unlike me.

  2. Today, I want to use this opportunity to tell everyone about Dr agbuza of agbuzaodera(at)gmail. com, on how he help me reunited with my husband after 2 months of divorce.My husband divorce me because he saw another woman in his office and he said to me that he is no longer in love with me anymore and decide to divorce me.I seek help from the Net and i saw good talk about Dr agbuza and i contact him and explain my problem to him and he cast a spell for me which i use to get my husband back within 2 days.am totally happy because there is no reparations and side-effect. If you need his help Email him at agbuzaodera(at)gmail. com

  3. The practitioners and judges who hail E-filing as the Saviour of the West need to contain their respective excitements. E-filing is federal court requires the practitioner to cram his motion practice into pigeonholes created by IT people. Compound motions or those seeking alternative relief are effectively barred, unless the practitioner wants to receive a tart note from some functionary admonishing about the "problem". E-filing is just another method by which courts and judges transfer their burden to practitioners, who are the really the only powerless components of the system. Of COURSE it is easier for the court to require all of its imput to conform to certain formats, but this imposition does NOT improve the quality of the practice of law and does NOT improve the ability of the practitioner to advocate for his client or to fashion pleadings that exactly conform to his client's best interests. And we should be very wary of the disingenuous pablum about the costs. The courts will find a way to stick it to the practitioner. Lake County is a VERY good example of this rapaciousness. Any one who does not believe this is invited to review the various special fees that system imposes upon practitioners- as practitioners- and upon each case ON TOP of the court costs normal in every case manually filed. Jurisprudence according to Aldous Huxley.

  4. Any attorneys who practice in federal court should be able to say the same as I can ... efiling is great. I have been doing it in fed court since it started way back. Pacer has its drawbacks, but the ability to hit an e-docket and pull up anything and everything onscreen is a huge plus for a litigator, eps the sole practitioner, who lacks a filing clerk and the paralegal support of large firms. Were I an Indiana attorney I would welcome this great step forward.

  5. Can we get full disclosure on lobbyist's payments to legislatures such as Mr Buck? AS long as there are idiots that are disrespectful of neighbors and intent on shooting fireworks every night, some kind of regulations are needed.

ADVERTISEMENT