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

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. Such things are no more elections than those in the late, unlamented Soviet Union.

  2. It appears the police and prosecutors are allowed to change the rules halfway through the game to suit themselves. I am surprised that the congress has not yet eliminated the right to a trial in cases involving any type of forensic evidence. That would suit their foolish law and order police state views. I say we eliminate the statute of limitations for crimes committed by members of congress and other government employees. Of course they would never do that. They are all corrupt cowards!!!

  3. Poor Judge Brown probably thought that by slavishly serving the godz of the age her violations of 18th century concepts like due process and the rule of law would be overlooked. Mayhaps she was merely a Judge ahead of her time?

  4. in a lawyer discipline case Judge Brown, now removed, was presiding over a hearing about a lawyer accused of the supposedly heinous ethical violation of saying the words "Illegal immigrant." (IN re Barker) http://www.in.gov/judiciary/files/order-discipline-2013-55S00-1008-DI-429.pdf .... I wonder if when we compare the egregious violations of due process by Judge Brown, to her chiding of another lawyer for politically incorrectness, if there are any conclusions to be drawn about what kind of person, what kind of judge, what kind of apparatchik, is busy implementing the agenda of political correctness and making off-limits legit advocacy about an adverse party in a suit whose illegal alien status is relevant? I am just asking the question, the reader can make own conclsuion. Oh wait-- did I use the wrong adjective-- let me rephrase that, um undocumented alien?

  5. of course the bigger questions of whether or not the people want to pay for ANY bussing is off limits, due to the Supreme Court protecting the people from DEMOCRACY. Several decades hence from desegregation and bussing plans and we STILL need to be taking all this taxpayer money to combat mostly-imagined "discrimination" in the most obviously failed social program of the postwar period.

ADVERTISEMENT