ILNews

Disciplinary Actions - 2/26/14

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share
Indiana Lawyer Disciplinary Actions

The Indiana Supreme Court Disciplinary Commission brings charges against attorneys who have violated the state’s rules for admission to the bar and Rules of Professional Conduct. The Indiana Commission on Judicial Qualifications brings charges against judges, judicial officers, or judicial candidates for misconduct. Details of attorneys’ and judges’ actions for which they are being disciplined by the Supreme Court will be included unless they are not a matter of public record under the court’s rules.

Reciprocal Discipline
Kent D. Mitchner, has been suspended for 30 days, all stayed subject to probation as imposed by the Supreme Court of Kentucky, per a Feb. 3 Indiana Supreme Court order. Mitchner was suspended in Kentucky effective Aug. 29 for 30 days, probated for one year with conditions. The costs of the proceeding are assessed against him.

Public reprimand
Scott Storms, of Marion County, has received a public reprimand for violating Indiana Professional Conduct Rule 1.11(d). Storms was general counsel and chief administrative law judge at the Indiana Utility Regulatory Commission, where he heard matters involving Duke Energy Indiana Inc. He resigned from the IURC when formally offered a job at Duke. A state ethics investigation led to a $12,120 fine for violating I.C. 4-2-6-9 and a ban from future employment with the state.

The justices found several mitigating factors, including the fine and employment ban. The order notes that the discipline imposed may have been more severe had this matter been submitted without the commission’s agreement to a public reprimand.

Suspension
Randall B. Stiles, of Allen County, has been suspended for noncooperation effective immediately, per two Feb. 3 orders. Stiles filed objections to the Disciplinary Commission’s requests for ruling and to tax costs, in which the court found no merit. The suspension will remain in effect until Stiles cooperates with the commission, the disciplinary proceedings arising from the investigation are disposed of, or until further order of the court. He is ordered to reimburse the Disciplinary Commission $1,048.88 in costs.

Amanda A. Johnson, of Madison County, has been suspended for noncooperation, effectively immediately, per a Feb. 4 order. The suspension shall continue until she fully cooperates with the Disciplinary Commission, the investigation or any disciplinary proceedings arising from the investigation are disposed of, or until further order of the court. She is ordered to reimburse the Disciplinary Commission $524.44 in costs.

Thomas L. Montgomery, of Vanderburgh County, has been suspended for at least one year, without automatic reinstatement, per a Feb. 3 order. The order lists five counts, including becoming involved in a personal relationship with a former client and purchasing a gun for her, knowing she was a convicted felon. The order also says that Montgomery falsely told colleagues that he had a life-threatening brain tumor.

He has been diagnosed with bipolar disorder and has been working with the Judges and Lawyers Monitoring Program. There is a cyst on his brain, but it is not a brain tumor.

The justices found Montgomery has violated Indiana Professional Conduct Rules 1.3; 1.4(a)(3); 5.3(b); 8.4(b); 8.4(c); and 8.4(d).

Montgomery has been suspended since 2008 for CLE noncompliance and dues nonpayment. The costs of the proceeding are assessed against him.

Gary L. Dilk, of Marion County, has been suspended for at least six months, without automatic reinstatement, per a Feb. 10 order. The suspension takes effect March 24. The justices found he violated Indiana Professional Conduct Rules 1.4(a); 1.4(b); 1.8(f); 3.2; 5.4(a); 5.4(c); 5.5(a); 7.3(e); and 8.4(d). The nine counts of misconduct concern Dilk’s representation of clients referred to him by Ohio-based for-profit Foreclosure Solutions LLC and by other organizations and his serving as “of counsel” in Indiana foreclosure actions for an Ohio law firm.

He received approximately 2,675 referrals from Foreclosures Solutions. His typical practice was to allow judgment to be entered without opposition or hearing, and he had no direct contact with many of his clients. He asserted to the Disciplinary Commission that the homeowners were not his clients, to which the order says “shows a lack of insight into his professional responsibilities to the homeowners for whom he appeared as counsel, asserting that his professional duties were owed to the companies who hired him, not to homeowners.”

Terrance L. Kinnard, of Marion County, has been suspended for at least six months, without automatic reinstatement, per a Feb. 10 order. The charges stem in part from false statements he made in April 2008 on a petition to modify custody and to find a mother in contempt. Kinnard also filed a defamation suit against the mother, who filed a grievance against him, seeking more than $100,000 and attorney fees. The mother and respondent filed a joint motion to dismiss in August 2008.

The justices found he violated Indiana Rules of Professional Conduct 3.5(b), 3.1, 4.4(a) and 8.4(d). The suspension begins March 24, and the costs of the proceeding are assessed against Kinnard.

Robert B. Bush, of Johnson County, has been suspended effective immediately, per a Feb. 13 order. Bush has been found guilty of felony stalking and invasion of privacy. The interim suspension shall continue until further order of the court or final resolution of any resulting disciplinary action, provided no other suspension is in effect.

Jennifer L. Graham, of Marion County, has been suspended for 60 days, beginning Feb. 14, per an order from the Supreme Court. The suspension is stayed subject to completion of at least two years of probation, including monitoring with the Judges and Lawyers Assistance Program. The justices found she violated Indiana Professional Conduct Rules 8.4(b) and 8.4(c) when she wrote two checks from her client trust account payable to herself and deposited into her operating account to cover losses she incurred from gambling. She has since repaid the $1,100 she converted from her client trust account.

Graham admits she is a compulsive gambler and has taken steps to address her addiction. The costs of the proceeding are assessed against her.•

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
2015 Distinguished Barrister &
Up and Coming Lawyer Reception

Tuesday, May 5, 2015 • 4:30 - 7:00 pm
Learn More


ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. A traditional parade of attorneys? Really Evansville? Y'all need to get out more. When is the traditional parade of notaries? Nurses? Sanitation workers? Pole dancers? I gotta wonder, do throngs of admiring citizens gather to laud these marching servants of the constitution? "Show us your billing records!!!" Hoping some video gets posted. Ours is not a narcissistic profession by any chance, is it? Nah .....

  2. My previous comment not an aside at court. I agree with smith. Good call. Just thought posting here a bit on the if it bleeds it leads side. Most attorneys need to think of last lines of story above.

  3. Hello everyone I'm Gina and I'm here for the exact same thing you are. I have the wonderful joy of waking up every morning to my heart being pulled out and sheer terror of what DCS is going to Throw at me and my family today.Let me start from the !bebeginning.My daughter lost all rights to her 3beautiful children due to Severe mental issues she no longer lives in our state and has cut all ties.DCS led her to belive that once she done signed over her right the babies would be with their family. We have faught screamed begged and anything else we could possibly due I hired a lawyer five grand down the drain.You know all I want is my babies home.I've done everything they have even asked me to do.Now their saying I can't see my grandchildren cause I'M on a prescription for paipain.I have a very rare blood disease it causes cellulitis a form of blood poisoning to stay dormant in my tissues and nervous system it also causes a ,blood clotting disorder.even with the two blood thinners I'm on I still Continue to develop them them also.DCS knows about my illness and still they refuse to let me see my grandchildren. I Love and miss them so much Please can anyone help Us my grandchildren and I they should be worrying about what toy there going to play with but instead there worrying about if there ever coming home again.THANK YOU DCS FOR ALL YOU'VE DONE. ( And if anyone at all has any ideals or knows who can help. Please contact (765)960~5096.only serious callers

  4. He must be a Rethuglican, for if from the other side of the aisle such acts would be merely personal and thus not something that attaches to his professional life. AND ... gotta love this ... oh, and on top of talking dirty on the phone, he also, as an aside, guess we should mention, might be important, not sure, but .... "In addition to these allegations, Keaton was accused of failing to file an appeal after he collected advance payment from a client seeking to challenge a ruling that the client repay benefits because of unreported income." rimshot

  5. I am not a fan of some of the 8.4 discipline we have seen for private conduct-- but this was so egregious and abusive and had so many points of bad conduct relates to the law and the lawyer's status as a lawyer that it is clearly a proper and just disbarment. A truly despicable account of bad acts showing unfit character to practice law. I applaud the outcome.

ADVERTISEMENT