ILNews

Disciplinary Actions - 6/8/12

June 6, 2012
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.

Reinstatement
James D. Nafe Jr., of St. Joseph County, has been reinstated to the practice of law in two separate disciplinary actions. Nafe had been suspended for noncooperation. He was reinstated May 2, 2012, based on two orders released from the Indiana Supreme Court May 15.

Suspension
Harlan L. Vondersaar II, of Hendricks County, has been suspended for 90 days by the Indiana Supreme Court, per a May 16, 2012, order. The suspension is effective 20 days from the date of the order. Vondersaar was conditionally admitted to the bar pursuant to a consent agreement with the state Board of Law Examiners that he refrain from using alcohol and have no arrests for criminal offenses. On Oct. 3, 2011, he notified the board that he had been arrested for drunk driving and later pleaded guilty to Class A misdemeanor operating a vehicle while intoxicated with endangerment.

Following his suspension, Vondersaar shall be automatically reinstated to conditional admission for five years pursuant to the terms of a consent agreement signed May 5, 2011, and he shall comply in all respects with Judges and Lawyers Assistance Program monitoring or treatment programs.

Kjell P. Engebretsen, of Boone County, has had his suspension for noncooperation converted into an indefinite suspension, per an Indiana Supreme Court order on May 25. Engebretsen was initially suspended Sept. 2, 2011.

Louis W. Denney, of Delaware County, and Deborah D. Julian (Kubley), of Johnson County, have been suspended for failure to pay costs, per a May 25 Supreme Court order. The suspensions are effective 10 days from the date of the order.

Lawrence Todd Newman has been suspended from practice for 18 months in Ohio, per the Supreme Court of Ohio. His suspension is reciprocal discipline based on Newman’s suspension in Indiana, which was effective Jan. 31.

Charges dismissed
The Indiana Supreme Court has dismissed petitions for suspension for failure to satisfy costs against Lindsay T. Boyd, Bradley D. Hamilton, Neil C. Thomas and Gregory A. Watkins, per a May 25 order.

Public reprimand
Julia E. Dimick, of Marion County, has received a public reprimand for violating Indiana Professional Conduct Rule 8.4(d), per a May 25 order from the Indiana Supreme Court. According to the order, Dimick sent a letter to the opposing party’s counsel implying she would file a grievance with the Disciplinary Commission against that attorney unless the attorney made a settlement offer.

Resignation
Charles R. Hyde Jr., of Wayne County, has resigned from the bar, per a May 25 order from the Indiana Supreme Court accepting his resignation.

Correction
The Indiana Supreme Court has corrected its April 10, 2012, suspension order of Mark J. Thornburg. His suspension date should have read April 28, 2011.•

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
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. 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.

  2. 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

  3. 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

  4. 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

  5. Here's an idea...how about we MORE heavily regulate the law schools to reduce the surplus of graduates, driving starting salaries up for those new grads, so that we can all pay our insane amount of student loans off in a reasonable amount of time and then be able to afford to do pro bono & low-fee work? I've got friends in other industries, radiology for example, and their schools accept a very limited number of students so there will never be a glut of new grads and everyone's pay stays high. For example, my radiologist friend's school accepted just six new students per year.

ADVERTISEMENT