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. Indianapolis employers harassment among minorities AFRICAN Americans needs to be discussed the metro Indianapolis area is horrible when it comes to harassing African American employees especially in the local healthcare facilities. Racially profiling in the workplace is an major issue. Please make it better because I'm many civil rights leaders would come here and justify that Indiana is a state the WORKS only applies to Caucasian Americans especially in Hamilton county. Indiana targets African Americans in the workplace so when governor pence is trying to convince people to vote for him this would be awesome publicity for the Presidency Elections.

  2. Wishing Mary Willis only God's best, and superhuman strength, as she attempts to right a ship that too often strays far off course. May she never suffer this personal affect, as some do who attempt to change a broken system: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QojajMsd2nE

  3. Indiana's seatbelt law is not punishable as a crime. It is an infraction. Apparently some of our Circuit judges have deemed settled law inapplicable if it fails to fit their litmus test of political correctness. Extrapolating to redefine terms of behavior in a violation of immigration law to the entire body of criminal law leaves a smorgasbord of opportunity for judicial mischief.

  4. I wonder if $10 diversions for failure to wear seat belts are considered moral turpitude in federal immigration law like they are under Indiana law? Anyone know?

  5. What a fine article, thank you! I can testify firsthand and by detailed legal reports (at end of this note) as to the dire consequences of rejecting this truth from the fine article above: "The inclusion and expansion of this right [to jury] in Indiana’s Constitution is a clear reflection of our state’s intention to emphasize the importance of every Hoosier’s right to make their case in front of a jury of their peers." Over $20? Every Hoosier? Well then how about when your very vocation is on the line? How about instead of a jury of peers, one faces a bevy of political appointees, mini-czars, who care less about due process of the law than the real czars did? Instead of trial by jury, trial by ideological ordeal run by Orwellian agents? Well that is built into more than a few administrative law committees of the Ind S.Ct., and it is now being weaponized, as is revealed in articles posted at this ezine, to root out post moderns heresies like refusal to stand and pledge allegiance to all things politically correct. My career was burned at the stake for not so saluting, but I think I was just one of the early logs. Due, at least in part, to the removal of the jury from bar admission and bar discipline cases, many more fires will soon be lit. Perhaps one awaits you, dear heretic? Oh, at that Ind. article 12 plank about a remedy at law for every damage done ... ah, well, the founders evidently meant only for those damages done not by the government itself, rabid statists that they were. (Yes, that was sarcasm.) My written reports available here: Denied petition for cert (this time around): http://tinyurl.com/zdmawmw Denied petition for cert (from the 2009 denial and five year banishment): http://tinyurl.com/zcypybh Related, not written by me: Amicus brief: http://tinyurl.com/hvh7qgp

ADVERTISEMENT