ILNews

Disciplinary Actions - 7/20/12

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.

Suspension
Sarah Nagy, of Hamilton County, has been suspended by the Indiana Supreme Court due to a physical disability, per a June 28, 2012, order. Nagy had two show cause proceedings for noncooperation with the Indiana Supreme Court Disciplinary Commission pending, which were dismissed without prejudice. Nagy is suspended immediately and may petition for reinstatement upon termination of the disability.

John L. Stewart, of Marion County, has been suspended pendente lite by the Indiana Supreme Court per a July 5, 2012, order. Stewart was found guilty of Class D felony operating a vehicle while intoxicated with a prior conviction. The interim suspension will continue until further order of the court or final resolution of any resulting disciplinary action, provided no other suspension is in effect. Justices Frank Sullivan and Robert Rucker preferred to deny the request for interim suspension and set a deadline to advance the case.

Resignation
William F. Conour, of Marion County, has resigned from the bar, according to a June 29, 2012, Indiana Supreme Court order. A verified complaint for disciplinary action was filed against Conour in May. He also faces a wire fraud charge in federal court and is accused of misappropriating more $2.5 million of client money. His resignation ends any disciplinary proceedings against him. Conour may not petition for reinstatement for five years.

Discipline modification
Beau J. White, of Grant County, has had his suspension terms modified by the Indiana Supreme Court, per a July 9, 2012, order. White was suspended in March for no less than 60 days without automatic reinstatement, with the suspension to begin April 20. He petitioned for the court to reconsider his discipline sanctions, and the justices found White demonstrated sufficient grounds for modification. His suspension order has been revised to: a suspension for 180 days, beginning April 20, with at least 60 days actively served and the remainder stayed subject to completion of at least 24 months of probation. He must meet certain terms to comply with probation, including entering into a monitoring agreement with the Judges and Lawyers Assistance Program. The remainder of the original order is still in effect.•

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. Just an aside, but regardless of the outcome, I 'm proud of Judge William Hughes. He was the original magistrate on the Home place issue. He ruled for Home Place, and was primaried by Brainard for it. Their tool Poindexter failed to unseat Hughes, who won support for his honesty and courage throughout the county, and he was reelected Judge of Hamilton County's Superior Court. You can still stand for something and survive. Thanks, Judge Hughes!

  2. 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.

  3. 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

  4. 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

  5. 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

ADVERTISEMENT