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

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. First comment on this thread is a fitting final comment on this thread, as that the MCBA never answered Duncan's fine question, and now even Eric Holder agrees that the MCBA was in material error as to the facts: "I don't get it" from Duncan December 1, 2014 5:10 PM "The Grand Jury met for 25 days and heard 70 hours of testimony according to this article and they made a decision that no crime occurred. On what basis does the MCBA conclude that their decision was "unjust"? What special knowledge or evidence does the MCBA have that the Grand Jury hearing this matter was unaware of? The system that we as lawyers are sworn to uphold made a decision that there was insufficient proof that officer committed a crime. How can any of us say we know better what was right than the jury that actually heard all of the the evidence in this case."

  2. wow is this a bunch of bs! i know the facts!

  3. MCBA .... time for a new release about your entire membership (or is it just the alter ego) being "saddened and disappointed" in the failure to lynch a police officer protecting himself in the line of duty. But this time against Eric Holder and the Federal Bureau of Investigation: "WASHINGTON — Justice Department lawyers will recommend that no civil rights charges be brought against the police officer who fatally shot an unarmed teenager in Ferguson, Mo., after an F.B.I. investigation found no evidence to support charges, law enforcement officials said Wednesday." http://www.nytimes.com/2015/01/22/us/justice-department-ferguson-civil-rights-darren-wilson.html?ref=us&_r=0

  4. Dr wail asfour lives 3 hours from the hospital,where if he gets an emergency at least he needs three hours,while even if he is on call he should be in a location where it gives him max 10 minutes to be beside the patient,they get paid double on their on call days ,where look how they handle it,so if the death of the patient occurs on weekend and these doctors still repeat same pattern such issue should be raised,they should be closer to the patient.on other hand if all the death occured on the absence of the Dr and the nurses handle it,the nurses should get trained how to function appearntly they not that good,if the Dr lives 3 hours far from the hospital on his call days he should sleep in the hospital

  5. It's a capital offense...one for you Latin scholars..

ADVERTISEMENT