ILNews

Disciplinary Actions - 7/3/13

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
Phillip H. Chamberlain, of Monroe County, has been suspended per a June 11 order from the Indiana Supreme Court. His interim suspension became effective 15 days from the date of the order.

Chamberlain pleaded guilty in October 2012 to Class D felony counterfeiting. He requested and was granted an extension to May 15 to file a response to the request for suspension, but did not file any submission.

The Clear Creek attorney was arrested in 2008 and faced charges of Class C felonies fraudulent sale of securities, forgery, sale of unregistered securities and unregistered investment advisor. These charges were dismissed after he entered an agreement to plead guilty to the Class D felony.He was sentenced to 540 days in the Indiana Department of Correction with all but time served suspended, completion of 120 days of community service and ordered to pay $166 in court costs.

Carl C. Jones, of Lake County, has been suspended for at least six months without automatic reinstatement, per a June 17 order. Jones was convicted in November 2010 of Class A misdemeanor trafficking with an inmate. He delivered a letter from his client’s girlfriend offering to testify falsely about an alibi for the client, as well as letters from the client’s mother and brother, and other items.

In a 2007 Disciplinary Commission response, Jones said the letters confiscated were mailed to the client by the client’s mother. At his trial, he said he brought the letters to his client. He was found to have violated Indiana Professional Conduct Rules 8.4(b) and 8.4(c). The use of his position of trust as an attorney to traffic in contraband with an inmate is serious misconduct, and Jones’ untruthful response to the commission’s investigative inquiry was a substantial breach of professional ethics, the justices held. The costs of the proceeding are assessed against Jones.

Anthony T. Adolf, of Allen County, has been suspended for noncooperation with the Disciplinary Commission, effective immediately, per a June 20 order. Adolf was ordered to show cause as to why he shouldn’t be suspended for failing to cooperate with the commission’s investigation into a grievance. Adolf responded with a one-sentence answer and has not cooperated.

Adolf must also pay $512.22 for costs of prosecuting the proceeding.

Veronica M. Roby, of Madison County, has been suspended for noncooperation with the Disciplinary Commission, effective immediately, per a June 20 order. She has not submitted a response to the Supreme Court’s order to show cause issued in March regarding her failure to cooperate with the commission’s investigation of a grievance.

Roby must also pay $523.72 for the costs of prosecuting the proceeding.

Public reprimand
David E. Corbitt, of Marion County, has been publicly reprimanded, in a June 20 order, for violating Indiana Professional Conduct Rule 8.4(b). He pleaded guilty last year to Class A misdemeanors resisting law enforcement and operating a vehicle while intoxicated endangering a person.

Corbitt has no disciplinary history, is making restitution for property damage he caused, and has voluntarily engaged himself for assessment by the Indiana Judges and Lawyers Assistance Program, the order notes. The costs of the proceeding are assessed against him.

Resignation
Robert L. Collins, of Perry County, has resigned from the bar, per a June 20 order. A verified complaint for disciplinary action was filed against him in August 2010. Any disciplinary proceeds pending are dismissed as moot, and Collins must wait at least five years to petition for reinstatement.•

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. Such things are no more elections than those in the late, unlamented Soviet Union.

  2. It appears the police and prosecutors are allowed to change the rules halfway through the game to suit themselves. I am surprised that the congress has not yet eliminated the right to a trial in cases involving any type of forensic evidence. That would suit their foolish law and order police state views. I say we eliminate the statute of limitations for crimes committed by members of congress and other government employees. Of course they would never do that. They are all corrupt cowards!!!

  3. Poor Judge Brown probably thought that by slavishly serving the godz of the age her violations of 18th century concepts like due process and the rule of law would be overlooked. Mayhaps she was merely a Judge ahead of her time?

  4. in a lawyer discipline case Judge Brown, now removed, was presiding over a hearing about a lawyer accused of the supposedly heinous ethical violation of saying the words "Illegal immigrant." (IN re Barker) http://www.in.gov/judiciary/files/order-discipline-2013-55S00-1008-DI-429.pdf .... I wonder if when we compare the egregious violations of due process by Judge Brown, to her chiding of another lawyer for politically incorrectness, if there are any conclusions to be drawn about what kind of person, what kind of judge, what kind of apparatchik, is busy implementing the agenda of political correctness and making off-limits legit advocacy about an adverse party in a suit whose illegal alien status is relevant? I am just asking the question, the reader can make own conclsuion. Oh wait-- did I use the wrong adjective-- let me rephrase that, um undocumented alien?

  5. of course the bigger questions of whether or not the people want to pay for ANY bussing is off limits, due to the Supreme Court protecting the people from DEMOCRACY. Several decades hence from desegregation and bussing plans and we STILL need to be taking all this taxpayer money to combat mostly-imagined "discrimination" in the most obviously failed social program of the postwar period.

ADVERTISEMENT