ILNews

Disciplinary Actions -1/30/13

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.

Reciprocal discipline
Mark J. Hughes has been suspended indefinitely from the practice of law in Indiana, as of Jan. 8, per a Supreme Court order. Hughes, who is also admitted to practice in Arizona, was disbarred from practice in Arizona in May 2012. If Hughes is reinstated in Arizona, he may file for reinstatement in Indiana, provided there is no other suspension order in effect.

Suspension
William E. Dittrich, of Porter County, has received a 90-day suspension with automatic reinstatement from the Supreme Court, per a Jan. 10 order. Dittrich admitted to four counts of misconduct occurring from 2008 to 2010, including failing to do the work he was hired to do and failing to safeguard unearned fees by placing them in a trust account. He knew he was suffering from depression and other health-related issues that interfered with his ability to attend to his clients’ needs.

After the verified complaint was filed, Dittrich made full refunds of unearned fees. He has violated Indiana Professional Conduct Rules 1.3: Failure to act with reasonable diligence and promptness; 1.4(a)(3): Failure to keep a client reasonably informed about the status of a matter; 1.4(a)(4): Failure to comply promptly with a client’s reasonable requests for information; 1.15(a): Failure to safeguard property of a client; 1.16(a)(2): Failure to withdraw from representation when the lawyer’s physical or mental condition materially impairs the lawyer’s ability to represent the client; 1.16(d): Failure to refund an unearned fee promptly upon termination of representation; and 3.2: Failure to expedite litigation consistent with the interests of a client.

The costs of the proceeding are processed against Dittrich. His suspension begins Feb. 15.

Diamond Z. Hirschauer, of Marion County, has been suspended indefinitely per a Jan. 10 Supreme Court order because more than six months have passed since Hirschauer was suspended due to noncooperation with the disciplinary process. The conversion to the indefinite suspension was effective the date of the order. To be readmitted to practice, Hirschauer must cure the causes of all suspensions in effect and successfully petition the Supreme Court for reinstatement.

Thomas N. Nuttle, of Elkhart County, has been suspended indefinitely per a Jan. 10 Supreme Cout order because more than six months have passed since he was suspended due to noncooperation with the disciplinary process. The conversion to the indefinite suspension was effective the date of the order. To be readmitted to practice, Nuttle must cure the causes of all suspensions in effect and successfully petition the Supreme Court for reinstatement.

Jon A. Criss, of St. Joseph County, has been suspended pendente lite from the practice of law, effective Jan. 10, per a Supreme Court order. Criss was found guilty of Class D felonies possession of methamphetamine and maintaining a common nuisance. The interim suspension shall continue until further order of the court or final resolution of any resulting disciplinary action, provided no other suspension is in effect.

Marla E. Muse, of Marion County, has been suspended for 180 days, with 30 days served and the remainder stayed subject to at least two years of probation, per a Jan. 11 Supreme Court order. Muse pleaded guilty in April 2012 to Class D felony possession of marijuana. She agreed with the Disciplinary Commission that she violated Indiana Professional Conduct Rule 8.4(b), which prohibits committing a criminal act that reflects adversely on trustworthiness or fitness as a lawyer.

She has entered into a voluntary monitoring agreement with the Judges and Lawyers Assistance Program. Muse’s suspension begins Feb. 15, and the costs of the proceeding are assessed against her.

Resignation
Olubunmi O. Okanlami, of St. Joseph County, has resigned from the bar, effective Jan. 10. Any disciplinary proceedings pending against Okanlami have been dismissed as moot. She is not eligible to petition for reinstatement to practice for five years. The costs of the proceeding are accessed against Okanlami.

Leonard M. Holajter, of Lake County, has resigned from the bar, effective Jan. 14. Any disciplinary proceedings pending against him are dismissed as moot. The costs of the proceeding are accessed against Holajter, and he is ineligible to petition for reinstatement for five years.•

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. Bob Leonard killed two people named Jennifer and Dion Longworth. There were no Smiths involved.

  2. Being on this journey from the beginning has convinced me the justice system really doesn't care about the welfare of the child. The trial court judge knew the child belonged with the mother. The father having total disregard for the rules of the court. Not only did this cost the mother and child valuable time together but thousands in legal fees. When the child was with the father the mother paid her child support. When the child was finally with the right parent somehow the father got away without having to pay one penny of child support. He had to be in control. Since he withheld all information regarding the child's welfare he put her in harms way. Mother took the child to the doctor when she got sick and was totally embarrassed she knew nothing regarding the medical information especially the allergies, The mother texted the father (from the doctors office) and he replied call his attorney. To me this doesn't seem like a concerned father. Seeing the child upset when she had to go back to the father. What upset me the most was finding out the child sleeps with him. Sometimes in the nude. Maybe I don't understand all the rules of the law but I thought this was also morally wrong. A concerned parent would allow the child to finish the school year. Say goodbye to her friends. It saddens me to know the child will not have contact with the sisters, aunts, uncles and the 87 year old grandfather. He didn't allow it before. Only the mother is allowed to talk to the child. I don't think now will be any different. I hope the decision the courts made would've been the same one if this was a member of their family. Someday this child will end up in therapy if allowed to remain with the father.

  3. Ok attorney Straw ... if that be a good idea ... And I am not saying it is ... but if it were ... would that be ripe prior to her suffering an embarrassing remand from the Seventh? Seems more than a tad premature here soldier. One putting on the armor should not boast liked one taking it off.

  4. The judge thinks that she is so cute to deny jurisdiction, but without jurisdiction, she loses her immunity. She did not give me any due process hearing or any discovery, like the Middlesex case provided for that lawyer. Because she has refused to protect me and she has no immunity because she rejected jurisdiction, I am now suing her in her district.

  5. Sam Bradbury was never a resident of Lafayette he lived in rural Tippecanoe County, Thats an error.

ADVERTISEMENT