ILNews

Disciplinary Actions - 12/21/11

December 21, 2011
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
Stanley Kahn of Marion County has been suspended from the practice of law for noncooperation with the Disciplinary Commission into an investigation of a grievance filed against him. The suspension began immediately with the issuance of the Dec. 8, 2011, order from the Indiana Supreme Court and continues until the commission’s executive secretary certifies Kahn has cooperated with the investigation, any investigation or disciplinary proceedings are disposed of or until further order of the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court ordered Kahn on July 24, 2011, to show cause why he shouldn’t be suspended for failure to cooperate with the commission’s investigation, but he didn’t respond and the commission on Oct. 18 filed a request for a ruling and to tax costs.

Conditional Reinstatement
Jeffrey A. Golding of Porter County has been granted conditional reinstatement to the practice of law in Indiana. The Indiana Supreme Court in October 1998 suspended Golding for not less than nine months without automatic reinstatement. After nearly a decade, Golding filed a petition for reinstatement Feb. 25, 2008. On Nov. 4, 2011, the Disciplinary Commission filed recommendations that Golding be reinstated in a probationary status requiring that he meet several conditions including that he desires in good faith to restore his privilege to practice law; that he’s complied fully with the previous order’s disciplinary terms; and he’s taken the Multistate Professional Responsibility Examination within six months of requesting the reinstatement and passed with a scaled score of 80 or above. Golding is to meet regularly with another attorney for a year to consult about stress, and he’ll be monitored for a year by the Indiana Judges and Lawyers Assistance Program. The conditions apply only if Golding enters private practice within one year of his reinstatement and they will be in effect for one year after he enters private practice, the Dec. 8 order states.•

ADVERTISEMENT

  • Kahn caused a friend to lose MILLIONS in compensation
    My friend, before I knew him, engaged Stanley Kahn to represent him in an injury caused by faulty equipment on the job, which caused him to fall 45 feet, break almost every bone in his body, resulting in long stays in hospitals & a nursing home. Kahn did NOT file in a timely manner so my friend lost any chance of compensation for the carelessness of this company, & is STILL totally disabled. My friend is illiterate due to severe dyslexia & did not know his rights or how to handle the situation, resulting in THIS kind of behavior by an uncaring, unprofessional attorney, who unfortunately still seems to be practicing his own brand of "law".

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. 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?

  2. 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?

  3. 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.

  4. You can put your photos anywhere you like... When someone steals it they know it doesn't belong to them. And, a man getting a divorce is automatically not a nice guy...? That's ridiculous. Since when is need of money a conflict of interest? That would mean that no one should have a job unless they are already financially solvent without a job... A photographer is also under no obligation to use a watermark (again, people know when a photo doesn't belong to them) or provide contact information. Hey, he didn't make it easy for me to pay him so I'll just take it! Well heck, might as well walk out of the grocery store with a cart full of food because the lines are too long and you don't find that convenient. "Only in Indiana." Oh, now you're passing judgement on an entire state... What state do you live in? I need to characterize everyone in your state as ignorant and opinionated. And the final bit of ignorance; assuming a photo anyone would want is lucky and then how much does your camera have to cost to make it a good photo, in your obviously relevant opinion?

  5. Seventh Circuit Court Judge Diane Wood has stated in “The Rule of Law in Times of Stress” (2003), “that neither laws nor the procedures used to create or implement them should be secret; and . . . the laws must not be arbitrary.” According to the American Bar Association, Wood’s quote drives home this point: The rule of law also requires that people can expect predictable results from the legal system; this is what Judge Wood implies when she says that “the laws must not be arbitrary.” Predictable results mean that people who act in the same way can expect the law to treat them in the same way. If similar actions do not produce similar legal outcomes, people cannot use the law to guide their actions, and a “rule of law” does not exist.

ADVERTISEMENT