ILNews

Disciplinary Commission seeks agency head

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Indiana needs a new face for lawyer discipline, and applications are being accepted from anyone interested in the job.

The Indiana Supreme Court Disciplinary Commission is accepting applications through Jan. 29, 2010, for the executive secretary post, which is being vacated at the end of this year. Current executive secretary Don Lundberg announced last month that he's leaving the position he's held since December 1991. At the start of the year, he'll become a partner and deputy general counsel at Barnes & Thornburg in Indianapolis.

As administrative head of the agency responsible for investigating and prosecuting claims of lawyer misconduct, the executive secretary supervises a staff of 15 that includes 11 attorneys, an investigator, and part-time law student clerks and support staff. The agency investigates roughly 16,000 grievances each year and prosecutes a percentage of that total. The executive secretary also acts as chief legal counsel to the nine-member commission, and handles occasional trial work.

"This is a key job for the legal community," said Indianapolis attorney Sally Franklin Zweig, immediate past chair of the nine-member commission. "It is a position that works to maintain the credibility of lawyers as an honored profession. Consumer protection is a central part of that role and the executive secretary also has the opportunity to help assure that the community at large will have confidence in the lawyer discipline process."

The commission is doing a "broad" search, which means it is prepared to look inside and outside of Indiana, according to Zweig. Candidates should have at least 10 years of law practice experience, and must be admitted to practice in Indiana or be eligible for immediate admission. The current compensation is $115,000, and benefits include health, dental, vision, life, and disability insurance, as well as participation in the Indiana Public Employees Retirement Fund's benefit pension plan.

Applications will be posted online at the Commission's Web site at www.in.gov/judiciary/discipline, where more information about the agency is also available. Applicants can download applications and send to: Confidential Applications c/o Indiana Supreme Court Disciplinary Commission, 30 S. Meridian St., Suite 850, Indianapolis, IN 46204. All applications will be confidential.

Once applications are received, the Disciplinary Commission expects to review those as quickly as possible and discuss the issue at its February meeting, Zweig said. The commission will recommend finalists for consideration to the Indiana Supreme Court, which makes the ultimate decision on the appointment. No timeline exists for that to happen.

The commission plans to discuss the issue of an interim executive secretary at its next meeting on Dec. 11, Zweig said.

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