ILNews

  • Home

Efforts to aid those facing foreclosure continue

Rebecca Berfanger
October 19, 2009
Keywords
Courts, Economy, Foreclosures, Indiana Continuing Legal Education Forum, Indiana Foreclosure Prevention Network, Indiana Pro Bono Commission, Indiana Supreme Court, Legal organizations/services
Back to TopE-mailPrint

More than 1,000 Indiana attorneys, judges, and mediators have attended CLE trainings since June about mortgage foreclosures. Chief Justice Randall Shepard disclosed the numbers today in Evansville where he also announced a new statewide initiative to help implement the state law that went into effect July 1 that provides homeowners the option of settlement conferences to save their homes.

About 35 of the CLEs, "Back Home in Indiana - Guiding Homeowners Through Foreclosure," have taken place for attorneys looking to represent homeowners, and for mediators willing to conduct settlement conferences. The final two CLEs are scheduled for this week - one today in Evansville and another Friday in Bloomington. While nothing has been set, there has been some talk to offer more CLEs about foreclosures in the future.

The CLEs were part of the court's response to the approximately 50 percent increase in the number of foreclosure cases in Indiana during the past five years. In 2008, there were 45,394 foreclosures filed in the state. In 2003 and 2004, there were approximately 30,000 foreclosures filed.

The Indiana Housing and Community Development Authority, the Indiana Foreclosure Prevention Network, the Indiana Pro Bono Commission, the Indiana Commission on Continuing Legal Education, the Indiana Continuing Legal Education Forum, the Office of the Indiana Attorney General, bar associations, law firms across the state, and the Indiana Supreme Court supported the training sessions.

Those who have handled settlement conferences have told Indiana Lawyer that having an attorney in the room can vastly improve a homeowner's chance of success.

While the court surpassed its goal to train at least 700 mediators, judges, and attorneys, an official statewide number has not been released regarding how many of those are eligible or have offered to take a pro bono case or mediate a settlement conference. That issue, along with other issues regarding the mortgage foreclosure CLEs, will be up for discussion at the annual conference of pro bono district plan administrators, which coincides with the Indiana State Bar Association's annual meeting in November.

Beyond training attorneys, judges, and mediators, the chief justice said the courts have a new plan to be implemented.

The proposed statewide system will help local courts handle the thousands of expected settlement conferences through local coordinators. The coordinators will also track the data for success rates, something each court currently does on its own without a centralized system. The Indiana Supreme Court and the Indiana Housing and Community Development Authority will finalize plans on this effort in the coming months.


ADVERTISEMENT
ADVANCED SEARCH
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. G. Michael Witte letter states he's suspended for three years. The case that got him suspended is identical to my estate case, including havin the Late Judge Deiter recuse himself because Newman had a conflict of interest with the judge. His Modus Operandi is nearly identical.

  2. SIGNED BY G. MICHAEL WITTE EXECUTIVE SECRETARY INDIANA SUPREME COURT DISCIPLINARY COMMISSION DATED MAY 17, 2012.

    Your 6th complaint against Lawrence T. Newman filed on 4/12/2012. On 1/31/12, the Indiana Supreme Court entered an order suspending Lawrence T. Newman’s law license for a period of three years. More important, even after three years, Lawrence Todd Newman will not get his license back unless and until he goes through a separate proceeding to prove that he is fit to practice law. This is not an easy process, and the burden is upon Lawrence T. Newman to prove by clear and convincing evidence that he is fit to return to practice.
    Because of the length of Lawrence T. Newman’s license suspension and the fact he may never succeed in getting his law license reinstated, we are not opening an investigation file at this time.
    Should Lawrence T. Newman seek reinstatement in the future, we will open your file and ask Lawrence T. Newman to address your grievance as part of his burden of proving fitness. We have attempted to notify Lawrence T. Newman that this will be required of him.
    It may disappoint you to hear that we will be doing nothing on your grievance at this time. However, the most our office can ever accomplish is to take away a lawyer’s license to practice law. We have already done that, albeit as a result of misconduct in cases other than your own. It makes better sense for our office to focus its limited resources on cases where the lawyers are still actively practicing law.

  3. Is there any justice in the Marion County Superior Court Civil Division? I am the unfortunate victim of a retaliatory lawsuit brought by Lawrence Todd Newman, the attorney from an estate case on which I worked as a unsupervised personal representative in 2006. The contract agreement for that case stated that the estate would be responsible for all attorney fees, but Newman refused to close the nearly insolvent estate when my duties were complete and his fees were paid. Instead, he tried to extort additional attorney fees from me by keeping the case open to address a wrongful death claim, despite the estate’s heir’s lack of interest in pursuing it and an expert doctor’s opinion that it would not be worth doing so. He also knowingly deceived me into believing that a “closing statement” was needed to close the estate, even though this requirement had actually been waived by the estate’s heir. The heir’s attorney filed a motion to have Newman removed from the case. After the court closed the probate case with prejudice (barred from further litigation) Newman illegally re-opened the case in another courtroom.
    As a result of complaints filed against him for these and similar actions, Newman has been suspended from practicing law for 18 months by the Indiana Disciplinary Commission. In retaliation, he has filed suit against me demanding additional attorney fees for the 2006 estate case, despite the fact that I made no agreement stating that I would pay any fees from my own assets on behalf of the estate. This lawsuit violates the rules of ethics, due process of law, and equal protection of law. Newman has been allowed to file ridiculous pleadings at an alarming rate and has been supported by a biased court system. Judge Carroll refuses to recuse himself from the case despite the fact that, by his own admission, he intends to grant Newman sanctions regardless of the evidence. When my former counsel discovered that the previous judge on the case, Judge Sosin, was a long-time close friend of Newman’s family, Judge Carroll commented for the record during a hearing that Judge Sosin in so many words “he finds the door “was weak for recusing himself from the case as a result of this obvious conflict of interest.
    This case is a public policy issue. Statutes put in place to protect unsupervised personal representatives in probate matters are being ignored. This case will affect thousands of individuals involved in probating and the personal representation of estates. Justice cannot possibly be served as long as a biased judge is allowed to defend a “vexatious litigant,” as Newman has been described by Judge Logan in Bradenton, Florida court. If there is any justice in the Marion County Superior Court Civil Division, this case against me will be dismissed with prejudice.

  4. Every affront to decency and every style adopted by criminals is not per se a constituttional violation. Only fools believe or espouse that.

  5. This was an unnecessary change in law, a needless fiddling with a tax that impacted very very few hoosiers, but one that erodes a tax base benefitting very many hoosiers. Just because some people wanted to chalk up a "tax cut" on their legislative brag-list, and didnt give a fig about replacing the revenue any other way. Really stupid. I am a republican my whole life and this just shames me like hell. I have to use a fake name over this because I know my fellow republicans are all brain washed over tax cutting too.

ADVERTISEMENT