ILNews

Former senior judge faces disciplinary proceedings

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

A former senior judge in northern Indiana faces disciplinary action for charges that she had a sexual relationship with a client to whom she was appointed as a public defender.

Lisa Traylor-Wolff of Logansport was appointed in January 2012 as S.W.’s public defender in a Cass County case in which he was sentenced to 30 years for convictions of robbery and criminal confinement. She represented him during his appeal until his conviction was affirmed by the Indiana Court of Appeals in mid-July 2012.

Between February 2012 and June 2012, Traylor-Wolff “developed a more personal relationship” with S.W., according to the notice of the institution of formal proceedings and statement of charges issued Monday by the Indiana Commission on Judicial Qualifications.

Traylor-Wolff allegedly provided S.W. with art, books and cash, and she completed a Bible study with him before the relationship became sexual. The two kissed on multiple occasions during Traylor-Wolff’s visits with him in the prison’s attorney-client visitations rooms, according to the three counts against her. On a visit in June 2012, correction officers witnessed “excessive fondling with intent to sexually gratify over the clothing.”

The alleged conduct violates Rule 1.8(j) of the Indiana Rules of Professional Conduct and Miami Correctional Facility visitation rules, and S.W. was issued a disciplinary write-up and sanctioned with a loss of jail credit time.

The charges against Traylor-Wolff also accuse her of violating Rule 1.7(a)(2), prohibiting a lawyer from representing a client if there is significant risk that the representation will be materially limited by a personal interest of the lawyer.

Traylor-Wolff was certified as a senior judge at the time of the alleged violations, putting the discipline against her before the Judicial Qualifications Commission, according to Supreme Court Public Information Officer Kathryn Dolan. The former judge also is charged with violating rules of the Code of Judicial Conduct.

Traylor-Wolff had been a senior judge since 2001 and did not seek recertification as a senior judge at the end of 2012, Dolan said. She was admitted to practice in 1986 and is listed as active and in good standing on the Indiana Roll of Attorneys with no prior record of discipline. She served on the bench in Fulton and Pulaski counties in the 1990s until becoming a senior judge.  

Traylor-Wolff has 20 days to file an answer with the Supreme Court, after which three masters may be appointed to conduct a public hearing on the disciplinary charges.
 

 

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. What a fine article, thank you! I can testify firsthand and by detailed legal reports (at end of this note) as to the dire consequences of rejecting this truth from the fine article above: "The inclusion and expansion of this right [to jury] in Indiana’s Constitution is a clear reflection of our state’s intention to emphasize the importance of every Hoosier’s right to make their case in front of a jury of their peers." Over $20? Every Hoosier? Well then how about when your very vocation is on the line? How about instead of a jury of peers, one faces a bevy of political appointees, mini-czars, who care less about due process of the law than the real czars did? Instead of trial by jury, trial by ideological ordeal run by Orwellian agents? Well that is built into more than a few administrative law committees of the Ind S.Ct., and it is now being weaponized, as is revealed in articles posted at this ezine, to root out post moderns heresies like refusal to stand and pledge allegiance to all things politically correct. My career was burned at the stake for not so saluting, but I think I was just one of the early logs. Due, at least in part, to the removal of the jury from bar admission and bar discipline cases, many more fires will soon be lit. Perhaps one awaits you, dear heretic? Oh, at that Ind. article 12 plank about a remedy at law for every damage done ... ah, well, the founders evidently meant only for those damages done not by the government itself, rabid statists that they were. (Yes, that was sarcasm.) My written reports available here: Denied petition for cert (this time around): http://tinyurl.com/zdmawmw Denied petition for cert (from the 2009 denial and five year banishment): http://tinyurl.com/zcypybh Related, not written by me: Amicus brief: http://tinyurl.com/hvh7qgp

  2. Justice has finally been served. So glad that Dr. Ley can finally sleep peacefully at night knowing the truth has finally come to the surface.

  3. While this right is guaranteed by our Constitution, it has in recent years been hampered by insurance companies, i.e.; the practice of the plaintiff's own insurance company intervening in an action and filing a lien against any proceeds paid to their insured. In essence, causing an additional financial hurdle for a plaintiff to overcome at trial in terms of overall award. In a very real sense an injured party in exercise of their right to trial by jury may be the only party in a cause that would end up with zero compensation.

  4. Why in the world would someone need a person to correct a transcript when a realtime court reporter could provide them with a transcript (rough draft) immediately?

  5. This article proved very enlightening. Right ahead of sitting the LSAT for the first time, I felt a sense of relief that a score of 141 was admitted to an Indiana Law School and did well under unique circumstances. While my GPA is currently 3.91 I fear standardized testing and hope that I too will get a good enough grade for acceptance here at home. Thanks so much for this informative post.

ADVERTISEMENT