ILNews

In case of dishonest lawyers

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Attorneys know they aren’t supposed to reach into a client’s cookie jar and take money that doesn’t belong to them or fail to provide the legal services they’ve vowed to perform.

But sometimes, lawyers behave badly, and clients can find themselves cheated. A legal malpractice action might be a remedy, but sometimes former clients are left without what they might consider a real remedy for what has happened to them.

That’s where the Indiana State Bar Association sees a place to step in and do what it can to try and help repair the legal profession’s bruised and battered image that stems from these kinds of dishonest circumstances. Specifically, the Clients’ Financial Assistance Fund is a voluntary attempt by the legal profession to help those who’ve been victimized by dishonest attorneys.

“We have some lawyers who give the profession a bad name, and I think it’s a good thing for the state bar to do – and lawyers to know – that this resource is available for some clients who’ve had negative experiences out there,” said Indianapolis attorney Seamus Boyce, vice chair of the fund program. “We don’t see ourselves as judges, but just attorneys who are trying to do a good service, like public relations for the legal profession.”

Nearing its 50th birthday after being formed by the House of Delegates in 1961, the fund receives about $2 from every state bar member’s annual dues and the money usually rolls over to the next cycle. Most states have a similar fund, though some are run by the judiciary or state rather than through the state bar association.

Those attorneys who’ve been a part of the program for years say this is an unprecedented time due to the amount of claims coming in regarding a single attorney.

In fact, association records show that the complaints against one attorney this year are on pace to exceed the amount filed for all attorneys during the past decade, but it’s still unknown what the total might be and whether some or all of that money will ultimately be given to those victims.
 

sniadecki-rod-mug Sniadecki

That individual is a now-disbarred St. Joseph County attorney, Rod Sniadecki, who nearly 100 clients have expressed interest in complaining about because of his conduct.

The Indiana Supreme Court struck his name from the attorney roll back in May, after finding that the solo practitioner admitted to the bar in 1992 had violated the terms of a previous suspension imposed for having a sexual relationship with a client and then lying about it, as well as hiring a suspended attorney to perform various legal duties. Sniadecki also took on conflicting roles as counsel for a divorcing wife while representing both her and the husband in a joint bankruptcy case.

In disbarring Sniadecki, the justices found he’d committed misconduct by not notifying all active clients of his October 2007 suspension. He also accepted new clients and represented them during his suspension. The misconduct ruling found that Sniadecki directed his legal secretary to forge several documents and gave false sworn statements to the Disciplinary Commission during its investigation of the disciplinary case, took money from clients without repaying it, and falsified loan documents and attempted to obstruct justice when trying to get a loan to repay a client through mortgages on his law office and new law office properties.

Following that disbarment, the St. Joseph Prosecutor’s Office turned over its criminal investigation to the U.S. Attorney for the Northern District of Indiana to consider possible forgery, perjury, and attempted obstruction of justice charges. No charges or indictments have been made public at this time, according to the federal court docket.

The Sniadecki situation has created a new phenomenon for the ISBA’s victim fund that it hasn’t faced before, according to Boyce and current chair, Gary Stage in Indianapolis.

In the past decade, records show the ISBA has paid out nearly $276,414 to dozens of applicants who’ve proved they were victimized by their attorneys. Stage says the fund administrators meet every other month and usually discuss about eight to 10 cases, and most of the claims range from $500 to $5,000. The ISBA doesn’t have a historic breakdown of how many attorneys have been the subject of claims each year, but the amount submitted against Sniadecki is nearly at the level submitted against all attorneys during the past decade.


stage-gary-mug Stage

More than 90 applications from different individuals have been requested, and so far 44 of those have been returned for a total of about $200,163, the ISBA reports. Stage says that the fund is more than able to handle the excess, with most recent figures from Oct. 31 showing a total $560,156 in the fund. Almost $20,000 has been collected so far since July 1 and about $31,000 has been paid on attorney claims, though none of that has been related to Sniadecki because applications are still being accepted and reviewed.

A hurdle the fund faces with Sniadecki, though, is that current rules limit the amount of money that can be paid out for one attorney to $50,000.

“It’s been interesting to me about the history of this program, but in studying that history and talking to those who’ve been around, no one can recall anything like this happening,” Boyce said.

Stage has been involved with the program for six years, served the past three as chair, and agreed that the large number of claims against Sniadecki is unprecedented and could force fund administrators to ask the ISBA’s governing board for additional revenue to give to applicants. While he and Boyce believe that the request is rare but has been made before, neither they nor other long-time members could pinpoint an example of that cap being increased.

The rules stipulate that not more than $15,000 can go to any one applicant and that $50,000 is the total that can be collected for any one attorney’s conduct, but if the board agrees to exceed that amount it cannot be more than an additional $10,000.

“They might increase it past that $50,000 mark, but I doubt it would get anywhere near $200,000 even if all those claims were found eligible,” Stage said, pointing out that he couldn’t speculate about ongoing or future investigations or what could be determined. “Theoretically, we’d ask for approval and allocate on a pro rata basis, maybe paying three-fourths of the claim amounts. But we don’t know, because we’ve never had to apply that type of thing before.”

Both lawyers said that they act as filters for the applications to determine if any fraud or misconduct happened, but sometimes that just doesn’t warrant recovery through this fund and is more suitable for a court action, they said.•

ADVERTISEMENT

  • in case of dishonest lawyers
    Because of the public embarrassment, there should be a class action suit against this man. He knew what he was doing. from 1994 til 2007, he lied about filing cases. I TRUSTED THIS MAN! I LOSE! NO ACCOUNTABILITY!

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. No second amendment, pro life, pro traditional marriage, reagan or trump tshirts will be sold either. And you cannot draw Mohammed even in your own notebook. And you must wear a helmet at all times while at the fair. And no lawyer jokes can be told except in the designated protest area. And next year no crucifixes, since they are uber offensive to all but Catholics. Have a nice bland day here in the Lego movie. Remember ... Everything is awesome comrades.

  2. Thank you for this post . I just bought a LG External DVD It came with Cyber pwr 2 go . It would not play on Lenovo Idea pad w/8.1 . Your recommended free VLC worked great .

  3. All these sites putting up all the crap they do making Brent Look like A Monster like he's not a good person . First off th fight actually started not because of Brent but because of one of his friends then when the fight popped off his friend ran like a coward which left Brent to fend for himself .It IS NOT a crime to defend yourself 3 of them and 1 of him . just so happened he was a better fighter. I'm Brent s wife so I know him personally and up close . He's a very caring kind loving man . He's not abusive in any way . He is a loving father and really shouldn't be where he is not for self defense . Now because of one of his stupid friends trying to show off and turning out to be nothing but a coward and leaving Brent to be jumped by 3 men not only is Brent suffering but Me his wife , his kids abd step kidshis mom and brother his family is left to live without him abd suffering in more ways then one . that man was and still is my smile ....he's the one real thing I've ever had in my life .....f@#@ You Lafayette court system . Learn to do your jobs right he maybe should have gotten that year for misdemeanor battery but that s it . not one person can stand to me and tell me if u we're in a fight facing 3 men and u just by yourself u wouldn't fight back that you wouldn't do everything u could to walk away to ur family ur kids That's what Brent is guilty of trying to defend himself against 3 men he wanted to go home tohisfamily worse then they did he just happened to be a better fighter and he got the best of th others . what would you do ? Stand there lay there and be stomped and beaten or would u give it everything u got and fight back ? I'd of done the same only I'm so smallid of probably shot or stabbed or picked up something to use as a weapon . if it was me or them I'd do everything I could to make sure I was going to live that I would make it hone to see my kids and husband . I Love You Brent Anthony Forever & Always .....Soul 1 baby

  4. Good points, although this man did have a dog in the legal fight as that it was his mother on trial ... and he a dependent. As for parking spaces, handicap spots for pregnant women sure makes sense to me ... er, I mean pregnant men or women. (Please, I meant to include pregnant men the first time, not Room 101 again, please not Room 101 again. I love BB)

  5. I have no doubt that the ADA and related laws provide that many disabilities must be addressed. The question, however, is "by whom?" Many people get dealt bad cards by life. Some are deaf. Some are blind. Some are crippled. Why is it the business of the state to "collectivize" these problems and to force those who are NOT so afflicted to pay for those who are? The fact that this litigant was a mere spectator and not a party is chilling. What happens when somebody who speaks only East Bazurkistanish wants a translator so that he can "understand" the proceedings in a case in which he has NO interest? Do I and all other taxpayers have to cough up? It would seem so. ADA should be amended to provide a simple rule: "Your handicap, YOUR problem". This would apply particularly to handicapped parking spaces, where it seems that if the "handicap" is an ingrown toenail, the government comes rushing in to assist the poor downtrodden victim. I would grant wounded vets (IED victims come to mind in particular) a pass on this.. but others? Nope.

ADVERTISEMENT