Attorney discipline

Brizzi disciplinary case poses 'actual prejudice' question

January 7, 2011
Michael Hoskins
Former Marion County prosecutor Carl Brizzi took the stand today, defending himself against attorney misconduct charges alleging that he violated professional conduct rules by public statements made on pending cases.
More

Offensive language results in disciplinary actions

January 5, 2011
Rebecca Berfanger
Complaints based on a misconduct rule regarding how an attorney could offend others through prejudicial words or actions resulted in disciplinary orders in May and December 2010.
More

Disciplinary Actions -1/5/11

January 5, 2011
See who's been suspended or publicly reprimanded.
More

Justice wants attorney suspended longer

December 28, 2010
Jennifer Nelson
The Indiana Supreme Court couldn’t agree on the appropriate sanction for an attorney who engaged in an improper ex parte communication with a judge, leaving one judge to argue for at least a 90-day suspension.
More

Lawyers suspended for not complying with CLE requirements

December 27, 2010
IL Staff
The Indiana Supreme Court has suspended 12 attorneys for remaining delinquent regarding compliance with certain continuing legal education requirements for the period ending Dec. 31, 2009.
More

Disciplinary Actions - 12/22/10

December 22, 2010
See who's resigned and been reinstated.
More

Disciplinary Actions - 12/8/10

December 8, 2010
Read who's been suspended by the Indiana Supreme Court.
More

Disciplinary Actions - 11/24/10

November 24, 2010
See who's been disbarred, suspended, or resigned.
More

Justices disbar attorney

November 12, 2010
Jennifer Nelson
The Indiana Supreme Court chose to disbar a Marion County attorney due to his pattern of neglect in clients’ cases.
More

New advertising rule on law firm monikers sparks concern

November 10, 2010
Michael Hoskins
New attorney advertising rules adopted recently by the Indiana Supreme Court have some lawyers throughout the state worried that they’re being forced to change their law firm names from what’s historically been allowed.
More

Brizzi disciplinary case delayed again

November 10, 2010
Michael Hoskins
By the time Marion County Prosecutor Carl Brizzi faces a disciplinary hearing on alleged misconduct about how he publicly discussed pending cases, he’ll have finished his term and will no longer be prosecutor in the state’s largest county.
More

Disciplinary Actions - 11/10/10

November 10, 2010
See who's been suspended and reinstated.
More

Agency wants one-year suspension

November 10, 2010
Michael Hoskins
The Indiana Supreme Court’s Disciplinary Commission argues that a hearing officer’s recommendation of a public reprimand against Delaware County Prosecutor Mark McKinney is inadequate and the elected official should receive a one-year suspension.
More

Discipline case poses questions on recusals, separation of powers

October 13, 2010
Michael Hoskins
Delaware County Prosecutor Mark McKinney should be publicly reprimanded for violating four professional conduct rules in his handling of civil forfeiture matters as a private attorney while simultaneously prosecuting those same criminal defendants, according to a hearing officer the Indiana Supreme Court appointed to examine disciplinary charges against the prosecutor.
More

Disciplinary Actions -10/13/10

October 13, 2010
IL Staff
Read who's been suspended or publicly reprimanded.
More

Justices disagree on prosecutor's public reprimand

October 5, 2010
Michael Hoskins
The Indiana Supreme Court has publicly reprimanded a lawyer for what happened to his license when he left private practice to become a full-time prosecutor in northwest Indiana, but the disciplinary action has split the state’s justices on whether a more severe punishment was warranted.
More

Hearing officer: prosecutor should get public reprimand

October 4, 2010
Michael Hoskins
Delaware County Prosecutor Mark McKinney should be publicly reprimanded for violating four professional conduct rules in his handling of civil forfeiture matters as a private attorney while simultaneously prosecuting those same criminal defendants, according to hearing officer appointed by the Indiana Supreme Court.
More

Disciplinary Actions - 9/29/10

September 29, 2010
IL Staff
See who received a public reprimand.
More

Attorney found guilty but mentally ill in attack

September 16, 2010
Jennifer Nelson
A Hamilton County jury found an attorney guilty but mentally ill on the five counts he faced following his attack on a state representative nearly a year ago.
More

Disciplinary Actions - 9/15/10

September 15, 2010
IL Staff
Read who's been suspended and reinstated to the practice of law.
More

Justices warn Indiana, out-of-state attorneys

September 3, 2010
Michael Hoskins
The Indiana Supreme Court has a warning for attorneys both inside and outside the state: comply with the rules for being admitted to practice here or else.
More

Disciplinary Actions - 9/1

September 1, 2010
Read more about a private reprimand.
More

High court privately reprimands attorney

August 30, 2010
Jennifer Nelson
The Indiana Supreme Court has privately reprimanded an attorney for improperly revealing information about a former client when socializing with friends.
More

Judge sues prosecutor for intimidation, retribution

August 23, 2010
Jennifer Nelson
A Delaware County judge is claiming that county prosecutor Mark McKinney and a former deputy prosecutor threatened and intimidated the judge and his wife based on the judge’s ruling on how McKinney handled civil drug forfeitures.
More

Disciplinary Actions - 8/18

August 18, 2010
Read who's been suspended from the practice of law.
More
Page  << 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 >> pager
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. I need an experienced attorney to handle a breach of contract matter. Kindly respond for more details. Graham Young

  2. I thought the slurs were the least grave aspects of her misconduct, since they had nothing to do with her being on the bench. Why then do I suspect they were the focus? I find this a troubling trend. At least she was allowed to keep her law license.

  3. Section 6 of Article I of the Indiana Constitution is pretty clear and unequivocal: "Section 6. No money shall be drawn from the treasury for the benefit of any religious or theological institution."

  4. Video pen? Nice work, "JW"! Let this be a lesson and a caution to all disgruntled ex-spouses (or soon-to-be ex-spouses) . . . you may think that altercation is going to get you some satisfaction . . . it will not.

  5. First comment on this thread is a fitting final comment on this thread, as that the MCBA never answered Duncan's fine question, and now even Eric Holder agrees that the MCBA was in material error as to the facts: "I don't get it" from Duncan December 1, 2014 5:10 PM "The Grand Jury met for 25 days and heard 70 hours of testimony according to this article and they made a decision that no crime occurred. On what basis does the MCBA conclude that their decision was "unjust"? What special knowledge or evidence does the MCBA have that the Grand Jury hearing this matter was unaware of? The system that we as lawyers are sworn to uphold made a decision that there was insufficient proof that officer committed a crime. How can any of us say we know better what was right than the jury that actually heard all of the the evidence in this case."

ADVERTISEMENT