Attorney discipline

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

Court suspends attorney for 30 days

August 9, 2010
Michael Hoskins
The Indiana Supreme Court has imposed a 30-day suspension against an Indianapolis attorney who was one of nearly three dozen people to recently apply for an opening on the state’s highest court.
More

Disciplinary rulings explore 'knowing' standard

July 21, 2010
Michael Hoskins
Attorneys faced misconduct cases involving incorrect citation, agreement-signing.
More
Page  << 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 >> pager
Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. The practitioners and judges who hail E-filing as the Saviour of the West need to contain their respective excitements. E-filing is federal court requires the practitioner to cram his motion practice into pigeonholes created by IT people. Compound motions or those seeking alternative relief are effectively barred, unless the practitioner wants to receive a tart note from some functionary admonishing about the "problem". E-filing is just another method by which courts and judges transfer their burden to practitioners, who are the really the only powerless components of the system. Of COURSE it is easier for the court to require all of its imput to conform to certain formats, but this imposition does NOT improve the quality of the practice of law and does NOT improve the ability of the practitioner to advocate for his client or to fashion pleadings that exactly conform to his client's best interests. And we should be very wary of the disingenuous pablum about the costs. The courts will find a way to stick it to the practitioner. Lake County is a VERY good example of this rapaciousness. Any one who does not believe this is invited to review the various special fees that system imposes upon practitioners- as practitioners- and upon each case ON TOP of the court costs normal in every case manually filed. Jurisprudence according to Aldous Huxley.

  2. Any attorneys who practice in federal court should be able to say the same as I can ... efiling is great. I have been doing it in fed court since it started way back. Pacer has its drawbacks, but the ability to hit an e-docket and pull up anything and everything onscreen is a huge plus for a litigator, eps the sole practitioner, who lacks a filing clerk and the paralegal support of large firms. Were I an Indiana attorney I would welcome this great step forward.

  3. Can we get full disclosure on lobbyist's payments to legislatures such as Mr Buck? AS long as there are idiots that are disrespectful of neighbors and intent on shooting fireworks every night, some kind of regulations are needed.

  4. I am the mother of the child in this case. My silence on the matter was due to the fact that I filed, both in Illinois and Indiana, child support cases. I even filed supporting documentation with the Indiana family law court. Not sure whether this information was provided to the court of appeals or not. Wish the case was done before moving to Indiana, because no matter what, there is NO WAY the state of Illinois would have allowed an appeal on a child support case!

  5. "No one is safe when the Legislature is in session."

ADVERTISEMENT