Discipline

Disciplinary charges filed against Hamilton County judge

May 13, 2011
Jennifer Nelson
The Indiana Commission on Judicial Qualifications has filed disciplinary charges against Hamilton Superior Judge William Hughes. The charges are related to the judge’s arrest for driving while impaired and later guilty plea to misdemeanor reckless driving in North Carolina.
More

Disciplinary actions - 5/11/11

May 11, 2011
IL Staff
Read about disciplinary actions imposed by the Indiana Supreme Court.
More

Beech Grove City judge publicly admonished

May 5, 2011
Jennifer Nelson
The Indiana Commission on Judicial Qualifications has publicly admonished Beech Grove City Court Judge Charles W. Hunter for comments he made last year to an Indianapolis television reporter.
More

Disciplinary Actions - 4/27/11

April 27, 2011
See who resigned and who was reinstated.
More

Suspended attorney pleads guilty to theft

April 13, 2011
Michael Hoskins
A suspended attorney has pleaded guilty to stealing $283,000 from his clients during dozens of transactions.
More

New advertising rules irk some lawyersRestricted Content

April 13, 2011
Michael Hoskins
Bloomington attorney Ken Nunn says he hasn’t been hurt by new attorney advertising rules put in place at the start of the year, but he’s hearing more disturbing stories from people who are feeling the effects.
More

Disciplinary Actions - 4/13/11

April 13, 2011
See who was suspended by the Indiana Supreme Court.
More

Fund awards victim of disbarred lawyer

March 30, 2011
Michael Hoskins
The Indiana State Bar Association’s Clients’ Financial Assistance Fund Committee has awarded a woman $14,973 for losses she suffered due to the dishonest acts of disbarred South Bend attorney Rod Sniadecki.
More

Disciplinary Actions - 3/30/11

March 30, 2011
See who's been suspended or received a public reprimand from the Indiana Supreme Court.
More

Brizzi discipline case could set new prejudice standard

March 4, 2011
Michael Hoskins
The Indiana Supreme Court’s Disciplinary Commission wants to set a new standard of “actual prejudice” for attorney misconduct. In making that argument, the validity of two high-profile murder convictions that Carl Brizzi secured during his time as prosecutor in the state’s largest county are being questioned.
More

Court weighs needs when timing judicial suspensionsRestricted Content

March 2, 2011
Michael Hoskins
When deciding that a judge must be suspended and determining when that time off the bench should be, decision-makers must maintain a delicate balance.
More

Disciplinary dividing line = R-E-S-P-E-C-TRestricted Content

March 2, 2011
Michael Hoskins
Two recent rulings by the Indiana Supreme Court send a message to any attorney who might be accused of misconduct and face disciplinary proceedings.
More

Disciplinary Actions - 3/2/11

March 2, 2011
See who has been suspended, received a public reprimand, and who resigned.
More

Justices appoint pro temp judge for Marion County traffic court

February 22, 2011
IL Staff
The Indiana Supreme Court has appointed Indianapolis attorney Jane H. Conley as Judge Pro Tempore in Marion Superior Court, according to a Feb. 16 order posted on the court’s website this week.
More

Disciplinary Actions - 2/16/11

February 16, 2011
See who was recently suspended.
More

Supreme Court suspends judge for 30 days

February 15, 2011
Michael Hoskins
A 30-day unpaid suspension begins next week for Marion Superior Traffic Judge William Young, though the chief justice expects the Indiana Supreme Court would have issued a lengthier sanction if a settlement had not been reached in the misconduct case.
More

Traffic judge's suspension begins Feb. 22

February 14, 2011
Michael Hoskins
A 30-day suspension without pay begins next week for Marion Superior Traffic Judge William Young.
More

Attorney reprimanded for charging unreasonable fees

February 14, 2011
Jennifer Nelson
The Indiana Supreme Court has publicly reprimanded a Hamilton County attorney for violating Indiana Professional Conduct Rule 1.5(a) by making agreements for and charging unreasonable fees.
More

Lawyer suspended for 180 days due to conduct during disciplinary process

February 11, 2011
Michael Hoskins
The Indiana Supreme Court has ordered a six month suspension for an Indiana lawyer who primarily practices in Michigan, not because of the misconduct committed, but more specifically because of the attorney’s bad behavior during the disciplinary process.
More

Disciplinary Actions - 2/2/11

February 2, 2011
See who's been suspended and reinstated.
More

Ex-Marion County Prosecutor Carl Brizzi defends himself in court

January 19, 2011
Michael Hoskins
While the ex-prosecutor in the state’s largest county waits to hear whether he will get a black mark for misconduct on his record, the Marion County disciplinary action against Carl Brizzi has broader professional conduct implications for attorneys throughout Indiana.
More

Disciplinary Actions - 1/19/11

January 19, 2011
See who's been suspended by the Disciplinary Commission.
More

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 actionsRestricted Content

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
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 like the concept. Seems like a good idea and really inexpensive to manage.

  2. I don't agree that this is an extreme case. There are more of these people than you realize - people that are vindictive and/or with psychological issues have clogged the system with baseless suits that are costly to the defendant and to taxpayers. Restricting repeat offenders from further abusing the system is not akin to restricting their freedon, but to protecting their victims, and the court system, from allowing them unfettered access. From the Supreme Court opinion "he has burdened the opposing party and the courts of this state at every level with massive, confusing, disorganized, defective, repetitive, and often meritless filings."

  3. So, if you cry wolf one too many times courts may "restrict" your ability to pursue legal action? Also, why is document production equated with wealth? Anyone can "produce probably tens of thousands of pages of filings" if they have a public library card. I understand this is an extreme case, but our Supreme Court really got this one wrong.

  4. He called our nation a nation of cowards because we didn't want to talk about race. That was a cheap shot coming from the top cop. The man who decides who gets the federal government indicts. Wow. Not a gentleman if that is the measure. More importantly, this insult delivered as we all understand, to white people-- without him or anybody needing to explain that is precisely what he meant-- but this is an insult to timid white persons who fear the government and don't want to say anything about race for fear of being accused a racist. With all the legal heat that can come down on somebody if they say something which can be construed by a prosecutor like Mr Holder as racist, is it any wonder white people-- that's who he meant obviously-- is there any surprise that white people don't want to talk about race? And as lawyers we have even less freedom lest our remarks be considered violations of the rules. Mr Holder also demonstrated his bias by publically visiting with the family of the young man who was killed by a police offering in the line of duty, which was a very strong indicator of bias agains the offer who is under investigation, and was a failure to lead properly by letting his investigators do their job without him predetermining the proper outcome. He also has potentially biased the jury pool. All in all this worsens race relations by feeding into the perception shared by whites as well as blacks that justice will not be impartial. I will say this much, I do not blame Obama for all of HOlder's missteps. Obama has done a lot of things to stay above the fray and try and be a leader for all Americans. Maybe he should have reigned Holder in some but Obama's got his hands full with other problelms. Oh did I mention HOlder is a bank crony who will probably get a job in a silkstocking law firm working for millions of bucks a year defending bankers whom he didn't have the integrity or courage to hold to account for their acts of fraud on the United States, other financial institutions, and the people. His tenure will be regarded by history as a failure of leadership at one of the most important jobs in our nation. Finally and most importantly besides him insulting the public and letting off the big financial cheats, he has been at the forefront of over-prosecuting the secrecy laws to punish whistleblowers and chill free speech. What has Holder done to vindicate the rights of privacy of the American public against the illegal snooping of the NSA? He could have charged NSA personnel with violations of law for their warrantless wiretapping which has been done millions of times and instead he did not persecute a single soul. That is a defalcation of historical proportions and it signals to the public that the government DOJ under him was not willing to do a damn thing to protect the public against the rapid growth of the illegal surveillance state. Who else could have done this? Nobody. And for that omission Obama deserves the blame too. Here were are sliding into a police state and Eric Holder made it go all the faster.

  5. JOE CLAYPOOL candidate for Superior Court in Harrison County - Indiana This candidate is misleading voters to think he is a Judge by putting Elect Judge Joe Claypool on his campaign literature. paragraphs 2 and 9 below clearly indicate this injustice to voting public to gain employment. What can we do? Indiana Code - Section 35-43-5-3: Deception (a) A person who: (1) being an officer, manager, or other person participating in the direction of a credit institution, knowingly or intentionally receives or permits the receipt of a deposit or other investment, knowing that the institution is insolvent; (2) knowingly or intentionally makes a false or misleading written statement with intent to obtain property, employment, or an educational opportunity; (3) misapplies entrusted property, property of a governmental entity, or property of a credit institution in a manner that the person knows is unlawful or that the person knows involves substantial risk of loss or detriment to either the owner of the property or to a person for whose benefit the property was entrusted; (4) knowingly or intentionally, in the regular course of business, either: (A) uses or possesses for use a false weight or measure or other device for falsely determining or recording the quality or quantity of any commodity; or (B) sells, offers, or displays for sale or delivers less than the represented quality or quantity of any commodity; (5) with intent to defraud another person furnishing electricity, gas, water, telecommunication, or any other utility service, avoids a lawful charge for that service by scheme or device or by tampering with facilities or equipment of the person furnishing the service; (6) with intent to defraud, misrepresents the identity of the person or another person or the identity or quality of property; (7) with intent to defraud an owner of a coin machine, deposits a slug in that machine; (8) with intent to enable the person or another person to deposit a slug in a coin machine, makes, possesses, or disposes of a slug; (9) disseminates to the public an advertisement that the person knows is false, misleading, or deceptive, with intent to promote the purchase or sale of property or the acceptance of employment;

ADVERTISEMENT