Supreme Court disciplines attorneys for noncompliance

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Two Indiana attorneys are facing disciplinary measures after failing to comply with various court orders.

The Indiana Supreme Court ordered disciplinary actions against Ralph Staples, an Indianapolis attorney, and Donald James, a Fort Wayne attorney, on Friday.

Staples’ discipline, a public reprimand, traces back to February 2013, when he appeared as successor counsel for a criminal defendant but failed to appear for a pretrial conference and did not timely respond to the court’s inquiries about his absence. Then, when Staples’ client was hospitalized in July 2013, the attorney was ordered to file a motion to continue with verification that his client was in the hospital, but failed to do so and also failed to appear at the ensuing show cause proceedings.

Staples was eventually found to be in contempt, but did not appear for a sanctions hearing.  He also failed again to appear at a hearing with his client, so the court found him in contempt a second time. When the Indiana Supreme Court Disciplinary Commission demanded either a response from Staples or his compliance with a subpoena duces tecum, the attorney did not timely respond, resulting in two show cause proceedings that were eventually dismissed with costs when Staples eventually cooperated.

Staples was placed on probation, and in a Conditional Agreement for Discipline, the parties agreed that the attorney violated Indiana Rules of Professional Conduct 3.2, 3.4(c) and 8.1(b) and Indiana Admission and Discipline Rule 23(10)(e). The Supreme Court imposed a public reprimand against Staples and assessed the costs of the proceedings against him.

The justices chose to suspend James from the practice of law in Indiana effective Friday following his failure to respond to a September 2016 show cause order related to two separate disciplinary cases.  The court issued the order to show cause as to why James should not be suspended after he failed to cooperate with the commission’s investigation into two grievances filed against him.  The commission also filed a Request for Ruling and to Tax Costs, to which James has also not responded.

The state’s high court ordered James’ license be suspended, effective immediately.  The suspension in each case will continue until James cooperates with the commission’s investigation or until further order of the Supreme Court. The Fort Wayne attorney was also ordered to reimburse the commission $525.88 for the costs of prosecuting the first case against him, but the court did not order reimbursement of the costs of the second case.

The full order against James can be read here


  • Here is the rot
    OK, take notice. Those wondering just how corrupt the Indiana system is can see the picture in this post. Attorney Donald James did not criticize any judges, he merely, it would seem, caused some clients to file against him and then ignored his own defense. James thus disrespected the system via ignoring all and was also ordered to reimburse the commission $525.88 for the costs of prosecuting the first case against him. Yes, nearly $526 for all the costs, the state having proved it all. Ouch, right? Now consider whistleblower and constitutionalist and citizen journalist Paul Ogden who criticized a judge, defended himself in such a professional fashion as to have half the case against him thrown out by the ISC and was then handed a career ending $10,000 bill as "half the costs" of the state crucifying him. THE TAKEAWAY MESSAGE for any who have ears to hear ... resist Star Chamber and pay with your career ... welcome to the Indiana system of (cough) justice.

Post a comment to this story

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
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Residents can't vote under our current system? Okay, let's replace the system with another system where they can't vote. Yeah, that's the ticket!

  2. It's an appreciable step taken by the government to curb the child abuse that are happening in the schools. Employees in the schools those are selected without background check can not be trusted. A thorough background check on the teachers or any other other new employees must be performed to choose the best and quality people. Those who are already employed in the past should also be checked for best precaution. The future of kids can be saved through this simple process. However, the checking process should be conducted by the help of a trusted background checking agency(

  3. Almost everything connects to internet these days. From your computers and Smartphones to wearable gadgets and smart refrigerators in your home, everything is linked to the Internet. Although this convenience empowers usto access our personal devices from anywhere in the world such as an IP camera, it also deprives control of our online privacy. Cyber criminals, hackers, spies and everyone else has realized that we don’t have complete control on who can access our personal data. We have to take steps to to protect it like keeping Senseless password. Dont leave privacy unprotected. Check out this article for more ways:

  4. You need to look into Celadon not paying sign on bonuses. We call get the run

  5. My parents took advantage of the fact that I was homeless in 2012 and went to court and got Legal Guardianship I my 2 daughters. I am finally back on my feet and want them back, but now they want to fight me on it. I want to raise my children and have them almost all the time on the weekends. Mynparents are both almost 70 years old and they play favorites which bothers me a lot. Do I have a leg to stand on if I go to court to terminate lehal guardianship? My kids want to live with me and I want to raise them, this was supposed to be temporary, and now it is turning into a fight. Ridiculous