ILNews

Valparaiso attorney slapped with 5th felony charge

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Valparaiso attorney Clark Holesinger, charged last month with four felony counts alleging he stole more than $1.6 million from clients, now faces a fifth count alleging theft from another client.

Charges against Holesinger were amended Monday in Porter Superior Court to add a charge of Class D felony theft. Holesinger has pleaded not guilty to the charges, which also include four previously filed counts of Class C felony theft of more than $100,000.

A probable cause affidavit from the Porter County Sheriff’s Department led to the additional charge accusing Holesinger, 52, of skimming $6,313 last November from a client for whom he exercised power of attorney.

The client requested a transfer of $306,313 from a trust to a business account, but the probable cause accuses Holesinger of instead forging the client’s signature authorizing transfer of the sum to his trust account, then moving just $300,000 to the client’s business account.

Holesinger’s attorney, Thomas Vanes of Merrillville, could not be reached for comment early Tuesday.

The charges filed last month accuse Holesinger of stealing more than $1.6 million over the past three years from four businesses he represented. Charging information accuses Holesinger of stealing $817,962 from North Star Stone; $233,410 from RBF Island Investment LLC; $215,406 from ITF LLC; and $371,736 from Maridor LLC. All of the companies are located in Valparaiso and owned by Chris Andrews, according to the probable cause affidavit, which says Holesinger also had been Andrews’ family attorney since the mid-1990s.

A civil suit the businesses filed against Holesinger details the numerous checks that were written to pay taxes but instead were allegedly converted to Holesinger’s use, including 97 exhibits of alleged misappropriation. The suit seeks treble damages, attorney fees and accounting costs.

Admitted to practice in 1987, the Indiana Roll of Attorneys lists Holesinger’s law license status as active in good standing with no disciplinary history and no pending discipline.

 

 

ADVERTISEMENT

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

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. Such things are no more elections than those in the late, unlamented Soviet Union.

  2. It appears the police and prosecutors are allowed to change the rules halfway through the game to suit themselves. I am surprised that the congress has not yet eliminated the right to a trial in cases involving any type of forensic evidence. That would suit their foolish law and order police state views. I say we eliminate the statute of limitations for crimes committed by members of congress and other government employees. Of course they would never do that. They are all corrupt cowards!!!

  3. Poor Judge Brown probably thought that by slavishly serving the godz of the age her violations of 18th century concepts like due process and the rule of law would be overlooked. Mayhaps she was merely a Judge ahead of her time?

  4. in a lawyer discipline case Judge Brown, now removed, was presiding over a hearing about a lawyer accused of the supposedly heinous ethical violation of saying the words "Illegal immigrant." (IN re Barker) http://www.in.gov/judiciary/files/order-discipline-2013-55S00-1008-DI-429.pdf .... I wonder if when we compare the egregious violations of due process by Judge Brown, to her chiding of another lawyer for politically incorrectness, if there are any conclusions to be drawn about what kind of person, what kind of judge, what kind of apparatchik, is busy implementing the agenda of political correctness and making off-limits legit advocacy about an adverse party in a suit whose illegal alien status is relevant? I am just asking the question, the reader can make own conclsuion. Oh wait-- did I use the wrong adjective-- let me rephrase that, um undocumented alien?

  5. of course the bigger questions of whether or not the people want to pay for ANY bussing is off limits, due to the Supreme Court protecting the people from DEMOCRACY. Several decades hence from desegregation and bussing plans and we STILL need to be taking all this taxpayer money to combat mostly-imagined "discrimination" in the most obviously failed social program of the postwar period.

ADVERTISEMENT