Subscriber Benefit
As a subscriber you can listen to articles at work, in the car, or while you work out. Subscribe Now
The Indiana Supreme Court issued disciplinary orders Friday for three attorneys, including an Indianapolis attorney whose license to practice law was put on probation for six violations of Indiana Professional Conduct Rules.
In the matter of India R. Lane, 23S-I-167, the parties agreed that the Indianapolis attorney violated rules prohibiting the following misconduct:
- 1.1: Failing to provide competent representation.
- 1.3: Failing to act with reasonable diligence and promptness.
- 1.4: Failing to keep a client reasonably informed about the status of a matter.
- 1.15: Failing to deposit legal fees and expenses paid in advance into a client trust account.
- 1.16(a)(2): Failing to withdraw from representation when the lawyer’s physical or mental condition materially impairs the lawyer’s ability to represent the client.
- 8.4(d): Engaging in conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice.
As a sanction, the court suspended Lane from the practice of law for a period of 60 days, beginning March 15, with that suspension stayed subject to completion of at least two years of probation with monitoring by the Indiana Judges and Lawyers Assistance Program.
The order stated that Lane represented “Clients A” in a contract dispute.
After filing a complaint on behalf of Clients A, Lane thereafter failed to respond to discovery, schedule court-ordered mediation, or comply with other pretrial orders.
When the defendant eventually moved for summary judgment, Lane failed to timely respond or designate any evidence, her extremely belated response (she attributed her untimeliness to mental health issues) was stricken, and summary judgment for the defendant was granted.
Lane then filed a motion for reconsideration that was simply a duplicate of her belated response, which the court denied.
Also, Lane represented “Client B” in post-conviction proceedings.
Lane delayed filing a petition for post-conviction relief for nearly one year after she first told Client B that a filing was imminent.
During this period, Lane failed to appear for a scheduled meeting with Client B, failed to respond to several inquiries from Client B, and failed to comply with multiple court orders for the return of the transcript Lane had withdrawn from the Clerk.
During the Supreme Court Disciplinary Commission’s investigation, Lane attempted to have Client B withdraw his grievance, telling him that doing so would help ensure the continuity of Lane’s representation.
In her response to the investigation, Lane attributed her negligence in Client B’s case to having fallen behind in her work due to an illness.
Finally, Lane inadvertently overdrafted her trust account in August 2023 when she issued a check to pay filing fees in a case without having first deposited the funds she had received from the client for that purpose.
Conditions of Lane’s probation include:
- Lane shall comply with treatment as determined and monitored by JLAP and shall timely execute any release or waiver required by JLAP or any service provider monitored by JLAP under the authority of the parties’ conditional agreement.
- Lane shall have no violations of the Rules of Professional Conduct during her probation.
- Lane shall promptly report to the commission any violation of the terms of her probation and/or JLAP monitoring agreement.
- If Lane violates the terms of her probation, the stay of her suspension may be vacated and the balance of the stayed suspension may be actively served with or without automatic reinstatement.
Attorneys who face interim suspensions are Benjamin Mattingly of Elkhart and Michael Quirk of Muncie.
The court finds that Mattingly has been found guilty of operating a vehicle while intoxicated, a level 6 felony.
Mattingly was found guilty of the offense in Elkhart Superior Court in October, according to court records.
The court that Mattingly be suspended from the practice of law in the state, effective immediately.
He is ordered to fulfill the duties of a suspended attorney under Admission and Discipline Rule 23(26) with the interim suspension continuing until further order of the court or final resolution of any resulting disciplinary action, provided no other suspension is in effect.
Quirk was suspended for being found guilty of battery on a person less than 14 years old, a level 6 felony.
Like Mattingly, Quirk’s suspension is effective immediately. He is already under suspension for a separate case.
The court also issued a fourth order on Friday, ending the suspension of East Chicago attorney James B. Dillon.
Dillon cooperated with the Indiana Supreme Court Disciplinary Commission investigation, according to the order.
Please enable JavaScript to view this content.