Indy attorneys suspended for conviction, disability

One Indianapolis lawyer has been suspended from practicing law in Indiana following a criminal conviction while another Indianapolis lawyer has been suspended due to a disability.

The Indiana Supreme Court on Thursday handed down orders of suspension against Christina N. La Croix and Nicholas M. Elliott.

La Croix pleaded guilty in April to neglect of a dependent, a Level 6 felony entered as a Class A misdemeanor. She was sentenced to 365 days, with credit for three days and 359 days suspended to probation, according to online court records.

La Croix was already under a suspension for CLE noncompliance. Thursday’s interim suspension, which was effective immediately, will continue until further order of the court or final resolution of any resulting disciplinary action, provided no other suspension is in effect.

The case of In the Matter of: Christina N. La Croix, 21S-DI-287, is her only disciplinary action, according to the Indiana Roll of Attorneys.

In Elliott’s case, the Indiana Supreme Court Disciplinary Commission filed a petition to determine disability in In the Matter of: Nicholas M. Elliott, 21S-DI-327. The commission and Elliott also executed a verified consent to agreed disability suspension.

“Separate proceedings on disciplinary complaints are pending against Respondent in Case Nos. 19S-DI-587 and 20S-DI-327. As part of their agreement, the parties request that those proceedings be stayed until such time as Respondent’s disability suspension has been removed,” according to the Thursday order.

The order did not list the nature of the disciplinary complaints against Elliott or the nature of his disability.

Elliott’s disability suspension was effective immediately on Thursday. He can petition for reinstatement upon termination of the disability pursuant to Admission and Discipline Rule 23(18)(b). Proceedings in the other two disciplinary cases are stayed until the disability suspension is lifted.

Elliott has been the subject of 10 disciplinary actions, according to the Roll of Attorneys.

All justices concurred in both orders.

Please enable JavaScript to view this content.

{{ articles_remaining }}
Free {{ article_text }} Remaining
{{ articles_remaining }}
Free {{ article_text }} Remaining Article limit resets in {{ count_down }} days.