Particularly rare is the Indiana Supreme Court’s suggestion that Rokita and the attorney disciplinary commission head to mediation and try to settle the prickly case with the help of a neutral third party.
Read More
Indiana Attorney General Todd Rokita is calling for new safeguards to protect himself and other lawyers from what he calls frivolous and politically-motivated disciplinary complaints.
Read More
For the second time in four years, the Indiana attorney general is facing lawyer discipline charges.
Read More
Adrienne Meiring has been selected as the new executive director of the Indiana Supreme Court Disciplinary Commission. She recently sat down with The Indiana Lawyer to discuss her career history and her new role.
Read More
The Indiana Supreme Court announced on Thursday that it has approved a new conditional agreement between Indiana Attorney General Todd Rokita and the court’s disciplinary commission, dismissing the second disciplinary complaint against Rokita as “moot.”
At the time of the alleged misconduct, the lawyer served as managing attorney for Indianapolis-based Charitable Allies Inc., marketed as a “nonprofit for nonprofits” that provides “low bono” legal services.
Earlier this month, at the strong encouragement of a hearing panel, the parties agreed on a mediator to try to help them settle the disciplinary case against Indiana Attorney General Todd Rokita and avoid a public hearing.
A three-person panel appointed to hear the case strongly encouraged Rokita and the attorney disciplinary commission to reach an agreement through mediation—an uncommon approach in attorney disciplinary matters.
The panel appointed to hear the disciplinary case against Indiana Attorney General Todd Rokita has set a public hearing for December, but it is strongly encouraging Rokita and the disciplinary commission to reach an agreement through mediation.
The panel overseeing Indiana Attorney General Todd Rokita’s professional misconduct case denied his effort to force the state’s disciplinary commission to turn over internal records and instead set the matter for a December hearing.
The Indiana Supreme Court issued an order Tuesday, immediately suspending the law license of James Wisco.
The state paid four law firms between 2022 and 2025 to represent Attorney General Todd Rokita in at least six separate matters before the Indiana Supreme Court Disciplinary Commission.
A Westfield attorney has been suspended from the practice of law indefinitely for failing to cooperate with the Indiana Supreme Court Disciplinary Commission.
In a 44-page brief, Adrienne Meiring, executive director of the Indiana Supreme Court Disciplinary Commission, called Rokita’s motion “procedurally improper” and “meritless.”
The attorney is suspended from the practice of law for 180 days beginning on April 25.
The outcome of the heated situation between Rokita and the state disciplinary commission now rests with the Indiana Supreme Court.
The court determined the Winamac attorney’s actions were predatory, not “merely exercises in poor judgment.”
The Indiana Supreme Court has suspended a Pendleton attorney from the practice of law for at least a year, after his failure to report a drunk driving conviction led the court’s disciplinary commission to open a complaint against him.
Attorney General Todd Rokita is facing disciplinary action for a second time, after the Indiana Supreme Court Disciplinary Commission filed another complaint against him Friday morning.
Indiana Attorney General Todd Rokita is calling for new rules that would allow the state disciplinary commission to quickly dismiss politically motivated complaints against attorneys and require it to follow the same impartiality guidelines as judges.
Dentons 2024 Legislative Conference kicked off on Wednesday morning by discussing cases in which attorneys found themselves faced with disciplinary action.
An Indiana attorney has been suspended from the practice of law for not cooperating with an Indiana Supreme Court Disciplinary Commission investigation into grievances lodged against him.
The Indiana Supreme Court approved disciplinary action against an attorney for reportedly violating Indiana Professional Conduct Rules when he revealed information about a client without the client’s consent.
The commission wrote that an attorney trying to engage in ex parte communications with a judicial officer regarding time-sensitive issues involving child custody and visitation can avoid an ethical violation by adhering to the mandates of Trial Rule 65(B).