Summary
The Indiana Supreme Court approved a conditional agreement for discipline involving an attorney's delay in filing a required entry in a dissolution of marriage action. The Court imposed a 180-day suspension, stayed upon successful completion of 24 months of probation, with monitoring and counseling requirements and no automatic reinstatement.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether the respondent violated Indiana Professional Conduct Rules 3.2 and 8.4(d) by failing to make reasonable efforts to expedite the dissolution proceeding and engaging in conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice.
- Whether the court should approve the parties' Statement of Circumstances and Conditional Agreement for Discipline and impose the agreed discipline.
Holdings
- The stipulated facts established that the respondent violated Indiana Professional Conduct Rule 3.2 by failing to make reasonable efforts to expedite litigation and Rule 8.4(d) by engaging in conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice.
- The Indiana Supreme Court approved the parties' agreed discipline: a 180-day suspension without automatic reinstatement, stayed in its entirety upon successful completion of 24 months of probation, with costs assessed against the respondent.
Key quotations
“The Court, having considered the submission of the parties, now APPROVES and ORDERS the agreed discipline.” (251)
Factual background
The respondent represented a client in a dissolution of marriage action in which a final hearing occurred on March 11, 2003, and the court directed the respondent to file the appropriate entry. After repeated contacts from the court and extensions of time, the respondent filed the entry on December 2, 2003, shortly before a scheduled hearing concerning the delay.
Procedural history
The respondent represented a client in a dissolution of marriage action and delayed filing the required final entry after the final hearing. The Disciplinary Commission and respondent stipulated to the facts, violations, and proposed discipline, and submitted the agreement to the Indiana Supreme Court for approval. The court approved the agreement and assessed costs against the respondent.