Anonymous, Matter of, 89S00-9411-DI-1083
| Decision Date | 08 September 1995 |
| Docket Number | No. 89S00-9411-DI-1083,89S00-9411-DI-1083 |
| Citation | 654 N.E.2d 1128 |
| Parties | In the Matter of ANONYMOUS. |
| Court | Indiana Supreme Court |
The respondent has been charged by the Disciplinary Commission in a verified complaint for disciplinary action with violating Rules 1.6(a), 1.8(b), and 1.16(a)(1) of the Rules of Professional Conduct for Attorneys at Law. The Commission and the respondent now tender for this Court's approval a statement of circumstances and conditional agreement for discipline, pursuant to Ind.Admission and Discipline Rule 23, Section 11(g). In their agreement, the parties agree that the proper sanction for the respondent's misconduct is a private reprimand and that the facts and circumstances of this case should be set forth in an anonymous opinion to educate the Bar. We approve the parties' agreement, and herein more fully set forth the facts and circumstances of this case.
As stipulated by the parties, the respondent was contacted by an individual (the "mother") in April or May of 1994 about representing her in seeking a child support arrearage due to her from the father ("father") of her minor child. She supplied the respondent with records concerning her support action and her income. Also included in these documents was information regarding the father, including the fact that he was going to receive a substantial inheritance, his salary, his place of employment, and his address.
In the course of reviewing the documents supplied by the mother, the respondent discovered that on July 17, 1992, a judgment had been entered against the mother and father, making them jointly liable for almost $4,500 of medical and hospital debt resulting from the birth of their child. The judgment was in favor of the local county welfare department. The respondent was, at all times relevant to this proceeding, the attorney under contract to represent the local county welfare department.
The respondent contacted the mother to determine if the medical debt owed to the welfare department had been paid by either her or the father. It had not. The respondent then informed the mother that he would be unable to represent her in the case because of a conflict of interest, then forwarded her documents, at her request, to another attorney. Thereafter, the respondent received approval from the local county welfare department to file a collection suit against the father, which he did on April 26, 1994. Later, the father's counsel joined the mother as a party defendant in the collection suit. The respondent ultimately obtained a summary judgment against the mother and the father. The respondent did not withdraw from the case after the mother was joined as a party defendant.
We find that, by...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Schuff v. AT Klemens & Son
... ... ¶ 9 Needless to say, the litigation of the matter, now approaching its tenth year, was less than tractable ... ¶ 10 One focal ... Smith, Legal Malpractice § 11.1, at 631 (3d ed.1989)). See also In re Anonymous (Ind.1995), 654 N.E.2d 1128, 1129-30 (concluding that lawyer violated Rule 1.16(a)(1), and should ... ...
-
In re Mid-City Parking, Inc.
... ... JACQUELINE P. COX, Bankruptcy Judge ... This matter presents the question of whether a trustee or debtor-in-possession may unilaterally waive the ... ...
-
Louisiana Crisis Assistance Ctr. v. Marzano–Lesnevich, Civil Action No. 11–2102.
... ... As an initial matter, LCAC's references to burdens with respect to the questions of law such a motion would present are ... features of a client's life just because they are documented in public records); In re Anonymous, 654 N.E.2d 1128, 112930 (Ind.1995) (holding that a lawyer violated the duty of confidentiality, ... ...
-
People v. Isaac
... ... In the interest of deciding the matter after full briefing, the PDJ granted that request, but Respondent never filed a response. The PDJ ... 14 See also In re Anonymous , 654 N.E.2d 1128, 1129 (Ind. 1995) (concluding that a lawyer violated Rule 1.6 by disclosing ... ...
-
MASTERING ESSENTIAL ASPECTS OF THE ATTORNEY-CLIENT PRIVILEGE, WORK PRODUCT IMMUNITY, AND LAWYERS' ETHICAL DUTY OF CONFIDENTIALITY
...the argument that "self-evident" analysis in work product could not be protected against disclosure by Rule 1.6); In re Anonymous, 654 N.E.2d 1128, 1129-30 (Ind. 1995) (holding that the lawyer violated Rule 1.6(a) by revealing information "readily available from public sources"); Iowa Sup. ......
-
Of legal audits and legal ethics.
...Formal Op. 96-403, at 3 (1996). (24.) See In re Criminal Investigation, 602 A.2d at 1222. (25.) See, e.g., In re Anonymous, 654 N.E.2d 1128 (Ind. 1995) (reprimanding lawyer who revealed information readily available from public sources for violating client's right to confidentiality); Lawye......
-
Formal Opinion No. 130
...of a client” that is covered by the Rules. There is no exception for disclosing information in public records. In re Anonymous, 654 N.E.2d 1128, 1129 (Ind. 1995) (disclosure of client information that “was readily available from public sources and not confidential in nature” violated Rule 1......
-
Opinion 130: Online Posting and Other Sharing of Materials Relating to the Representation of a Client
...by the Rules. There is no exception for disclosing information in public records or those public records themselves. In re Anonymous, 654 N.E.2d 1128, 1129 (Ind. 1995) (disclosure of information related to the representation of a client that “was readily available from public sources and no......