In Re Conour

969 N.E.2d 1008, 2012 WL 2574748, 2012 Ind. LEXIS 554
CourtIndiana Supreme Court
DecidedJune 29, 2012
Docket49S00-1205-DI-285
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 969 N.E.2d 1008 (In Re Conour) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Indiana Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
In Re Conour, 969 N.E.2d 1008, 2012 WL 2574748, 2012 Ind. LEXIS 554 (Ind. 2012).

Opinion

PUBLISHED ORDER ACCEPTING RESIGNATION AND CONCLUDING PROCEEDING

BRENT E. DICKSON, Chief Justice.

A “Verified Complaint for Disciplinary Action” against Respondent was filed on May 24, 2012. Respondent has now tendered to this Court a resignation from the bar of this State, pursuant to Indiana Admission and Discipline Rule 23(17).

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the resignation from the bar of this State tendered by Respondent is accepted effective immediately. The Clerk of this Court is directed to record Respondent’s resignation on the Roll of Attorneys. Respondent shall fulfill all the applicable duties under Admission and Discipline Rule 23(26).

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that all attorney disciplinary proceedings pending against Respondent are hereby dismissed as moot because of Respondent’s resignation from the bar of this State, subject to consideration of pending allegations in the event there is a petition for reinstatement.

Respondent shall be ineligible to petition for reinstatement to the practice of law for five years from the date of this order. See Admis. Disc. R. 23(4)(a). Approval of a petition for reinstatement is discretionary and requires clear and convincing evidence of the petitioner’s remorse, rehabilitation, and fitness to practice law. See Admis. Disc. R. 23(4)(b).

The Clerk is directed to forward a copy of this Order to the parties or their respective attorneys and to all other entities entitled to notice under Admission and Discipline Rule 23(3)(d). The Clerk is further directed to post this order to the Court’s website, and Thomson Reuters is directed to publish a copy of this order in the bound volumes of this Court’s decisions.

All Justices concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Timothy Devereux v. Jim and Diana Love
30 N.E.3d 754 (Indiana Court of Appeals, 2015)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
969 N.E.2d 1008, 2012 WL 2574748, 2012 Ind. LEXIS 554, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-conour-ind-2012.