In re Failure to Satisfy Costs in Lawyer Discipline Cases of Cobb

Indiana Supreme Court

In re Failure to Satisfy Costs in Lawyer Discipline Cases of Cobb

820 N.E.2d 1222, 2005 Ind. LEXIS 30, 2005 WL 66050

CourtIndiana Supreme Court

DecidedJanuary 11, 2005

DocketNo. 94S00-0412-MS-515

StatusPublished

This text of 820 N.E.2d 1222 (In re Failure to Satisfy Costs in Lawyer Discipline Cases of Cobb) 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 Failure to Satisfy Costs in Lawyer Discipline Cases of Cobb, 820 N.E.2d 1222, 2005 Ind. LEXIS 30, 2005 WL 66050 (Ind. 2005).

Pincite

Opinion

ORDER GRANTING PETITION FOR SUSPENSION OF CERTAIN ATTORNEYS FOR FAILURE TO SATISFY COSTS ORDERED IN _ CONNECTION WITH LAWYER DISCIPLINE PROCEEDINGS

This matter comes before the Court on the Indiana Supreme Court Disciplinary Commission's Petition for Suspension of Certain Attorneys for Failure to Satisfy Costs Ordered in Commection with Lawyer Discipline Proceedings filed on December 13, 2004.

And this Court, being duly advised, now finds that the Commission's Petition should be GRANTED. Further, we also find that one of the respondents, Edwin D. Singleton, has had an additional assessment of costs in the amount of $508.84 imposed upon him in Cause No. 26800-0410-DI-458. On our own motion we include such costs in the amount respondent Singleton must satisfy to be eligible for the lifting of the suspension imposed herein. The delinquent costs which subject each respondent to suspension are as follows:

[[Image here]]

IT IS, THEREFORE, ORDERED that each of the respondents is suspended from the practice of law in this state, effective immediately, as provided in Ind. Admission and Discipline Rule 23, Section (J). A respondent shall remain suspended until the respondent satisfies the delinquent costs and meets the requirements of Ind. Admission and Discipline Rule 23, Section 21(e), or until further order of this Court.

All Justices concur.

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

ORDER GRANTING PETITION FOR SUSPENSION OF CERTAIN ATTORNEYS FOR FAILURE TO SATISFY COSTS ORDERED IN _ CONNECTION WITH LAWYER DISCIPLINE PROCEEDINGS

This matter comes before the Court on the Indiana Supreme Court Disciplinary Commission's Petition for Suspension of Certain Attorneys for Failure to Satisfy Costs Ordered in Commection with Lawyer Discipline Proceedings filed on December 13, 2004.

And this Court, being duly advised, now finds that the Commission's Petition should be GRANTED. Further, we also find that one of the respondents, Edwin D. Singleton, has had an additional assessment of costs in the amount of $508.84 imposed upon him in Cause No. 26800-0410-DI-458. On our own motion we include such costs in the amount respondent Singleton must satisfy to be eligible for the lifting of the suspension imposed herein. The delinquent costs which subject each respondent to suspension are as follows:

[[Image here]]

IT IS, THEREFORE, ORDERED that each of the respondents is suspended from the practice of law in this state, effective immediately, as provided in Ind. Admission and Discipline Rule 23, Section (J). A respondent shall remain suspended until the respondent satisfies the delinquent costs and meets the requirements of Ind. Admission and Discipline Rule 23, Section 21(e), or until further order of this Court.

All Justices concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

820 N.E.2d 1222, 2005 Ind. LEXIS 30, 2005 WL 66050, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-failure-to-satisfy-costs-in-lawyer-discipline-cases-of-cobb-ind-2005.