In re Flora

779 N.E.2d 1154, 2002 Ind. LEXIS 932, 2002 WL 31830139
CourtIndiana Supreme Court
DecidedDecember 16, 2002
DocketNo. 12S00-0210-DI-530
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 779 N.E.2d 1154 (In re Flora) 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 Flora, 779 N.E.2d 1154, 2002 Ind. LEXIS 932, 2002 WL 31830139 (Ind. 2002).

Opinion

ORDER APPROVING STATEMENT OF CIRCUMSTANCES AND CONDITIONAL AGREEMENT FOR DISCIPLINE

Pursuant to Ind.Admission and Discipline Rule 28, Section 11, the Indiana Supreme Court Disciplinary Commlssmn and the respondent have submitted for approval a Statement of Circumstances and Conditional Agreement for Discipline stipulating a proposed discipline and agreed facts as summarized below:

Facts: The parties agree that the respondent engaged in a sexual relationship with a client he was representing in a probation violation matter. The parties agree that the relationship did not in fact adversely affect the respondent's representation of the client.

Violations: The respondent violated Ind.Professional Conduct Rule 1.7(b), which prohibits a lawyer from representing a client where the representation of that client may be materially limited by the lawyer's responsibilities to another client, a third person, or by the lawyer's own interests, unless the lawyer reasonably believes the representation will not be adversely affected and the client consents after consultation. He also violated Prof. Cond.R. 8.4(d), which prohibits a lawyer from engaging in conduct that is prejudicial to the administration of justice.

Discipline: Thirty-day suspension from the practice of law, effective January 25, 2008, with automatic reinstatement thereafter.

The Court, having considered the submission of the parties, now APPROVES and ORDERS. the agreed discipline. Costs of this 'proceeding are assessed against the respondent. The Clerk is directed to provide notice of this order to the hearing officer and all parties and entities as directed by Admis.Disce.R. 28(8)(d).

All Justices concur.

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

Related

In re Mulvany
83 N.E.3d 72 (Indiana Supreme Court, 2017)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
779 N.E.2d 1154, 2002 Ind. LEXIS 932, 2002 WL 31830139, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-flora-ind-2002.