In the Matter of Saint

Indiana Supreme Court

In the Matter of Saint

785 N.E.2d 1101, 2003 Ind. LEXIS 288, 2003 WL 1792309

CourtIndiana Supreme Court

DecidedApril 3, 2003

Docket49S00-0110-DI-447

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 785 N.E.2d 1101 (In the Matter of Saint) 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 the Matter of Saint, 785 N.E.2d 1101, 2003 Ind. LEXIS 288, 2003 WL 1792309 (Ind. 2003).

Pincite

Opinion

ORDER FINDING MISCONDUCT AND IMPOSING DISCIPLINE

Upon review of the stipulated facts presented by the parties regarding the Disciplinary Commission's Verified Complaint for Disciplinary Action, we find that the respondent engaged in attorney misconduct.

Facts: The respondent represented the father in a custody matter. Previously, in 1996, the court had changed custody from the father to the mother. Subsequently, as the custody dispute continued, the father sought mental health records of the mother and children. The court ordered the records produced and issued a protective order prohibiting the disclosure of the contents of the records.

On June 18, 1999, the respondent filed an Ind.Trial Rule 60(B) motion to set aside the 1996 custody order, alleging the mother procured the order by fraud. The respondent alleged that a mental health counselor had forged the name of a clinical psychologist to reports favorable to the mother. These reports were then presented to the court-appointed psychological evaluator in 1996. On June 18, 1999, the respondent traveled from Indianapolis to Rochester, Fulton County, on his way to file the T.R. 60(B) motion in Miami County. In Rochester, the respondent delivered a copy of the motion to the special judge hearing the case. Outside of the presence of the mother or her attorney, the respondent communicated with the judge about the substantive content of the Ind.Trial Rule 60(B) motion. The disciplinary sanction imposed against the judge is reported at Matter of Morton, 770 N.E.2d 827 (Ind.2002).

Violations: The respondent violated Ind. Professional Conduct Rule 8.5(b), which prohibits an attorney from communicating ex parte with a judge except as permitted by law.

For the misconduct found herein, this Court now finds that the respondent should be reprimanded and admonished for the misconduct set forth herein.

Costs of this proceeding are assessed against the respondent. The Clerk of this Court is directed to provide notice of this Order in accordance with Ind. Admission and Discipline Rule 28(8)(d).

All Justices concur.

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

ORDER FINDING MISCONDUCT AND IMPOSING DISCIPLINE

Upon review of the stipulated facts presented by the parties regarding the Disciplinary Commission's Verified Complaint for Disciplinary Action, we find that the respondent engaged in attorney misconduct.

Facts: The respondent represented the father in a custody matter. Previously, in 1996, the court had changed custody from the father to the mother. Subsequently, as the custody dispute continued, the father sought mental health records of the mother and children. The court ordered the records produced and issued a protective order prohibiting the disclosure of the contents of the records.

On June 18, 1999, the respondent filed an Ind.Trial Rule 60(B) motion to set aside the 1996 custody order, alleging the mother procured the order by fraud. The respondent alleged that a mental health counselor had forged the name of a clinical psychologist to reports favorable to the mother. These reports were then presented to the court-appointed psychological evaluator in 1996. On June 18, 1999, the respondent traveled from Indianapolis to Rochester, Fulton County, on his way to file the T.R. 60(B) motion in Miami County. In Rochester, the respondent delivered a copy of the motion to the special judge hearing the case. Outside of the presence of the mother or her attorney, the respondent communicated with the judge about the substantive content of the Ind.Trial Rule 60(B) motion. The disciplinary sanction imposed against the judge is reported at Matter of Morton, 770 N.E.2d 827 (Ind.2002).

Violations: The respondent violated Ind. Professional Conduct Rule 8.5(b), which prohibits an attorney from communicating ex parte with a judge except as permitted by law.

For the misconduct found herein, this Court now finds that the respondent should be reprimanded and admonished for the misconduct set forth herein.

Costs of this proceeding are assessed against the respondent. The Clerk of this Court is directed to provide notice of this Order in accordance with Ind. Admission and Discipline Rule 28(8)(d).

All Justices concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

785 N.E.2d 1101, 2003 Ind. LEXIS 288, 2003 WL 1792309, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-the-matter-of-saint-ind-2003.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack