Matter of Lambka

Indiana Supreme Court

Matter of Lambka

928 N.E.2d 200, 2010 WL 2183945

CourtIndiana Supreme Court

DecidedMay 28, 2010

Docket45S00-1002-DI-111

StatusPublished

This text of 928 N.E.2d 200 (Matter of Lambka) 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

Matter of Lambka, 928 N.E.2d 200, 2010 WL 2183945 (Ind. 2010).

Pincite

Opinion

PUBLISHED ORDER SUSPENDING RESPONDENT FROM THE PRACTICE OF LAW IN INDIANA FOR NONCOOPERATION

On March 1, 2010, this Court ordered Respondent to show cause why Respondent should not be immediately suspended from the practice of law in this state for failure to cooperate with the Commission's investigation of a grievance filed against Respondent. The order required that Respondent show cause in writing within 10 days of service of the order. Respondent has not submitted a response to the Court's order to show cause. On April 16, 2010, the Commission filed a "Request for Ruling and to Tax Costs."

Being duly advised, the Court ORDERS that Respondent be suspended from the practice of law, effective immediately. Pursuant to Admission and Discipline Rule 28(10)(£)(8), the suspension shall continue until: (1) the Executive Secretary of the Disciplinary Commission certifies to the Court that Respondent has cooperated fully with the investigation; (2) the investigation or any disciplinary proceedings arising from the investigation are disposed of; or (3) until further order of this Court. Respondent is ordered to fulfill the duties of a suspended attorney under Admission and Discipline Rule 23(26).

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, pursuant to Admission and Discipline Rule 28(10)(F)(5), that Respondent reimburse the Disciplinary Commission $522.24 for the costs of prosecuting this proceeding.

The Clerk of this Court is directed to give notice of this order to Respondent by certified mail, return receipt requested, at the address reflected in the Roll of Attorneys. The Clerk of this Court is further directed to give notice of this order to the Disciplinary Commission and to all other entities entitled to notice under Admission and Discipline Rule 23(8)(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

PUBLISHED ORDER SUSPENDING RESPONDENT FROM THE PRACTICE OF LAW IN INDIANA FOR NONCOOPERATION

On March 1, 2010, this Court ordered Respondent to show cause why Respondent should not be immediately suspended from the practice of law in this state for failure to cooperate with the Commission's investigation of a grievance filed against Respondent. The order required that Respondent show cause in writing within 10 days of service of the order. Respondent has not submitted a response to the Court's order to show cause. On April 16, 2010, the Commission filed a "Request for Ruling and to Tax Costs."

Being duly advised, the Court ORDERS that Respondent be suspended from the practice of law, effective immediately. Pursuant to Admission and Discipline Rule 28(10)(£)(8), the suspension shall continue until: (1) the Executive Secretary of the Disciplinary Commission certifies to the Court that Respondent has cooperated fully with the investigation; (2) the investigation or any disciplinary proceedings arising from the investigation are disposed of; or (3) until further order of this Court. Respondent is ordered to fulfill the duties of a suspended attorney under Admission and Discipline Rule 23(26).

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, pursuant to Admission and Discipline Rule 28(10)(F)(5), that Respondent reimburse the Disciplinary Commission $522.24 for the costs of prosecuting this proceeding.

The Clerk of this Court is directed to give notice of this order to Respondent by certified mail, return receipt requested, at the address reflected in the Roll of Attorneys. The Clerk of this Court is further directed to give notice of this order to the Disciplinary Commission and to all other entities entitled to notice under Admission and Discipline Rule 23(8)(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.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

928 N.E.2d 200, 2010 WL 2183945, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/matter-of-lambka-ind-2010.