Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

In re Johnson

Supreme Court of Indiana

March 20, 2014

In the Matter of: Elton D. JOHNSON, Respondent

Brent E. Dickson, Chief Justice of Indiana. All Justices concur.

OPINION

Brent E. Dickson, Chief Justice.

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

On January 17, 2014, 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, No. 13-1430, filed against Respondent. The order required that Respondent show cause in writing within ten days of service of the order. On January 23, 2014, Respondent faxed a purported response to the Clerk of this Court. Despite being informed by voicemail on January 29, 2014, that the fax did not constitute effective filing, Respondent has failed to file a procedurally compliant response.

Page 360

On February 12, 2014, the Commission filed a " Request for Ruling and to Tax Costs" asserting that Respondent still has not cooperated. Respondent has filed no response to this request, although the certificate of service states that it was served by first class mail on him at both his office and home addresses.

Being duly advised, the Court ORDERS that Respondent be suspended from the practice of law for noncooperation with the Commission, effective immediately. Pursuant to Admission and Discipline Rule 23(10)(f)(3), this 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, provided there are no other suspensions then in effect. 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 23(10)(f)(5), that Respondent reimburse the Disciplinary Commission $512.22 for the costs of prosecuting this proceeding. If not paid by the due date of the next annual registration fee (October 1), Respondent will be subject to suspension for nonpayment of costs. See Admis. Disc. R. 23(10)(f)(5) and 2(b).

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(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.


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.