Published Judgment in Favor of Respondent
Upon review of the report of the hearing officer, the Honorable Robert C. Reiling, Jr., who was appointed by this Court to hear evidence on the Indiana Supreme Court Disciplinary Commissions verified disciplinary complaint, and the briefs of the parties, the Court finds that Respondent did not engage in professional misconduct and enters judgment for Respondent.
Charges: The Commission alleged that Respondent violated Indiana Professional Conduct Rule 1.7(a)(2) by representing a client when there is a significant risk the representation may be materially limited by the attorneys own self-interest, and Rule 8.1(a) by knowingly making a false statement of material fact to the Commission.
Discussion: The Court incorporates by reference the hearing officers findings of fact. The hearing officer concluded the Commission failed to meet its burden of proving that Respondent committed any professional misconduct. After reviewing the evidence and considering the parties’ arguments, the Court concludes that the hearing officers findings of fact are supported by the evidence, and based on those findings we likewise conclude that the Commission has failed to prove by clear and convincing evidence either of the two charged rule violations.
The Court therefore finds that the allegations of misconduct were not proven and enters judgment for Respondent. The hearing officer appointed in this case is discharged with the Courts appreciation.
All Justices concur, except Massa, J., who is not participating.