Opinion
Supreme Court Case No. 22S-DI-224
02-09-2023
In the MATTER OF: Bruce E. MCLANE, Respondent
Published Order Approving Statement of Circumstances and Conditional Agreement for Discipline
Pursuant to Indiana Admission and Discipline Rule 23 (12.1)(b), the Indiana Supreme Court Disciplinary Commission and Respondent have submitted for approval a "Statement of Circumstances and Conditional Agreement for Discipline" stipulating agreed facts and proposed discipline as summarized below.
Stipulated Facts: In December 2018, Respondent entered his appearance on behalf of "Client," a defendant in a collection matter that was set for a proceeding supplemental hearing. Respondent also appeared and filed for bankruptcy on behalf of Client in federal court. A stay was issued in the collection matter as a result of the bankruptcy filing. In September 2019 the stay was lifted, and in January 2020 the plaintiff in the collection action requested a hearing, which the trial court set for February 2021. After Respondent requested and received two continuances, he failed to appear at three additional scheduled hearings. Respondent failed to communicate adequately with his client and did not respond to the trial court's attempts to communicate regarding his failures to appear.
Violations: The parties agree that Respondent violated these Indiana Professional Conduct Rules prohibiting the following misconduct:
1.3: Failure to act with reasonable diligence and promptness.
1.4: Failure to adequately communicate with a client.
1.16(d): Failure to protect a client's interests upon termination of representation.
3.2: Failure to expedite litigation consistent with the interests of a client.
Discipline: The parties propose the appropriate discipline is a public reprimand. This discipline is consistent with that imposed in other cases involving similar misconduct. See Matter of Kinnard , 873 N.E.2d 58 (Ind. 2007). The Court, having considered the submissions of the parties, now approves the agreed discipline and imposes a public reprimand for Respondent's misconduct.
The costs of this proceeding are assessed against Respondent. With the acceptance of this agreement, the hearing officer appointed in this case is discharged with the Court's appreciation.
All Justices concur.