From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Mahin v. Soshnick

Supreme Court of Indiana
Sep 30, 1964
246 Ind. 13 (Ind. 1964)

Opinion

No. 30,462.

Filed September 30, 1964. Corrected opinion filed October 26, 1964.

1. DISBARMENT — Attorneys — Pleading and Practice — Petition and Information — Rules of Supreme Court. — Petition for leave to file disbarment proceedings and tendered information not filed separately, as required under the rules, should be stricken. Rule 3-21 of the Supreme Court. p. 14.

2. DISBARMENT — Attorneys — Insufficient Proof. — Recommendations of Disciplinary Commission and others and information tendered by petitioners for disciplinary action against attorney indicate insufficient proof exists to warrant such actions. p. 15.

Original action by petitioners, Glenn R. Mahin and Jessie Dayle Mahin, for leave to file disbarment proceedings.

Petition is denied and stricken.

Glenn R. Mahin, pro se.


The petitioners have filed pro se a Petition For Leave to File Disbarment Proceedings against the respondent.

The petition and the tendered Information are not separately filed but were prepared and presented and filed as a single instrument. This procedure is not contemplated by Rule 3-21 1. of this court for the reason that it would permit allegations defamatory in nature to be filed and made a matter of public record without first obtaining leave of court for the filing thereof. For this reason the same should be stricken from the files.

However, because of the gross allegations, persistent endeavors and numerous involvements of the petitioners with respect to their complaints, the matters complained of have been referred to the Indiana State Bar Association, Attorney General of Indiana, and the Disciplinary Commission of this court for consideration.

Upon recommendation of each of the above bodies, and upon examination of the tendered Information by this court, it is determined that sufficient proof upon 2. which to sustain a disciplinary action at this time does not exist.

The Petition for Leave of Court to File Disbarment Proceedings is therefore denied and the same is ordered stricken from the files.

Arterburn, Jackson, Landis Myers, JJ., concur.

NOTE. — Reported in 201 N.E.2d 331.


Summaries of

Mahin v. Soshnick

Supreme Court of Indiana
Sep 30, 1964
246 Ind. 13 (Ind. 1964)
Case details for

Mahin v. Soshnick

Case Details

Full title:MAHIN ET AL. v. SOSHNICK ET AL

Court:Supreme Court of Indiana

Date published: Sep 30, 1964

Citations

246 Ind. 13 (Ind. 1964)
201 N.E.2d 331