*1 Donald R. Executive Secre- Rice, In the Matter of Richard W. REED. tary, Fredrick L. In- dianapolis, for the Supreme Disciplinary Court Supreme Court of Indiana. 24,
The Indiana Disciplin- Commission, ary Verified Action, charged Richard making W. Reed with statements about qualifications with reckless falsity as .to the truth or statements, in violation of Ind.Professional 8.2(a). Conduct Rule Pursuant to Ind.Ad- 28(11) Discipline (c), mission and respondent commission and the approval for this Court’s a Statement of Circumstances Agree- Conditional Discipline ment stipulate wherein the facts for the is a public addition, reprimand.
has submitted to this Court an affidavit required Admis.Disc.R.23(ll)(c). as Upon review, a majority of this Court has approve decided to and im- pose public reprimand. find,
We
as the
agreed,
have
Richard
W. Reed is an
in good
Indiana,
standing in the
having
State
been
admitted
the Indiana Bar on Octo-
9,
ber
1974. At all times relevant to this
was,
currently
duly
still
prosecuting
elected
attor-
ney of
County,
In Jan-
uary
1996,
the Honorable Barbara Gas-
per
Hines was the
of the Delaware
Superior Court No.
having been ap-
pointed
position
to that
September
1995, by the
Governor
Indiana to fill the
vacancy in that
court created
the retire-
ment of the former judge. Prior to bench,
assuming
the Delaware
all
referred
welfare-related child
(Title IV-D)
support
cases
to be heard
9, 1996,
a commissioner.
On
Schafer, Muncie, IN,
James A.
for the
Hines announced that she would
Respondent.
begin presiding over the
Title
cases
*2
lawyer
that
knows
referring make
the
rather
than
statement
in her court
filed
or with reckless
as to
commissioner. As
to be false
Prosecut-
them to the
falsity concerning
qualifica-
truth or
the
responsi-
its
respondent was
ing Attorney, the
integrity
tions or
of a judge,
to
representation
providing legal
ble
officer,
of a
public legal
officer or
or
candi-
in such cases.
of Indiana
the State
appointment
to
date
election or
with
strongly disagreed
The
legal
A
or
office.
comment
Rules of
the Title
Judge Hines’s decision to hear
Attorneys
Conduct
Professional
cases,
and,
on
IV-D
provides
following
the
insight
Law
into the
to
expressed
disagreement
this rule:
reasoning for
Thereaf-
presence
Hines in the
by lawyers are relied on
Assessments
ter,
respondent gave press
interview
the
personal
the
evaluating
professional or
Evening
The Muncie
reporters
to
from
persons being
fitness of
considered
During
The
Press and
Muncie Star.
legal
and
offices. Ex-
interview,
amade
number
opinions
honest and candid
on
pressing
quali-
disparaging statements about
improving
such matters contributes to
Judge Hines
integrity
and
fications
justice.
Converse-
the administration
reported
were
verbatim
which statements
lawyer
ly, false statements
can
in the
appeared
articles that
newspaper
unfairly undermine
confidence
the interview.
press
local
justice.
administration
Prof.
excerpted portions of the
Following are
8.2,
Cond.R.
Comment.
respondent:
quoting
news articles
we
that
The
and
find
her
arrogance
only by
is exceeded
“Her
inaccurately,
without mak
by stating
said
Hines
ignorance,” Reed
about
any
verify
effort
to
reasonable
Evening
the Muncie
interview with
Judge Hines
accuracy
opinion,
of his
that
Press.
ignorant,
being improp
that she was
harsh words
prosecutor
“The
that she had
erly
by politicians,
influenced
way
‘Obviously
...
Barbara has
Hines
report
liquor
fabricated
hands,’
he said.”
too much time on
offices,
that
present in court
she
about hear-
[Judge Hines’ decision
“It’s
cases, the
understanding
Title IV-D
just petty
cases]
own Title IV-D
ing her
rule.
the above
violated
said Reed. “When-
political squabbling,”
that the
parties agree
further
any-
says
Hines
ever Barbara
this misconduct
I can see
thing,
[certain
public reprimand. Among
factors
is a
political figure’s] lips moving.”
deliberating an
examines when
received
“[Judge
also said she’d
Hines]
sanction are the
appropriate disciplinary
reports
support [Title
that child
respondent,
duty
of mind of the
state
a bucketful
bought
office]
court
workers
duty
violated,
pre
to
the court’s
it to work before
liquor
and took
profession,
serve
as a
it to another
Christ-
giving
aggravating circum
any mitigating
or
story ‘pure
Reed called
gift.
mas
Holmes,
stances.
of Christoff
up to
just making
“She’s
fiction.’
(Ind.1997);
behavior,” Reed
justify her
irrational
(Ind.1997); Mat
Darling,
said.”
Conway,
ter
any comprehension
“She doesn’t have
particu
struck
In this
we are
respect
with
to those
going
what’s
on
larly
nature
vicious
cases,”
“And
Reed said.
IV-D]
[Title
precipi
His remarks were
comments.
learn.”
she refuses to
litiga
heat of
made
tous outbursts
deliberate,
vituperative,
They
tion.
Conduct
Professional
the clear
8.2(a)
and broadcast with
premeditated,
shall not
provides that
to
to
intent
embarrass
de
The Clerk of this Court is directed to
provide
notice
this order in
position.
tract from the stature of her
accordance
23(3)(d)
with
provide
and to
duty
constitutional
the Clerk of the United
States Court
interests,
sovereign
preserve,
behalf of
*3
Circuit,
Appeals for the Seventh
the Clerk
manage,
safeguard
of each of the United States District
of Friedland,
system
state. Matter
state,
in
Courts
this
and the Clerk of each
(1981).
275 Ind.
holding office of
Moreover, biggest Muncie’s employed platform multi- this
news outlet and used on the court. The attacks
ple times *4 precedent seems warrant
Atanga of the current viola-
weightier treatment gives it. majority than the
tion Mat- concerning same could be said
ter of lawyer made
In that court,
actionable remarks
court, public reprimand. and received dissented, observing that of us
Two temper pro tem lost his guard in control and
“failed” to “remain preferential treat- appearances of
against (Sullivan, J.,
ment,” dissenting), id. at 920 only Turner was the
and that seemed held accountable situation
person oppos- tem pro created
largely counsel, C.J., (Shepard, dissent- id.
ing), mitigating no sign
There is of similar in the current case. Reed’s
circumstances any high- product
assaults were not the moments, pro-
pressure Thus, admoni-
voked response modest a
tion seems too in this case. A short facts . Corbin, Pro Timothy L. Se. warranted. seems Secre- R. Executive Donald McKinney, tary, Dennis K. DICKSON, J., concurs. for the Indiana Indianapolis, L. Attorney Timothy Corbin became Disci- subject of a Verified allegations plinary Action .because affairs neglected of several communi- adequately to clients and failed