Thursday, October 8, 2020
The Indiana Supreme Court has reprimanded an attorney
Respondent represented “Clients A and B” in unrelated matters. Respondent filed a pleading in Client A’s case that included 14 rhetorical paragraphs pertaining to Client B’s matter and consisting in part of confidential information. The disclosure of this information was not permitted under Indiana Professional Conduct Rule 1.6(b)...
All Justices concur, except David, J., who would reject the conditional agreement, believing the
discipline is insufficient in light of the misconduct admitted.