« Ind. Courts - "Attorney's actions bring Behrman case back into spotlight" | Main | Ind. Courts - "Shopping mall tycoon Melvin Simon's daughter sues widow over will" »
Saturday, January 09, 2010
Ind. Decisions - "Indiana Supreme Court suspends Spencer lawyer"
Laura Lane reported yesterday ($$) in the Bloomington Herald-Tribune:
Spencer attorney Paul Watts will not be practicing law for 120 days after being disciplined by the Indiana Supreme Court for his part in drafting a will for a 95-year-old man without consulting him about his wishes.Here is the Supreme Court's order, from Dec. 22, 2009.The will named Bloomington lawyer David Colman, who had represented George Archer in the past, as beneficiary of the elderly man’s estate, which in the end was worth more than half a million dollars.
According to the court’s recent disciplinary ruling, Colman arranged for the will to be executed in 2004. He told Watts that Archer was competent, and wanted Colman to inherit money the frugal man had saved over his lifetime while living in a decrepit mobile home and driving an old truck with the bumpers tied on with baling wire.
Colman, an attorney in Bloomington since 1970, was sanctioned by the state Supreme Court in the matter as well. In May 2008, his license to practice law was suspended for three years for his part in the drafting of Archer’s will.
A man Archer had done yard work for intervened on Archer’s behalf and had an independent lawyer review the will and the circumstances around its creation. That lawyer drafted a new will, and when Archer died in 2007 at the age of 100, the reclusive gardener’s money went to Indiana University’s Hilltop Garden program.
His $650,00 gift was the largest donation Hilltop has ever received.
The Supreme Court discipline order states that Watts violated three rules of professional conduct Indiana attorneys must adhere to, citing failure to explain a matter to a client to the extent necessary for an informed decision, representing a client where there might be a personal interest for the attorney and knowingly helping someone prepare a legal document that gives that person or someone related to him a “substantial gift.”
Chief Justice Randall Shepard’s decision reflects concern that Watts “maintains he did nothing wrong in failing to communicate at all with G.A. about his will, trusting the conflicted Colman to communicate on his behalf ... He says it was his practice to draft wills for elderly, bedfast clients without consulting them, relying instead on information provided by family members in order to minimize legal fees for the clients.”
Shepard said Watts’ belief he could ethically do that “displays a troubling lack of insight into his duty of undivided loyalty to the client.”
Shepard wrote that if Watts wanted to save his clients money, he should have reduced the amount he charged.
Posted by Marcia Oddi on January 9, 2010 09:18 AM
Posted to Ind. Sup.Ct. Decisions