Case Name: In the Matter of Vincent M. CAMPITI, Respondent
Court: Supreme Court of Indiana
Jurisdiction: Indiana
Decision Date: 2009-05-07
Citations: 905 N.E.2d 408
Docket Number: No. 71S00-0807-DI-400
Parties: In the Matter of Vincent M. CAMPITI, Respondent.
Judges: All Justices concur.
Reporter: North Eastern Reporter 2d
Volume: 905
Pages: 408–408

Head Matter:
In the Matter of Vincent M. CAMPITI, Respondent.
No. 71S00-0807-DI-400.
Supreme Court of Indiana.
May 7, 2009.

Opinion:
PUBLISHED ORDER APPROVING STATEMENT OF CIRCUM - STANCES AND CONDITIONAL AGREEMENT FOR DISCIPLINE
Pursuant to Indiana Admission and Discipline Rule 23(11), the Indiana Supreme Court Disciplinary Commission and Respondent have submitted for approval a "Statement of Cireumstances and Conditional Agreement for Discipline" stipulating agreed facts and proposed discipline as summarized below:
Stipulated Facts: While representing a father at a child support modification hearing, Respondent made repeated disparaging references to the facts that the mother was not a U.S. citizen and was receiving legal services at no charge. These facts were irrelevant to the issues being considered at the hearing. Facts in aggravation are: (1) the mother felt that Respondent discriminated against her due to her non-citizen status; and (2) the remarks were made in a public courtroom. Facts in mitigation are that Respondent: (1) has no prior discipline; (2) cooperated with the Commission; (8) regrets his emotional involvement in the case and has made efforts to change his advocacy style; and (4) apologized to the grievant.
Violations: The parties agree that Respondent violated Indiana Professional Conduct Rule 4.4(a), which prohibits using means in representing a client that have no substantial purpose other than to embarrass a third party.
Discipline: The parties agree the appropriate sanction is a public reprimand. The Court, having considered the submissions of the parties, now APPROVES and ORDERS the agreed discipline and imposes a public reprimand.
The costs of this proceeding are assessed against Respondent. With the acceptance of this agreement, the hearing officer appointed in this case is discharged.
All Justices concur.