Court Opinion

ID: 9526474
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-07 03:18:12.162184+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:20:11.506867
License: Public Domain

RUCKER, Justice,
concurring in part and dissenting in part.
I concur in that portion of the Court’s opinion adopting an objective standard for determining when a statement made by an Indiana attorney about a judicial officer violates Rule 8.2(a). However, I disagree with the Court’s conclusion that Respondent did not violate the Rule in this case. There is little to no daylight between the highlighted portions of Statements C and D and the statements a majority of this Court found sanctionable in Matter of Wilkins. I agree with the hearing officer that Respondent’s “comments went beyond legal argument, they became personal, and violate current professional standards”. In my view Respondent violated Rule 8.2(a) and should be sanctioned accordingly•