In Re Siegel
Indiana Supreme Court
1Opinion of the Court
DISCIPLINARY ACTION
2Per curiam
Attorney Michael J. Siegel filed, on behalf of a client, a voluntary bankruptcy petition that the respondent knew misrepresented the ownership status of the client’s personal residence. For this intentional deception of a tribunal, we find that respondent Siegel should be suspended from the practice of law.
The respondent’s admission to this state’s bar in 1975 confers with us disciplinary jurisdiction over this matter. This case formally commenced with the Disciplinary Commission’s filing of a four-count Verified Complaint for Disciplinary Action in 1991. That complaint was…
3Cases cited9 opinions
- Simon v. City of Auburn, Board of Zoning AppealsIndiana Court of Appeals · 1988
- Consolidated Matter of ChristoffIndiana Supreme Court · 1997
- Matter of GeislerIndiana Supreme Court · 1993
- Matter of BarrattIndiana Supreme Court · 1996
- Matter of RobakIndiana Supreme Court · 1995
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
4Cited by17 opinions
- PHICO Insurance v. Aetna Casualty & Surety Co. of AmericaDistrict Court, S.D. Indiana · 2000
- Hutchinson v. SpaniermanCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1999
- In re William J. McCarty, Jr.Supreme Court of Vermont · 2013
- In Re BrizziIndiana Supreme Court · 2012
- Lawyer Disciplinary Board v. LoschWest Virginia Supreme Court · 2006
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.