In Re Ettl

Disciplinary Action

The Disciplinary Commission charged the respondent with violating Indiana Professional Conduct Rule 8.5(b) by engaging in an ex parte communication with a judge. A hearing officer appointed pursuant to Indiana Admission and Discipline Rule 28 heard the matter and filed his findings of fact and conclusions of law, determining that the Commission failed to meet its burden of proof by clear and convincing evidence. The Commission filed a petition for review, respondent filed a brief in opposition, and the Commission replied. The matter is now before us for final determination.…