Legal Opinion
In The Matter of Daniel K. Houston
Indiana Supreme Court
Decided June 23, 1999No. 79S00-9809-DI-485PublishedCited by 1 opinion
1Per curiam
Today we find that by failing to respond to investigative subpoenas issued by the Disciplinary Commission, the respondent, attorney Daniel K. Houston, is in contempt of this Court.
The genesis of this contempt action is the Commission’s September 11, 1998, Verified Information and Motion for Order to Show Cause Why Respondent Should not be Held in Contempt of Court, filed in - accordance with Ind. Admission and Discipline Rule 23(9)(f), and based on the respondent’s failure to comply with two Disciplinary Commission subpoenas. On December 3, 1998, this Court ordered the respondent to appear…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Mitchell v. StevensonIndiana Court of Appeals · 1997
- Bottoms v. B & M COAL CORP.Indiana Court of Appeals · 1980
- Matter of CrumpackerIndiana Supreme Court · 1982
- National Education Ass'n-South Bend v. South Bend Community School Corp.Indiana Court of Appeals · 1995
- City of Mitchell v. GravesIndiana Court of Appeals · 1993
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- In re HoustonIndiana Supreme Court · 1999