On Friday, May 5, 2023, the Supreme Court of Indiana suspended attorney Clinton A. Hardesty for failing to appear for subsequent trials while representing clients.
The case is entitled “In the Matter of Clinton A. Hardesty,” with case no. 23S-DI-56.
The charges cited Indiana Rules of Professional Conduct 1.3, 3.4(c), and 8.4(d) which states:
Failing to act with reasonable diligence.
Knowingly disobeying an obligation under the rules or an order of a court.
Engaging in conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice.
On February 27, 2023, the Indiana Supreme Court suspended the respondent for missing his scheduled court appearances. The disciplinary matter arose from a two-count disciplinary complaint against the same filed by the commission alleging that the former violated the above-cited professional conduct rules. In both counts one and two, attorney Hardesty was alleged to have failed to diligently represent client matters by either arriving late for a scheduled trial or failing to appear for the subsequent trial which resulted in the court ordering the respondent’s appearance be withdrawn in both client matters. It was further alleged that attorney Hardesty failed to cooperate with the commission’s investigation.
The report states:
“‘In the short time since he was admitted to practice law in Indiana, Respondent has engaged in a pattern of misconduct and dereliction of an attorney’s most fundamental duties. Respondent caused two separate mistrials in one case, and in both cases, his repeated failures to appear for scheduled court proceedings squandered judicial resources and caused inconvenience for his clients and others.”
In relation to the Indiana Supreme Court Disciplinary Commission’s filing of a notice of guilty finding and request for suspension, requesting the respondent to be suspended from the practice of law, the Supreme Court of Indiana decided to suspend the respondent.
The Disposition states:
“IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Respondent is suspended from the practice of law in this State, effective immediately. Respondent is already under suspension as ordered in Case No. 22S-DI-290 and for continuing legal education noncompliance. Respondent is ordered to fulfill the continuing duties of a suspended attorney under Admission and Discipline Rule 23(26). The interim suspension shall continue until further order of this Court or final resolution of any resulting disciplinary action, provided no other suspension is in effect.”
Mr. Hardesty practices in Valparaiso, Indiana. He is licensed in Valparaiso. His info can be found on Linkedin.
A copy of the original filing can be found here.
