Published: November 09, 2009 08:57 pm      

Clark Judge Moore reprimanded for fees charged as attorney

Supreme Court found Moore charged too much, changed agreement as attorney

Clark County Circuit Court Judge Dan Moore was publicly reprimanded last week by the Indiana Supreme Court for his handling of a divorce case that began in 2004.

The court found that Moore — who became judge in January — violated Indiana Professional Conduct Rules by charging an unreasonable fee and amending the fee agreement with his client without advising her in writing the desirability of seeking advice from independent counsel.

Moore said he was representing a woman who had been battered at the start of her divorce. He said the work, which lasted 2 1/2 years, included a premarital agreement, protective order case, interlocutory appeal work and advice and service on a criminal case against her husband.

“Documents pertaining to modifications in our agreement, in hindsight, did not meet technical requirements of Supreme Court Rules,” Moore said in a statement to The Evening News.

According to the Supreme Court ruling, Moore was retained by an unnamed client to represent her in a dissolution of marriage. The client paid Moore $15,000 that, according to an agreement, would be his “fixed” fee, the decision states.

In May 2005, Moore reportedly asked his client to pay an additional $5,000 and another $1,500 in April 2006.

The Supreme Court Disciplinary Committee found that Moore never advised his client to consult with independent counsel before agreeing to amend the fee to his advantage.

“I made a mistake in not tracking those requirements more clearly in the midst of my work on those cases,” Moore said. “I respect the final resolution of these matters by the Supreme Court.”

The court found also stated that Moore had no disciplinary history and was cooperative with the commission. It states that Moore worked “diligently and competently” on the case.

Six of seven justices concurred with the decision to reprimand Moore. Justice Brent E. Dickson dissented, arguing that Moore should face a period of suspension without any evidence Moore refunded the additional $6,500 paid by the client.

Moore will have to pay any costs for the Supreme Court proceedings.