## Facts

- Donna Hagedorn, an Indiana attorney admitted in 1967, represented a married couple seeking a private adoption.
- Hagedorn arranged for the couple to receive a newborn pursuant to a court order releasing the child into their care.
- Before placement, Hagedorn did not advise the couple that Indiana law required a pre-placement evaluation and post-placement supervision as part of the adoption process.
- Hagedorn did not file an adoption petition until the child was about two years old.
- When the child was about 17 months old, Hagedorn told the couple the biological mother’s parental rights had been terminated, despite having no reason to believe that had occurred.
- Hagedorn later told the couple the adoption was delayed because the court had lost a home study, though no such loss had occurred.
- The couple discharged Hagedorn when the child was about 27 months old and retained new counsel.
- The Indiana Supreme Court Disciplinary Commission filed disciplinary charges; the court decided the matter as an original attorney-discipline action.

## Issues

1. Whether Hagedorn violated the Indiana Rules of Professional Conduct by failing to competently and diligently pursue the adoption and by failing to adequately communicate required adoption steps.
2. Whether Hagedorn engaged in professional misconduct by making false statements to clients about termination of parental rights and alleged court-related delays.
3. What sanction was warranted given the seriousness and duration of the misconduct and any pattern across client matters.

## Decision

- The Indiana Supreme Court found that Hagedorn committed professional misconduct in the adoption representation and related matters.
- The court concluded that the misconduct included neglect and misrepresentations to clients about case status and court procedures.
- The court imposed a substantial suspension from the practice of law.

## Legal Principles

- Lawyers must provide competent representation, including knowledge of and compliance with statutory prerequisites in specialized matters such as adoption.
- Lawyers must act with reasonable diligence and promptness; unjustified delay in filing essential pleadings constitutes misconduct.
- Lawyers must keep clients reasonably informed and may not make false statements about case status or blame delays on fictitious court errors.
- Conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit, or misrepresentation toward clients warrants significant discipline, particularly when repeated and tied to matters with high client risk.

## Conclusion

The Indiana Supreme Court suspended Hagedorn for serious professional misconduct arising from an adoption representation marked by failure to follow statutory requirements, prolonged delay, and extended misrepresentations to clients about critical events and the status of the proceeding.


In re Hagedorn, 725 N.E.2d 397 (Ind. 2000)