## Facts

- Larry O. Wilder, an Indiana attorney, served as town attorney for Utica, Indiana.
- Wilder prepared and filed a complaint and request for a temporary restraining order (TRO) aimed at preventing county commissioners from replacing a town appointment to a local board.
- The pleadings represented that copies had been served on opposing counsel in person or by mail.
- Wilder completed the documents after 4:00 p.m.; his secretary delivered copies to someone in opposing counsel’s nearby office.
- Wilder filed the pleadings after 5:00 p.m. and then met with the judge to request a TRO.
- Wilder sought and obtained a TRO ex parte without making the rule-required showings or certifications for ex parte relief, including:
  - that immediate and irreparable injury would occur before the opposing party could be heard;
  - what efforts were made to give notice; or
  - why notice should be excused.
- The judge signed the ex parte TRO; in separate judicial discipline proceedings, the judge was found to have violated the Code of Judicial Conduct and was suspended for three days.
- The Indiana Supreme Court Disciplinary Commission charged Wilder with professional misconduct based on improper ex parte conduct and knowingly assisting a judge’s judicial-code violation.

## Issues

1. Whether Wilder’s conduct in obtaining an ex parte TRO without satisfying the procedural prerequisites violated the Indiana Rules of Professional Conduct, including rules restricting ex parte communications and prohibiting lawyers from knowingly assisting judicial misconduct.
2. What sanction was appropriate for the misconduct.

## Decision

- The Indiana Supreme Court found Wilder committed professional misconduct related to the ex parte TRO.
- The court suspended Wilder from the practice of law for three days, effective April 22, 2002.
- Wilder was ordered automatically reinstated at the conclusion of the suspension period.

## Legal Principles

- A lawyer may be disciplined for pursuing ex parte relief in a manner that circumvents the notice and showing requirements intended to protect the adverse party’s opportunity to be heard.
- Seeking an ex parte TRO without the required certifications and factual basis can constitute improper ex parte conduct before a tribunal.
- A lawyer violates professional duties by knowingly assisting or facilitating a judge’s conduct that violates the Code of Judicial Conduct, including improper entry of an ex parte order.
- Even a single episode of process-distorting conduct in an ex parte setting can warrant a short suspension rather than a reprimand.

## Conclusion

The Indiana Supreme Court imposed a three-day suspension on Wilder for obtaining an ex parte TRO without the required notice-related showings and certifications, conduct the court treated as improper ex parte practice that also amounted to knowingly assisting judicial misconduct.


In re Wilder, 764 N.E.2d 617 (Ind. 2002)