Indiana attorney general could face bill over discipline case

  • Comments
  • Print
Listen to this story

Subscriber Benefit

As a subscriber you can listen to articles at work, in the car, or while you work out. Subscribe Now
0:00
0:00
Loading audio file, please wait.
  • 0.25
  • 0.50
  • 0.75
  • 1.00
  • 1.25
  • 1.50
  • 1.75
  • 2.00

curtis Hill 600px
Curtis Hill

Indiana Attorney General Curtis Hill could face a big bill from the disciplinary case stemming from allegations that he groped a state lawmaker and three other women during a party.

The state’s attorney disciplinary commission has asked the Indiana Supreme Court to order that Hill pay about $57,000 toward expenses in the case. That includes about $8,000 in investigation and litigation costs and nearly $49,000 for former Supreme Court Justice Myra Selby’s work as the case’s hearing officer.

The Supreme Court has given Hill’s lawyers until Oct. 19 to respond to the expenses filing, after which it will decide on the request.

Hill completed in June a 30-day suspension of his law license after the Supreme Court found “by clear and convincing evidence that (Hill) committed the criminal act of battery” against the women. The women say Hill drunkenly groped them during a March 2018 party at an Indianapolis bar marking the end of that year’s legislative session.

Hill has denied any wrongdoing, but his reelection bid failed when he lost the Republican nomination in June to former U.S. Rep. Todd Rokita. Rokita is facing Democrat Jonathan Weinzapfel, a former Evansville mayor, in the November election.

Please enable JavaScript to view this content.

Story Continues Below

Editor's note: You can comment on IBJ stories by signing in to your IBJ account. If you have not registered, please sign up for a free account now. Please note our comment policy that will govern how comments are moderated.

3 thoughts on “Indiana attorney general could face bill over discipline case

  1. The Indiana Supreme Court has previously ruled that private hearing officer expenses are not to be taxed to the Respondent in a disciplinary case. (Likely because a judge can be appointed in most disciplinary cases.) I wonder why this would be a different situation? Because he’s attorney general?

Get the best of Indiana business news. ONLY $1/week Subscribe Now

Get the best of Indiana business news. ONLY $1/week Subscribe Now

Get the best of Indiana business news. ONLY $1/week Subscribe Now

Get the best of Indiana business news. ONLY $1/week Subscribe Now

Get the best of Indiana business news.

Limited-time introductory offer for new subscribers

ONLY $1/week

Cancel anytime

Subscribe Now

Already a paid subscriber? Log In

Get the best of Indiana business news.

Limited-time introductory offer for new subscribers

ONLY $1/week

Cancel anytime

Subscribe Now

Already a paid subscriber? Log In

Get the best of Indiana business news.

Limited-time introductory offer for new subscribers

ONLY $1/week

Cancel anytime

Subscribe Now

Already a paid subscriber? Log In

Get the best of Indiana business news.

Limited-time introductory offer for new subscribers

ONLY $1/week

Cancel anytime

Subscribe Now

Already a paid subscriber? Log In