In re Everett E. Powell, II
Indiana Supreme Court
953 N.E.2d 1060 (2011)
T.G. obtained a settlement in a personal injury suit. Because T.G. had a history of substance abuse, was receiving public assistance, and was in an abusive relationship, she voluntarily had her attorney, Mark E. Ross, place $42,000 from the settlement in a special-needs trust in order to preserve her rights to public assistance and to prevent rapid depletion of the settlement. Ross agreed to act as the trustee. Soon after the creation of the trust, T.G. began demanding access to the money. Ross sent letters to T.G. reminding her of the purpose of the trust and stating that he was willing to resign as trustee if T.G. could find another qualified trustee. T.G. consulted with attorney Everett E. Powell (defendant) about the trust and her desire to access the settlement money. Powell agreed to take the case on a contingent basis. Powell prepared a contingent agreement under which he would provide legal services to remove Ross as the trustee in exchange for a fee of one-third of the money in the trust. The next day, Powell contacted Ross, and they agreed that Powell would take over as trustee. Powell, Ross, and T.G. signed an agreement making Powell the trustee the next day. Powell then created documents terminating the trust, and withdrew the funds from the trust account in his purported capacity as trustee. Powell retained almost $15,000 of the trust funds as his fee, with the rest of the money going to T.G. Powell’s was investigated by the Indiana Supreme Court Disciplinary Commission (plaintiff), which charged him with misconduct for collecting an unreasonable fee. The hearing officer found that Powell was unremorseful, failed to cooperate with the investigation, and had made misrepresentations during the matter.
Rule of Law
Holding and Reasoning (Per curiam)
What to do next…
Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.
You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 725,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.Unlock this case briefRead our student testimonials
Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.
Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee
Here's why 725,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 45,700 briefs, keyed to 983 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.