Rudy Indiana Otis Law

June 9, 2021 by Lewis
No Comments

Rudyard and Yarris Indiana Attorney Lawyer Sit in Court For Fabricated Rape Charges

Rudy Indiana is running for his State House seat against incumbent John Yeatman in the race for Cook County’s 7th Congressional District seat. He is an attorney, specializing in real estate and criminal law. He has served as campaign manager for his opponent since early Spring and has poured considerable time and money into his campaign.

Rudy Indiana Otis Law

John Yeatman has served in the Illinois statehouse for twelve terms, but Rudy Indiana Otis Law believes that the time is ripe for a change in politics. Why? He cited some issues concerning pension benefits for politicians and judicial misconduct by county judges as part of the reasons to run against Yeatman.

According to him, many people in Washington are “getting so tired of seeing politicians break the law.” He made some astute comments, such as, “You see people in Washington who have never done anything, then wonder why they’re in politics, why they are running around making stupid decisions all the time when they could be out there working with their constituents.”

John Yeatman has been married three times, has had several affairs with other women, and has said that he has “no personal interest in the personal lives of the people in the district he is serving.”

Yet, that did not stop him from hiring a lawyer, Richard Rudyard Kipling, who happens to be the best DUI attorney in the country, according to several reports. Rudyard Kipling is a partner in the law firm of attorneys Jack Whelan and Roger Ware, which has many offices throughout Illinois. The two lawyers are also listed as partners in Rudyard Kipling & Associates, LLC, a corporation that holds many offices throughout Illinois, including offices in Arlington and St. Louis counties.

According to the Wall Street Journal, Rudyard and Yeatman were listed as five of the seven lawyers chosen to attend the 2021 Chicago Bar Association’s meeting of lawyers.

Among the other six members of the panel who sat for the honor of being a member of the elite group, were attorney Ken Shamrock of Wisconsin, along with attorneys Frank Friedel of Michigan and John Van de Kamp of Minnesota. One of those who was not a lawyer was voting member Betty Koi of California.

In fact, none of the twelve took up seats on the dais, which suggested to some legal experts that this may be a clear indication that there may not be a quorum to vote on certain cases, which may have a bearing on the outcome of civil litigation attorney, such as that of Rudyard and Yeatman. This is one more scenario where the DUI statute might be overly broad and potentially render any and all criminal defense lawyers, not just those practicing in Chicago, guilty of DUI.

It seems to be quite clear that the problem lies in the fact that Illinois does not permit private citizens to be appointed to sit on the state’s supreme court.

In order for such a lawyer to be allowed to argue a case before the state’s highest court, he or she would need to be registered as a member of the bar in the county where the court is located. However, because Rudyard and Yeatman did not register as members of the Illinois bar, they are barred from ever sitting on the state’s supreme court.

This, along with the fact that the Illinois bar has no standing in this matter, makes it obvious that Rudyard and Yeatman engaged in something unethical, which goes against the bar’s code of conduct, which bars lawyers from taking part in the practice of law that has anything to do with the profession of law.

The only remaining hope that the two lawyers have of getting away with this episode is that the state has an interesting way of enforcement of its laws, which is to have the lawyer commit the crime before the district attorney presents it to a grand jury.

It should also be noted that in a case such as this, the two lawyers would most likely be found guilty. If this happens, then their personal lives will surely be ruined beyond repair, even if it means leaving their children fatherless. What is truly unfortunate here is that the media has stepped in to behave as if these acts of wrongdoing were acceptable. In the end, all that these two gentlemen needed was an honest judge to call them on their illegal activities and for the court to have done it legally.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *