Following a Motion for Summary Judgment by the Indiana Attorney General’s Office in the case against Defendants Richard Kelly, Ashley Kelly, Leonne, LLC, Western Surety Company and RLI Insurance Company, the Defendants filed a Motion for Enlargement of Time and to Stay Proceedings as they await discovery in the criminal case between the Kellys and the State of Indiana.
The Motion for Summary Judgment was filed by the Plaintiff on Sept. 16, followed by the official order being filed on Sept. 17 in the Clinton Circuit Court. The order stated that the Defendants were permitted a 30-day period to issue a response to the motion as the court took the motion under advisement. In response, the Defendants filed a Motion for Enlargement of Time and Stay Proceedings on Wednesday, Sept. 25 “pending the outcome and completion of the criminal proceedings directly related to this matter.”
The filing stated that the Motion for Summary Judgment included exhibits and discourse directly related to the State of Indiana case filed on March 4, 2022, which filed criminal charges against Richard Kelly and Ashley Kelly alleging a violation of Indiana Code 35-44.1-1-4(B)(1), Conflict of Interest, and Indiana Code 35-44.1-1-1(1), Official Misconduct.
According to the claims in the filing, “over one year later, on March 30, 2023, the State of Indiana, through Attorney General Todd Rokita, filed the present civil complaint against the Defendants alleging the exact same claims and facts as alleged in the criminal matter.” The filing continued to state that the Plaintiff’s complaint referenced the criminal filings and “requires a finding of criminal conduct in order to be resolved.”
On Sept. 10, the Kellys requested a continuance of the trial dates, originally scheduled for Oct. 7 through Oct. 11, to obtain discovery allegedly withheld by Clinton County and the State, in the criminal case, and the request was granted for continuance on Sept. 16, setting the jury trial dates for Feb. 24, 2025 at 9 a.m. against the State’s objection that was filed on Sept. 10.
In the Defendants’ recent motion, it was noted that the Motion for Summary Judgment in the Civil Plenary case was filed on the same date as the granting of continuance in the criminal case.
As a result of the motion and the order being filed, the Defendants’ response was set to be due on Oct. 16, approximately four months prior to the trial in the criminal matter. The filing further claimed that “there is no case management order in place and no trial date set; therefore, no prejudice will result from a stay.”
The filing further iterated that the Defendants are currently seeking additional discovery in the criminal matter cited in the exhibitions for the civil case, and the discovery sought reportedly includes “Clinton County records and document production withheld by the County, the deposition of Attorney Thomas Little who recommended and advised the Kellys regarding the legality of appropriate nature of the alleged conduct, and the deposition of other County officials.”
The filing reiterated that the Defendants dispute the criminal charges and the allegations in the Plaintiff’s complaint, and it stated that the discovery is “necessary to respond to the Motion for Summary Judgment.” Therefore, the Defendants are seeking a stay of the matter in order to complete the criminal matter as they seek to complete discovery.
The filing claimed that the Court “will not be prejudiced by” an enlargement and stay, and it “will conserve judicial resources” as the “same legal issues” would be decided by the Court in both the civil and criminal matter, and “the criminal matter can have a preclusive effect on the present civil matter.”
According to the filing, “The Plaintiff objects to a stay, but consents to an enlargement of time of 30 days,” and the Defendants claimed that “a stay is necessary to preserve the rights of the Defendants, as well as to preserve judicial resources.”
The Court has not filed an official ruling on the Motion for Enlargement of Time and to Stay Proceedings as of Wednesday, Sept. 25 at 6:30 p.m.
For more information regarding the initial Motion for Summary Judgment filed by the Indiana Attorney General’s Office, read Indiana Attorney General’s Office Motions For Summary Judgment In Case Against Richard Kelly, Ashley Kelly, Leonne, LLC, Et Al on Clinton County Daily News.
