Attorneys drop troubled home builder Hansen & Horn

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Indianapolis-based Hansen & Horn Group Inc. currently is without legal representation after attorneys defending the troubled home builder from a slew of lawsuits dropped it as a client.

Raymond Basile and Paul Carroll of Indianapolis-based Harrison & Moberly LLP notified Marion County courts of their decision on Monday.

The lawyers did not elaborate in court documents. But, in response to an IBJ inquiry, Carroll said via e-mail that “the reasons for the decision to withdraw are protected by the attorney-client privilege and cannot be disclosed by this firm.”

Steve Horn, Hansen & Horn Group’s chief operating officer, did not return phone calls Wednesday morning seeking comment.

Tom Bedsole, a residential construction and real estate lawyer at the local office of Cincinnati-based Frost Brown Todd LLC, said lawyers typically withdraw if they’re not getting paid.

“It is fairly unusual for attorneys to withdraw for other reasons,” he said.

The financially pressed Hansen & Horn is facing at least 14 lawsuits filed this year in Marion County courts, mostly by suppliers seeking to recover money they say the builder owes them. One would-be homeowner also has filed suit, alleging the company misused construction funds. All told, the suits seek to recover more than $1 million.

The decision by the lawyers to withdraw as counsel comes at a perilous time for Hansen & Horn.

Judge Heather A. Welch of Marion Superior Court 12 has been asked to appoint a receiver to take possession of the company. A hearing on the matter is scheduled for Thursday morning.

The request by C&R Concrete Contractors follows a lawsuit brought by the Indianapolis company alleging Hansen & Horn owes it $268,749 for concrete work done in the past three years. 

And fellow Marion Superior Court Judge Timothy Oakes took the drastic step in mid-November of having Monroe Bank place a 90-day hold on a Hansen & Horn account after it failed to pay a $183,000 judgment in a suit brought by a supplier in June.

A hearing on that matter is set for Jan. 26.

Indianapolis-based Lee Supply Corp. sued the home builder after it failed to pay for materials and services, according to court documents. Hansen & Horn, meanwhile, attempted to have the lawsuit dismissed, a legal maneuver that Oakes rejected Nov. 3.

Founded in 1977, Hansen & Horn is building homes in more than 20 subdivisions in central Indiana, including Duke Realty Corp.’s mixed-use Anson development in Boone County near Whitestown. It replaced Los Angeles-based KB Home Inc., which backed out of plans to build in Anson when it exited the Indiana market in July 2007.

Hansen & Horn anticipates building 168 houses priced at $180,000 and above in a first phase. Additional phases could result in a total of 680 houses. Six homes have been built so far, with two more under construction.

Altogether, the home builder has been named in at least 20 lawsuits in Marion County in the past 10 years.



  • FallingFast
    I have been hoping and praying for Hansen & Horn to be placed into receivership tomorrow!!! Take this business away from Ward and Steve Horn, Mike cameron and Andy Gugle for their thievery. They are all aware and responsible for what has happened to Hansen & Horn. Stealing from people and vendors to pay your attorneys to keep you from paying who you rightfully owe, or better yet, to sue people you already stole from you horrible people!

Post a comment to this story

We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. By Mr. Lee's own admission, he basically ran pro-bono ads on the billboard. Paying advertisers didn't want ads on a controversial, ugly billboard that turned off customers. At least one of Mr. Lee's free advertisers dropped out early because they found that Mr. Lee's advertising was having negative impact. So Mr. Lee is disingenous to say the city now owes him for lost revenue. Mr. Lee quickly realized his monstrosity had a dim future and is trying to get the city to bail him out. And that's why the billboard came down so quickly.

  2. Merchants Square is back. The small strip center to the south of 116th is 100% leased, McAlister’s is doing well in the outlot building. The former O’Charleys is leased but is going through permitting with the State and the town of Carmel. Mac Grill is closing all of their Indy locations (not just Merchants) and this will allow for a new restaurant concept to backfill both of their locations. As for the north side of 116th a new dinner movie theater and brewery is under construction to fill most of the vacancy left by Hobby Lobby and Old Navy.

  3. Yes it does have an ethics commission which enforce the law which prohibits 12 specific items. google it

  4. Thanks for reading and replying. If you want to see the differentiation for research, speaking and consulting, check out the spreadsheet I linked to at the bottom of the post; it is broken out exactly that way. I can only include so much detail in a blog post before it becomes something other than a blog post.

  5. 1. There is no allegation of corruption, Marty, to imply otherwise if false. 2. Is the "State Rule" a law? I suspect not. 3. Is Mr. Woodruff obligated via an employment agreement (contractual obligation) to not work with the engineering firm? 4. In many states a right to earn a living will trump non-competes and other contractual obligations, does Mr. Woodruff's personal right to earn a living trump any contractual obligations that might or might not be out there. 5. Lawyers in state government routinely go work for law firms they were formally working with in their regulatory actions. You can see a steady stream to firms like B&D from state government. It would be interesting for IBJ to do a review of current lawyers and find out how their past decisions affected the law firms clients. Since there is a buffer between regulated company and the regulator working for a law firm technically is not in violation of ethics but you have to wonder if decisions were made in favor of certain firms and quid pro quo jobs resulted. Start with the DOI in this review. Very interesting.