April 2022 Discipline

These lawyers were the subject of Louisiana Supreme Court disciplinary orders or Louisiana Attorney Disciplinary Board recommendations published during the month of April 2022.

Louisiana Supreme Court

  1. Michael Allen Smith, Jr. The court granted a petition for permanent resignation from the practice of law in lieu of discipline.
  2. Nicholas Cusimano, Sr. The court granted a joint petition for consent discipline and suspended the respondent from the practice of law for one year and one day, fully deferred. Respondent was arrested for driving while intoxicated.
  3. Dewanna Stewart. The court suspended the respondent from the practice of law on an interim basis.
  4. Brian D. Smith. The court suspended the respondent from the practice of law on an interim basis.
  5. Ned Franklin Pierce Sonnier, Sr. The court suspended the respondent from the practice of law on an interim basis.
  6. David J. Motter. The court granted a joint petition for consent discipline and suspended the respondent from the practice of law for three years, with all but one year and one day deferred. The respondent neglected legal matters, failed to communicate with clients, failed to promptly return unearned fees, engaged in the unauthorized practice of law, and engaged in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit, or misrepresentation. In doing so, the respondent violated Rules 1.3, 1.4, 1.5(f)(5), 5.5(a), 5.5(e)(4), 8.1(a), 8.1(c), 8.4(a), 8.4(c), and 8.4(d) of the Rules of Professional Conduct.
  7. Tara Elwell. The court granted a joint petition for consent discipline and suspended the respondent from the practice of law for eighteen months, with all but six months deferred. The respondent charged and failed to account for an excessive legal fee.
  8. Michael Blake Hale. The court suspended the respondent from the practice of law on an interim basis.

Louisiana Attorney Disciplinary Board

This image has an empty alt attribute; its file name is ladb-seal-300x150.png
  1. Paul Antoine Lapeyrouse. The board recommended that the court suspend the respondent for one year and one day. The respondent provided legal advice to both a client seeking divorce and that client’s spouse, disclosed confidential information, and asserted a defamation by libel claim based on disciplinary proceedings. In doing so, the respondent violated Rules 1.6, 1.7(a)(2), 3.1, 8.4(a), and 8.4(d) of the Rules of Professional Conduct.
  2. Richard C. Oustalet, Jr. The board recommended that the petitioner be reinstated to the practice of law subject to a two year probationary period.
  3. Stavros Panagoulopoulos. The board recommended that the respondent be suspended from the practice of law for three years, with all but one year and one day deferred. The respondent was arrested for driving while intoxicated, failed to communicate with clients, mismanaged clients funds, failed to return client property and files, failed to return an unearned fee, failed to advise a client in writing of the desirability to seek independent legal advice regarding a settlement release agreement, and failed to cooperate with the ODC in its investigations. In doing so, the respondent violated Rules 1.3, 1.4, 1.5(f), 1.7, 1.15(a), 1.15(f), 1.16(d), 8.1(a), 8.1(b), 8.1(c), 8.4(a), 8.4(b), and 8.4(c) of the Rules of Professional Conduct.

LADB Hearing Committees

  1. Edward J. McCloskey. Hearing Committee #55 recommended that the court suspend the respondent from the practice of law for two years, with all but six months deferred. The respondent received and deposited in his IOLTA account clerk of court refunds. The checks were for funds which had already been reimbursed to the respondent for various clients. The respondent did not return these funds to the clients. In doing so, the respondent violated Rules 1.15(a) and 8.4(c) of the Rules of Professional Conduct.

Please follow and like us: