August 2019 Discipline

These lawyers were the subject of Louisiana Supreme Court disciplinary orders or Louisiana Attorney Disciplinary Board recommendations published during the month of August 2019.

Louisiana Supreme Court

  1. Lionel H. Sutton, III. The court suspended the respondent for twelve months. The court issued no written reasons for so doing.
  2. Michael David Roche. The court suspended the respondent on an interim basis pending further orders of the court.

Disciplinary Board

  1. Donald R. Dobbins. The board recommended that the court suspend the respondent for two years. Additionally, the board recommended that the respondent be required to make restitution. The respondent acted negligently during the representation of his clients and failed to supervise his office staff in an appropriate manner.
  2. William F. Henderson. The board recommended that the court deny the respondent’s petition or readmission. The court previously disbarred the respondent following his guilty plea to one felony count of unauthorized use of a movable valued in excess of $1,000, stemming from his conversion of client funds.
  3. Harold D. Register, Jr. The board recommended that the court permanently disbar the respondent. The respondent committed multiple acts of conversion of client funds, neglecting client matters, and refusing to cooperate with ODC. In so doing, he violated Rules 1.3, 1.4(a), 1.4(b), 1.5(c), 1.5(d), 1.5(f)(5), 1.16(d), 8.1(b), 8.1(c), 8.4(a), and 8.4(c).

LADB Hearing Committees

  1. Daniel G. Abel. Hearing Committee #37 unanimously recommended that the court permanently disbar the respondent. The respondent committed multiple acts of misconduct, including filing frivolous and harassing lawsuits, making false statements to courts, and mishandling client funds. In so doing, the respondent violated Rules 1.15, 1.9, 3.1(a), 3.2, 3.3(a)(1), 3.4(c), 4.4(a), 5.5(a), 5.5(e)(3)(i), (ii), (e)(4), 8.2(a), 8.2(c), 8.4(c), 8.4(d),
  2. Peter Brian Derouen. Hearing Committee #22 recommended that the court permanently disbar the respondent. Among other acts of misconduct, the respondent practiced law while inegligble to do so, neglected client matters, and failed to cooperate with ODC. In so doing, the respondent violated Rules 1.3, 1.4(a)(3), 1.5(a), 15(f)(5), 5.5(a), 8.1(c), 8.4(a), 8.4(b), 8.4(c), and 8.4(d).
  3. Amy Elizabeth Bateman. Hearing Committee #8 recommended that the court suspend the respondent for one year and one day, with all but ninety days deferred. The respondent knowingly operated a vehicle while under the influence of alcohol, knowingly made false statements to law enforcement, and engaged in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit, or misrepresentation. In so doing, the respondent violated Rule 8.4.
  4. Audrey Melissa Lamb. Hearing Committee #1 recommended that the court suspend the respondent for one year and one day. The respondent was arrested and charged with a DWI, reckless operation of a motor vehicle, failure to maintain control, and possession of marijuana. In so doing, the respondent violated Rule 8.4(a) and 8.4(b).
  5. Kevin Schoenberger. Hearing Committee #23 recommended that the court suspend the respondent for one year, fully deferred. The respondent negligently handled his trust account in violation of Rules 1.15 and 8.4(a).
  6. John Edward Whalen, Jr. Hearing Committee #8 recommended that the court suspend the respondent for three years. The respondent failed to communicate with his client, failed to act with diligence, and failed to render a proper accounting to his client. In so doing, the respondent violated Rules 1.3, 1.4, and 1.5.
Please follow and like us:

Leave a Reply

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