August 2021 Discipline

These lawyers were the subject of Louisiana Supreme Court disciplinary orders or Louisiana Attorney Disciplinary Board recommendations published during the month of August 2021.

Louisiana Supreme Court

This image has an empty alt attribute; its file name is la-state-seal-300x150.png
  1. Robert A. Pearson. The court granted a joint petition for consent discipline and suspended the respondent from the practice of law for a period of ninety days, fully deferred. The respondent engaged in a consensual sexual relationship with a client. In doing so, the respondent violated Rules 1.7, 8.4(a), and 8.4(d) of the Rules of Professional Conduct.
  2. Charles Kirkland Middleton. The court granted a joint petition for consent discipline and suspended the respondent from the practice of law for a period of one year and one day, fully deferred. The respondent failed to refund an unearned fee and mismanaged his client trust account. In doing so, the respondent violated Rules 1.5 and 1.15 of the Rules of Professional Conduct.
  3. Bryan Joseph Haydel, Jr. The court granted a petition for permanent resignation from the practice of law in lieu of discipline. The respondent converted funds belonging to his clients and/or his former law firm. The court permanently prohibited the respondent from practicing law in Louisiana.
  4. Veleka Eskinde. The court granted a joint petition for consent discipline and suspended the respondent from the practice of law for one year and one day, with all but sixty days of the suspension deferred. The respondent mismanaged her client trust account. In doing so, the respondent violated Rule 1.15 of the Rules of Professional Conduct.

Louisiana Attorney Disciplinary Board

This image has an empty alt attribute; its file name is ladb-seal-300x150.png
  1. Lane Bennett. The board recommended that the court disbar the respondent from the practice of law. The respondent represented a client where there existed a concurrent conflict of interest and entered into a business transaction with a client or knowingly acquired an ownership, possessory, security or other pecuniary interest adverse to a client. In doing so, the respondent violated Rules 1.7(a), 1.7(b), 1.8(a), 8.4(a), 8.4(b), and 8.4(c).
  2. Kevin Matthew Dantzler. The board recommended that the court disbar respondent from the practice of law and order the respondent to make restitution to his victims. The respondent mismanaged his trust account on numerous occasions, failed to pay his bar dues and disciplinary assessment, engaged in the unauthorized practice of law, sold narcotic pain pills to another individual, failed to act with reasonable diligence and promptness in representing a client, failed to keep his client reasonably informed about the status of the matter, failed to promptly comply with reasonable requests for information, failed to consult with the client about relevant limitations on the lawyer’s conduct when the lawyer knew the client expected assistance not permitted by the Rules of Professional Conduct, failed to return unearned fees, failed to return his client’s file materials, failed to respond to the ODC regarding complaints filed against him, converted client’s funds, and charged an unreasonable amount for expenses. In doing so, the respondent violated, 1.1(c), 1.3, 1.4, 1.5, 1.15, 1.16, 5.5(a), 8.1(c), 8.4(a), 8.4(b), and 8.4(c).
  3. Arthur L. Harris, Sr. The board recommended that the court permanently disbar the respondent. The respondent failed to update his registration information, exhibited a lack of diligence, failed to adequately communicate with his clients, charged an unreasonable fee for his representation, failed to return unearned fees, failed to expedite litigation, failed to return client files, knowingly disobeyed an order of the court, engaged in the unauthorized practice of law, improperly collected legal fees, and failed to cooperate with the ODC’s investigation. In doing so, the respondent violated Rules 1.1(c), 1.3, 1.4(b), 1.5(f)(5), 1.16(a)(1), (c) & (d), 5.5(a) & (e)(4), 8.1(b) & (c), & 8.4(a), (c), & (d).

LADB Hearing Committees

  1. James W. Singleton. Hearing Committee #4 recommended that the court disbar the respondent. The respondent failed to disburse the entirety of the client’s portion of the settlement in a prompt and timely matter. The respondent also converted the client’s funds to his own use. In doing so, the respondent violated Rules 1.5(c), 1.15, 8.1(a), and 8.4(a) and (c).
  2. Steven Courtney-Gill. Hearing Committee #55 recommended that the court reinstate the respondent to the practice of law.
  3. Robert Matthew Waterwall. Hearing Committee # 3 recommended that the court suspend the respondent from the practice of law for one year and one day. The respondent knowingly abandoned and refused to retrieve client files. Additionally, the respondent accepted money from his employer in exchange for providing legal representation knowing he was engaging in the unlawful practice of law. In doing so, the respondent violated Rules 1.1(c), 1.6, 1.6(d), 5.5, 8.1(c), 8.4(a), 8.4(c), and 8.4(d).

Please follow and like us: