December 2019 Discipline

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

Louisiana Supreme Court

  1. Mitchell M. Evans, II. The court permanently disbarred the respondent. The respondent neglected legal matters, failed to provide competent representation, and failed to refund unearned fees. In so doing, the respondent violated Rules 1.1(a), 1.2(a), 1.3, 1.4, 1.5(f)(5), 1.8(a), and 8.4(a)(c)(d).
  2. Laura Johnson. The court disbarred the respondent. The respondent, in an effort to secure her client’s release from incarceration, fabricated a $24,500 receipt to show that the client had paid restitution in a criminal case. In so doing, the respondent violated Rules 8.4(a)(b)(c)(d).
  3. Clayton Paul Schnyder, Jr. The court suspended the respondent for one year and one day. The court issued no written reasons for so doing.
  4. Durward D. Casteel. The court disbarred the respondent. The respondent converted $360,000 in client funds. In so doing, the respondent violated Rules 8.4(a)(b)(c).

Louisiana Attorney Disciplinary Board

  1. Hilliard Charles Fazande, III. The board recommended that the court disbar the respondent. The respondent engaged in various acts of sanctionable conduct, ranging from misconduct involving clients to theft from a bank. In so doing, the respondent violated Rules 1.1, 1.3, 1.4, 1.5(a), 1.5(f)(4), 5.5, 8.1(c), 8.4(a), 8.4(b), 8.4(c), and 8.4(d).
  2. Larry English. The board publicly reprimand the respondent, subject to the condition that the respondent submit a fee dispute to the LSBA Fee Dispute Resolution Program. The respondent did not handle a fee dispute properly. In so doing, the respondent violated Rules 1.5(f)(5) and 8.1(c).

LADB Hearing Committees

  1. Kirby Dale Kelly. Hearing Committee #17 recommended that the court permanently disbar the respondent. The respondent withheld client settlements and mismanaged client funds and his trust account. In so doing, the respondent violated Rules 1.15(a), 1.15(d), 1.15(f), 5.1(a), 5.1(b). 5.1(c), 5.3(a), 5.3(b), 5.3(c), 8.1(c), 8.4(a), 8.4(c),
  2. Michael Peter Arata. Hearing Committee #37 recommended that the court disbar the respondent. The respondent was convicted of felonies relating to film tax credits issued under a state program that affords tax credits for expenditures involving the movie film industry. In so doing, the respondent violated Rules 8.4(a), 8.4(b), and 8.4(c).
  3. Otha Curtis Nelson, Sr. Hearing Committee #1 recommended that the court suspend the respondent for one year and one day. The respondent failed to act with reasonable diligence, failed to keep his client reasonably informed, and failed to respond to repeated requests for information, among other violations. In so doing, the respondent violated Rules 1.3, 1.4(a)(3), 1.4(a)(4), 3.1, 8.4(a), and 8.4(d).
  4. Kevin Matthew Dantzler. Hearing Committee #6 recommended that the court disbar the respondent. The respondent converted client and third-party funds, failed to return monies owed to others, and made no effort to correct his mistakes. In so doing, the respondent violated Rules 1.5(f)(5), 1.15, 8.1(c), 8.4(c), 8.4(a).
  5. Cecelia F. Abadie. Hearing Committee #27 recommended that the court suspend the respondent for one year with all but six months deferred. The committee also recommended that the court impose a two-year period of probation with conditions. The respondent violated Rules 3.1, 3.3, and 3.5.
  6. J. Renee Martin. Hearing Committee # 15 recommended that the court permanently disbar the respondent. The respondent neglected legal matters, failed to communicate with clients, failed to return unearned fees, engaged in criminal conduct, engaged in dishonest conduct, engaged in the unauthorized practice of law, engaged in conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice, and failed to cooperate with the ODC in its investigation. In so doing, the respondent violated Rules 1.2(a), 1.3, 1.4, 1.5(d), 1.5(f)(5), 1.16(d), 5.5(a), 5.5(e)(3), 8.1(c), 8.4(a), 8.4(b), 8.4(c), and 8.4(d).

Please follow and like us: