February 2026 Discipline

Posted on by

These lawyers were the subject of Louisiana Supreme Court disciplinary orders or Louisiana Attorney Discipline Board recommendations published during the month of February 2026.

Louisiana Supreme Court

  1. Wynnifred Lashawn Sanders (No. 2026-B-00147, Feb. 11, 2026). The Court granted the joint petition for interim suspension filed by respondent and the Office of Disciplinary Counsel. Respondent, Louisiana Bar Roll No. 40220, was suspended from the practice of law on an interim basis pursuant to Supreme Court Rule XIX, § 19.3, pending further orders of the Court. The order authorized the ODC to seek appointment of a trustee to protect the interests of respondent’s clients, if appropriate.
  2. James Vernon Petersen (No. 2025-B-01556, Feb. 3, 2026). The Court accepted the joint petition for consent discipline and suspended the respondent from the practice of law for one year, with the suspension deferred in its entirety. The ODC’s investigation arose from respondent’s guilty plea to misdemeanor domestic abuse battery. The deferred suspension is subject to probation for a period to coincide with the term of respondent’s recovery agreement with the Judges and Lawyers Assistance Program (JLAP). Any failure to comply with the terms of the JLAP agreement may result in the deferred suspension being made executory or the imposition of additional discipline. In doing so, he violated Rule 8.4(b). All costs and expenses were assessed against respondent.
  3. Muriel Offan Van Horn (No. 2025-B-01564, Feb. 10, 2026). The Court imposed an eighteen-month suspension arising from formal charges involving three consolidated disciplinary matters. Respondent, an attorney admitted in 1986 (Bar Roll No. 17730), failed to respond to ODC complaints and resisted cooperation with disciplinary investigations, resulting in a subpoena to obtain her sworn statement. In the Grandpre matter, respondent accepted $11,000 to pursue post-conviction relief and a civil rights application but never filed either pleading, affirmatively misrepresented to her client that the civil rights application had been filed, and failed to provide a complete client file or any refund. In the Lane matter, respondent accepted $10,000 to file a post-conviction application, allowed the two-year prescriptive period to lapse without filing, concealed the missed deadline from her client, and then conditioned the return of fees on the client’s execution of a settlement agreement waiving malpractice claims — without advising the client in writing to seek independent counsel. In doing so, respondent violated Rules 1.1, 1.3, 1.4, 1.5(f)(5), 1.8(a), 1.8(h), 1.15(a), 1.16(d), 3.2, 8.1(b), 8.1(c), 8.4(a), 8.4(c), and 8.4(d). The Court found aggravating factors including a pattern of misconduct, multiple offenses, bad faith obstruction of the disciplinary proceeding, vulnerability of the victims, substantial experience in the practice of law, and failure to make restitution. Mitigating factors included the absence of a prior disciplinary record and personal or emotional problems. The Court further ordered full restitution to Arthur Grandpre, III, and assessed all costs and expenses against respondent. Justices McCallum, Cole, and Penzato dissented, finding the discipline too lenient.

LADB Hearing Committees

  1. Gregory Joseph St. Angelo (Docket No. 19-DB-056, Hearing Committee #46, Feb. 23, 2026). Hearing Committee #46 recommended that respondent be permanently disbarred. Formal charges, consisting of nine counts, alleged violations of Rules 8.4(b) (commission of a criminal act) and 8.4(c) (conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit, or misrepresentation). On June 28, 2019, respondent — who had served as general counsel of First NBC Bank from approximately 2006 to 2016 — entered a guilty plea to one count of Conspiracy to Commit Bank Fraud in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1349. Respondent and others submitted false personal financial statements to First NBC Bank to overstate assets and understate liabilities, obtained loans through nominees for personal benefit, executed loan documents knowing their stated purposes were false, and conspired to cause the bank to disburse approximately $9.6 million in fictitious tax credit investments to cover outstanding loan balances and overdrafts. When First NBC Bank failed in April 2017, the outstanding loan balances attributable to respondent and related entities totaled approximately $46.7 million. At the disciplinary hearing, the committee found that respondent sought to minimize his role in the fraud and did not provide convincing testimony of contrition. The committee found that respondent’s knowing, willful, prolonged, and harmful misconduct — carried out over approximately a decade while he owed fiduciary, loyalty, and honesty duties to his bank client — satisfied both prongs of the permanent disbarment standard under Louisiana Supreme Court Rule XIX: (1) the misconduct was so egregious as to demonstrate a convincing lack of ethical and moral fitness to practice law, and (2) there is no reasonable expectation of significant rehabilitation in respondent’s character in the future. In reaching this conclusion, the committee relied on In re Bark, 2011-1737 (La. 10/21/11), 72 So. 3d 853, and In re Mann, 2004-1850 (La. 11/8/04), 886 So. 2d 441. The committee’s opinion was unanimous. Respondent is currently on interim suspension. See In re St. Angelo, 2019-1102 (La. 7/22/2019).
Please follow and like us:
Tweet