January 2021 Discipline

Posted on by

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

Louisiana Supreme Court

  1. Robert Christopher Oetjens. The court transferred the respondent to disability inactive status. The court issued no reasons for so doing.
  2. Donald Joseph Melancon. The court suspended the respondent for one year and one day. The respondent misused his client trust account and commingled and converted funds. In so doing, the respondent violated Rules 1.15(a), 1.15(b), 1.15(d), 1.15(f) and 8.4(a).
  3. Kevin P. Kleinpeter. The court accepted a joint ODC-respondent petition for consent discipline and suspended the respondent for one year. The respondent was arrested for driving while intoxicated.
  4. Suzan Jackson. The court suspended the respondent for one year and one day. The respondent mishandled her client trust account. In so doing, the respondent violated Rules 1.15 and 8.1(c).
  5. Welsey T. Bishop. The court disbarred the respondent. The respondent plead guilty to making false statements to a federal agency, a felony violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1001(a)(3). In so doing, the respondent violated Rules 8.4(a) and 8.4(b).
  6. Daniel E. Becnel, III. The court reinstated the respondent to the practice of law. The respondent was previously suspended for one year and one day for negligently mishandling client funds.

Louisiana Attorney Disciplinary Board

  1. Gerald Joseph Asay. The board recommended that the court reinstate the respondent to the practice of law.
  2. Walter P. Reed. The board recommended that the court permanently disbar the respondent. The respondent was convicted of federal tax fraud. In so doing, the respondent violated Rules 8.4(b), (c), (d), and (a).

LADB Hearing Committee

  1. Samuel Robert Aucoin. Hearing Committee #20 recommended that the court suspend the respondent for one year and one day. The respondent practiced law without a license, submitted falsified evidence to the LSBA Committee on Mandatory Continuing Legal Education, and lied under oath both in his sworn statement and at the hearing of this matter. In so doing, the respondent violated Rules 1.1(c), 5.5(a), 8.1(c), and 8.4(a)(c).
  2. Joseph B. Morton, III. Hearing Committee #9 recommended that the court suspend the respondent for six months. The respondent negligently billed clients. In so doing, the respondent violated Rules 1.5(a) and 8.4(a)(c).
  3. Paul A. Lapeyrouse. Hearing Committee #1 recommended that the court publicly reprimand the respondent. The respondent filed a defamation suit against individuals who participated in disciplinary hearings against him. The respondent’s behavior violated Rules 8.4(a) and (d).
  4. George Allen Roth Walsh. Hearing Committee #29 recommended that the court permanently disbar the respondent. The respondent practiced law while ineligible to do so. The court had previously suspended the respondent for the same misconduct. The respondent’s actions violated Rules 1.1, 1.16, 5.5, and 8.4.
  5. Matthew John Ungarino. Hearing Committee #10 recommended that the court suspend the respondent for one month. The respondent engaged in improper ex party communication with a District Court law clerk and made misrepresentations to the tribunal. In so doing, the respondent violated Rules 3.3, 3.4, 3.5, and 8.4.
Please follow and like us:
Tweet