January 2024 Discipline

Posted on by

These lawyers were the subject of Louisiana Supreme Court disciplinary orders of Louisiana Attorney Discipline Board recommendations published during the month of January 2024.

Louisiana Supreme Court

  1. Blake G. William. The Court denied the petitioner’s petition for readmission to the bar.
  2. Benji J. Istre. The Court granted the petition for permanent resignation from the practice of law in lieu of discipline. The ODC had filed formal charges against the respondent alleging that he committed serious attorney misconduct, including neglecting client matters, failing to communicate with clients, and failing to cooperate in a disciplinary investigation. The respondent then sought to permanently resign from the practice of law.
  3. Melissa Michelle Ramsey Eldridge. The Court disbarred the respondent. The respondent neglected legal matters, failed to communicate with her clients, failed to refund unearned fees, failed to protect her clients’ interests upon abandonment of her law practice, and failed to cooperate with the ODC in its investigations. In doing so, the respondent violated Rules 1.3, 1.4, 1.5, 1.15(a), 1.15(d), 1.16(d), 8.1(b), 8.1(c), 8.4(a), and 8.4(c).
  4. G. Karl Bernard. The Court accepted the joint petition for consent discipline and suspended the respondent for one year and one day, with all but 30 days suspended. The ODC had commenced an investigation into allegations that the respondent grossly mishandled his client trust account, resulting in the conversion of client and third-party funds, and represented a party although he realized that doing so would constitute a conflict of interest. Prior to the filing of formal charges, the respondent and the ODC submitted a joint petition for consent discipline.
  5. Karl J. Koch. The Court suspended the respondent from the practice of law for one year and one day, deferred in its entirety. The respondent mishandled his client trust account, resulting in commingling of funds. In doing so, the respondent violated Rules 1.15(a), 1.15(b), 1.15(c), 1.15(f), 8.4(a), and 8.4(c).
  6. Manfred Max Sternberg. The Court accepted the joint petition for consent discipline and enjoined the respondent for a period of one year from seeking full admission to the Louisiana bar or seeking admission to the practice in Louisiana on any temporary or limited basis. The respondent engaged in the unauthorized practice of law in Louisiana.
  7. David J. Motter. The Court granted the petitioner’s petition for reinstatement on a conditional basis.
  8. William M. Magee. The Court publicly reprimanded the respondent. The respondent instructed his legal assistant to send a settlement counteroffer to opposing counsel after the effective date of his suspension from the practice of law. In doing so, the respondent violated Rule 5.5(a), 5.5(e)(3)(v), and 8.4(a).
  9. Cassie Erin Felder. The Court granted the petition to transfer the petitioner to disability inactive status.
  10. Gerald F. Palmer. The Court granted the petitioner’s petition for readmission to the practice of law.
  11. Christopher D. Granger. The Court granted the joint petition for consent discipline and suspended the respondent for six months, deferred in its entirety. The ODC had commenced an investigation into allegations that the respondent neglected a legal matter, failed to communicate with a client, and inappropriately attempted to settle a malpractice claim with a client. Prior to the filing of formal charges, the respondent and the ODC submitted a joint petition for consent discipline.

Louisiana Attorney Discipline Board

  1. Gregory James Sauzer. The board recommended that the respondent be suspended from the practice of law for six months, with all but thirty days deferred. The respondent failed to file tax returns for 2015, 2016, 2017, and 2018. In doing so, the respondent violated Rules 8.4(a), 8.4(b), and 8.4(c).
  2. David R. Opperman. The board recommended that the respondent be permanently disbarred from the practice of law. The respondent was convicted of indecent behavior involving juveniles. In doing so, the respondent violated Rules 8.4(a) and 8.4(b).
  3. Robert William Hjortsberg. The board recommended that the respondent be suspended for six months, with all but 60 days deferred. The respondent failed to file tax returns for two years and failed to participate in a criminal trial following his clients’ voluntary absence from the proceedings. In doing so, the respondent violated Rules 1.3, 8.4(a), 8.4(b), and 8.4(c).

LADB Hearing Committees.

  1. Aaron P. Mollere. Hearing Committee #54 recommended that the respondent be disbarred. The respondent converted substantial funds from her parents to fuel her drug use and failed to cooperate with the ODC’s investigation, failed to provide competent representation to a client, failed to reasonably communicate with a client, failed to refund an unearned fee or otherwise deposit any amount representing the portion of the fee reasonably in dispute, failed to take steps to protect her client’s interests after being terminated as counsel, and converted funds. In doing so, the respondent violated Rules 1.1(a), 1.3, 1.4(a), 1.5(f)(5), 1.15(a), 1.15(d), 1.16(d), 3.2, 8.1(b), 8.1(c), 8.4(a), 8.4(b), 8.4(c), and 8.4(d).
  2. Robert W. Sharp, Jr. Hearing Committee # 3 recommended that the respondent be suspended for six months. The respondent represented multiple parties who all had clear conflicts of interest. In doing so, the respondent violated Rule 1.7 and 8.4(d).
Please follow and like us:
Tweet