March 2020 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 March 2020.

Louisiana Supreme Court

  1. Connie P. Trieu. The court suspended the respondent for six months, deferred in its entirety subject to the condition that the respondent attend the Louisiana State Bar Association’s Trust Accounting School. The respondent failed to pay third parties and to fully disburse funds held in her trust account for substantial periods of time after closing associated transactions. In so doing, the respondent violated Rules 1.15(a), 1.15(b), and 1.15(d).
  2. Alphonse M. Thompson, Jr. The court suspended the respondent for three years. The respondent neglected a client’s legal matter, misled a client into thinking that a trial date was imminent, forged a judge’s signature on a fabricated order, and failed to expedite litigation. In so doing, the respondent violated Rules 1.3, 1.4(a), 1.4(b), 3.2, 8.4(a), 8.4(c), and 8.4(d).
  3. Ike Spears. The court publicly reprimanded the respondent. The respondent engaged in an inappropriate verbal exchange in open court. His conduct violated Rules 3.5(d) and 8.4(d).
  4. Raymond Fritz Niswanger. The court suspended the respondent for one year and one day. The respondent submitted a joint petition for consent discipline after the ODC commenced an investigation into allegations that the respondent was arrested for driving while intoxicated.
  5. Michael P. Ned. The court transferred the respondent to Disability Inactive Status and deferred all disciplinary proceedings until he resumes active status. The court issued no reasons for so doing.
  6. Tedrick K. Knightshead. The court suspended the respondent for one year and one day. The respondent submitted a joint petition for consent discipline in response to the ODC commencing an investigation into allegations that the respondent had inappropriate interactions with a college student intern who worked at his office, in violation of Rule 8.4(d).
  7. Willie R. Joseph, Jr. The court suspended the respondent on an interim basis. The court issued no reasons for so doing.
  8. William F. Janney. The court suspended the respondent for one year and one day. The respondent submitted a joint petition for consent discipline in response to the ODC commencing an investigation into allegations that the respondent was arrested for driving while intoxicated.
  9. Roy Joseph Richard, Jr. The court permanently disbarred the respondent. The respondent abandoned the representation of clients without cause after accepting funds. He also practiced law after being deemed ineligible to do so and ignored all disciplinary proceedings lodged against him. In so doing, the respondent violated Rules 1.1(b)(c), 1.3, 1.4(a)(b), 1.5(f)(5), 1.16(d), 3.2, 5.5(a), 8.1(b)(c), and 8.4 (a)(d).
  10. J. Renee Martin. The court permanently disbarred the respondent. The respondent neglected legal matters, failed to communicate with clients, failed to account for or return $27,000 in client funds, 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).

Louisiana Attorney Disciplinary Board

  1. Shane E. Romero. The board recommended that the court suspend the respondent for one year. The respondent pleaded guilty to one count of failing to file a complete financial disclosure report. In so doing, the respondent violated Rules 3.4(b), 8.4(a), 8.4(b), and 8.4(c).

LADB Hearing Committees

  1. Lucretia Patrice Pecantte. Hearing Committee #5 recommended that the court conditionally reinstate the respondent. The respondent previously pleaded guilty to a failure to file a tax return and, in connection with her guilty plea, she admitted that she engaged in acts which constituted the felony crimes of tax evasion and filing false tax returns. As a result, the court previously suspended her for two years.
  2. George Randy Trelles. Hearing Committee #15 recommended that the court suspend the respondent for one year and one day, with six months deferred subject to a period of probation to run concurrently with the respondent’s current recovery agreement with the Judges and Lawyers Assistance Program. The respondent practiced law while ineligible to do so, failed to communicate with a client, ineffectively represented a client, failed to refund fees, and was arrested for driving while intoxicated. In so doing, the respondent violated Rules 1.3, 1.4, 1.5(f), 5.5(a), 8.1(c), and 8.4(b).
  3. Lane N. Bennet. Hearing Committee #40 recommended that the court disbar the respondent. The respondent represented a client when a conflict of interest existed, failed to to provide pertinent information verbally or in writing to the client, failed to give the client the opportunity to have transactions reviewed by independent counsel, failed to obtain the consent of the client in writing, and engaged in conduct which involved dishonesty, deceit and misrepresentation, all of which caused substantial harm. In so doing, the respondent violated Rules 1.7, 1.8, and 8.4.
  4. Dwan S. Hilferty. Hearing Committee #53 recommended that the court suspend the respondent for one year and one day, with all but 90 days deferred. The respondent neglected client matters, failed to diligently represent clients, failed to expedite litigation, and failed to communicate with clients. In so doing, the respondent violated rules 1.3, 1.4, 3.2, and 8.4(d).
  5. Felix Anthony DeJean, IV. Hearing Committee #15 recommended that the court grant the respondent’s petition for reinstatement. The court previously suspended the respondent for one year and one day as a result of being convicted of the misdemeanor crime of simple battery.
Please follow and like us:
Tweet