November 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 November 2020.

Louisiana Supreme Court

  1. Erin L. Tyrer. The court accepted a joint ODC-respondent petition for consent discipline and suspended the respondent on an interim basis. The court issued no written reasons for so doing.
  2. Michael Brian Rennix. The court permanently disbarred the respondent. The respondent neglected legal matters, failed to communicate with clients, failed to refund unearned fees, converted client funds, practiced law while ineligible to do so, engaged in dishonest conduct, and failed to cooperate with the ODC in its investigation. In so doing, the respondent violated Rules 1.3, 1.4, 1.5, 1.15(a)(c), 3.3(a)(1), 8.1(c), 8.4(a), 8.4(b), 8.4(c), and 8.4(d).
  3. Elzey Jeffrey Perrilloux. The court accepted a joint ODC-respondent petition for consent discipline and suspended the respondent on an interim basis. The court issued no written reasons for so doing.
  4. Robert Wesley Malone. The court suspended the respondent for two years. The respondent neglected legal matters, failed to communicate with clients, failed to return client files upon request, failed to provide accountings and refunds of unearned fees upon request, and failed to cooperate with the ODC in its investigations. In so doing, the respondent violated Rules 1.3, 1.4, 1.5, 8.1(c), and 8.4(a).
  5. Nicholas Anthony Bellard. The court disbarred the respondent. The respondent neglected legal matters, failed to communicate with clients, converted client funds, overdrew his trust account, failed to maintain records of his trust account, failed to properly withdraw from representations, and failed to cooperate with the ODC in its investigation. The respondent’s behavior violated Rules 1.3, 1.4, 1.5, 1.16, 3.2, 8.1(c), and 8.4(a).
  6. Sally Harrison Longmire Hingel. The court permanently disbarred the respondent. The respondent plead guilty to possession with intent to distribute marijuana. The respondent was previously disbarred in 2019 for failing to perform any services for a client, misleading a client about the status of her case, soliciting and purchasing prescription medication from a client, and failing to cooperate with the ODC in its investigation.
  7. Ashley Johnson Greenhouse. The court accepted a joint ODC-respondent petition for consent discipline and suspended the respondent for one year and one day. The respondent neglected a legal matter, failed to communicate with a client, inappropriately attempted to settle a malpractice claim with a client, and failed to return a client’s file upon request. In so doing, the respondent violated Rules 1.3, 1.4, 1.8, 1.16, 8.4(a), and 8.4(d).
  8. Rudy W. Gorrell, Jr. The court publicly reprimanded the respondent. The respondent made statements to a witness in a case that caused them to feel intimidated. The respondent’s behavior violated Rules 4.4(a), 8.4(a), and 8.4(d).
  9. Charles Kramer Diel. The court accepted a joint ODC-respondent petition for consent discipline and suspended the respondent for one year and one day. The respondent was arrested on charges of operating a vehicle while under the influence of alcohol, reckless operation of a vehicle, operating a vehicle with improper headlamps, and improper lane usage. In so doing, the respondent violated Rules 8.4(a) and 8.4(b).
  10. Stephen A. Jefferson. The court considered a Petition for Interim Suspension for Threat of Harm filed by the Office of Disciplinary Counsel and suspended the respondent on an interim basis. The court issued no written reasons for so doing.

Louisiana Attorney Disciplinary Board

  1. Cecilia F. Abadie. The board recommended that the court suspend the respondent for one year and one day. The respondent made unsupported allegations that a judge colluded with a party in litigation. In so doing, the respondent violated Rules 1.1, 8.2 and 8.4(a).
  2. Brad Allen Guillory. The board dismissed the formal charges against the respondent.
  3. Joseph Nelson Mayer, III. The board recommended that the court suspend the respondent for one year and one day. The respondent was arrested and charged with DWI, Hit and Run, and Driving Under Suspension. In so doing, the respondent violated Rules 8.4(a) and 8.4(b).

LADB Hearing Committee

  1. Kemic Alan Smothers. Hearing Committee #24 recommended that the court suspend the respondent for one year and one day. The respondent collected legal fees for services while he was ineligible to practice law. In so doing, the respondent violated Rules 1.1(b), (c), 5.5 (a), (e)(3), and 8.4(a).
  2. Daniel E. Becnel, III. Hearing Committee #8 recommended that the court reinstate the respondent. The respondent met the procedural requirements for reinstatement after previously being suspended for one year and one day.
  3. Hilliard Charles Fazande, III. Hearing Committee #46 recommended that the court permanently disbar the respondent. The respondent practiced law while ineligible to do so, failed to communicate with clients, failed to respond to the ODC investigation, failed to return an unearned fee, and abandoned a case. In so doing, the respondent violated Rules 1.1, 1.3, 1.4, 1.5, 1.16, 1.16(a)(1), 1.16(c)(d), 5.5(a), 8.1(c), and 8.4(c).
  4. Michael Wayne Kelly. Hearing Committee #17 recommended that the court grant the respondent’s application for reinstatement of license to practice law subject to terms of probation. The respondent met the procedural requirements for reinstatement after previously being disbarred.
  5. Kimuel W. Lee. Hearing Committee #62 recommended that the court grant the respondent’s application for reinstatement of license to practice law. The respondent met the procedural requirements for reinstatement after previously being suspended for two years in 2012.
  6. Michael D. Cox. Hearing Committee #26 recommended that the court permanently disbar the respondent. The respondent filed frivolous lawsuits and engaged in the unauthorized practice of serving as a Notary Public for which he was convicted of Attempted Felony Theft and ordered to pay $160,000 in restitution. In so doing, the respondent violated Rules 3.1, 3.4(c), 8.2(a), 8.4(a), (b), (c), and (d).
Please follow and like us:
Tweet