September 2021 Discipline

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

Louisiana Supreme Court

1. Joseph N. Mayer, III. The court suspended respondent from the practice of law for one year and one day. The respondent, driving heavily intoxicated with a suspended license and no vehicle insurance, caused two vehicular accidents and fled the scene. In doing so, the respondent violated Rules 8.4(a) and 8.4(b) of the Rules of Professional Conduct.
2. Jesse P. Lagarde. The court granted a joint petition for consent discipline and suspended the respondent from the practice of law for six months, fully deferred. The respondent neglected a legal matter and failed to communicate with his client. In doing so, the respondent violated Rules 1.3, 1.4, 1.16(d), 3.2, and 8.1(c) of the Rules of Professional Conduct.
3. William Francis Henderson. The court remanded the case to the Hearing Committee. The court assigned no reasons for so doing.
4. Andrew James Murphy. The court granted a joint petition for consent discipline and suspended respondent for one year and one day, fully deferred. The respondent drove while intoxicated.
5. Shalita Kelly Sanders. The court granted a joint petition for consent discipline, publicly reprimanded respondent, and placed respondent on two years unsupervised probation. The respondent mishandled her client trust account.
6. Sangbahn Y. Scere. The court reinstated the respondent to the practice of law. The respondent was previously suspended for two years.
7. Jerome M. Volk, Jr. The court suspended respondent from the practice of law for three years. The respondent neglected legal matters, failed to communicate with a client, failed to timely remit funds owed to a client and a third party, converted client funds, and failed to cooperate with the ODC in its investigations. In doing so, the respondent violated Rules 1.3, 1.4, 1.15(a), 1.15(d), 8.1(b), 8.1(c), 8.4(a), and 8.4(c) of the Rules of Professional Conduct.

LADB Hearing Committees

1. Alan Scott Killen. Hearing Committee #3 recommended that the court suspend the respondent for one year and one day. The respondent failed to complete a client’s expungement. The respondent also converted the client’s funds to his own use. In doing so, the respondent violated Rules 1.3, 1.4, 1.5(f)(5), 1.16(d), and 8.1(c).
2. Richard Forrest White. Hearing Committee #31 recommended that the court permanently disbar respondent. The respondent neglected legal matters, failed to communicate with a client, and failed to cooperate with the ODC in its investigation. Additionally, the district attorney charged the respondent with possession of cocaine and drug paraphernalia. In doing so, the respondent violated rules 1.3, 1.4(a)(3)(4), 3.4(c), 8.1(c), 8.4 (b), 8.4(c), and 8.4(d).