In re Arata

Supreme Court of Louisiana

In re Arata

182 So. 3d 36, 2015 La. LEXIS 2618, 2015 WL 8683300

CourtSupreme Court of Louisiana

DecidedNovember 6, 2015

DocketNo. 2015-B-1837

StatusPublished

This text of 182 So. 3d 36 (In re Arata) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Louisiana primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

In re Arata, 182 So. 3d 36, 2015 La. LEXIS 2618, 2015 WL 8683300 (La. 2015).

Pincite

Opinion

: ATTORNEY DISCIPLINARY PROCEEDING

PER CURIAM.

| Respondent and the Office of Disciplinary Counsel (“ODC”) submitted a joint petition for consent discipline, in which respondent acknowledges that he violated the following provisions of the Rules of Professional Conduct: Rules 1.4,. 1.8(h), 8.4(a), and 8.4(c). . Having reviewed the petition,

IT IS ORDERED that the Petition for Consent Discipline be accepted and that William Harrell Arata, Louisiana Bar Roll number 23431, be suspended from the practice of law for a period of one year and one day, with all but six months deferred.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that all costs and expenses in the matter are assessed against respondent,, in accordance with. Supreme Court Rule XIX, § 10.1, with legal interest to commence thirty days from the date of finality of this court’s judgment until paid.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

: ATTORNEY DISCIPLINARY PROCEEDING

PER CURIAM.

| Respondent and the Office of Disciplinary Counsel (“ODC”) submitted a joint petition for consent discipline, in which respondent acknowledges that he violated the following provisions of the Rules of Professional Conduct: Rules 1.4,. 1.8(h), 8.4(a), and 8.4(c). . Having reviewed the petition,

IT IS ORDERED that the Petition for Consent Discipline be accepted and that William Harrell Arata, Louisiana Bar Roll number 23431, be suspended from the practice of law for a period of one year and one day, with all but six months deferred.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that all costs and expenses in the matter are assessed against respondent,, in accordance with. Supreme Court Rule XIX, § 10.1, with legal interest to commence thirty days from the date of finality of this court’s judgment until paid.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

182 So. 3d 36, 2015 La. LEXIS 2618, 2015 WL 8683300, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-arata-la-2015.