In re Bloom

Supreme Court of Louisiana

In re Bloom

103 So. 3d 357, 2012 La. LEXIS 3086, 2012 WL 5834934

CourtSupreme Court of Louisiana

DecidedNovember 16, 2012

DocketNo. 2012-B-2298

StatusPublished

This text of 103 So. 3d 357 (In re Bloom) 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 Bloom, 103 So. 3d 357, 2012 La. LEXIS 3086, 2012 WL 5834934 (La. 2012).

Pincite

Opinion

| ATTORNEY DISCIPLINARY PROCEEDINGS

PER CURIAM

*

The Office of Disciplinary Counsel (“ODC”) commenced an investigation into allegations that respondent failed to adequately maintain the financial records of his client trust account, which resulted in a negligent conversion of funds. Prior to the institution of formal charges, respondent and the ODC submitted a joint petition for consent discipline. Having reviewed the petition,

IT IS ORDERED that the Petition for Consent Discipline be accepted and that Seth J. Bloom, Louisiana Bar Roll number 28498, be suspended from the practice of law for a period of one year and one day. This suspension shall be deferred in its entirety, subject to respondent’s successful completion of a two-year period of supervised probation governed by the terms and conditions set forth in the Petition for Consent Discipline. The probationary period shall commence from the date respondent, the probation monitor, and the ODC execute a formal probation plan. Any failure of respondent to comply with the conditions of probation, or any misconduct during the probationary period, may be grounds for making the deferred suspension executory, or imposing additional discipline, as appropriate.

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.

Chief Justice Kimball not participating in the opinion.

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

| ATTORNEY DISCIPLINARY PROCEEDINGS

PER CURIAM

*

The Office of Disciplinary Counsel (“ODC”) commenced an investigation into allegations that respondent failed to adequately maintain the financial records of his client trust account, which resulted in a negligent conversion of funds. Prior to the institution of formal charges, respondent and the ODC submitted a joint petition for consent discipline. Having reviewed the petition,

IT IS ORDERED that the Petition for Consent Discipline be accepted and that Seth J. Bloom, Louisiana Bar Roll number 28498, be suspended from the practice of law for a period of one year and one day. This suspension shall be deferred in its entirety, subject to respondent’s successful completion of a two-year period of supervised probation governed by the terms and conditions set forth in the Petition for Consent Discipline. The probationary period shall commence from the date respondent, the probation monitor, and the ODC execute a formal probation plan. Any failure of respondent to comply with the conditions of probation, or any misconduct during the probationary period, may be grounds for making the deferred suspension executory, or imposing additional discipline, as appropriate.

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.

Chief Justice Kimball not participating in the opinion.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

103 So. 3d 357, 2012 La. LEXIS 3086, 2012 WL 5834934, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-bloom-la-2012.