In re Douglas

Supreme Court of Louisiana

In re Douglas

275 So. 3d 870

Supreme Court of Louisiana·Decided June 26, 2019·No. NO. 2019-B-0984·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM

Respondent and the Office of Disciplinary Counsel submitted a joint petition for consent discipline, in which respondent acknowledges that he violated Rule 8.4(d) (engaging in conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice) of the Rules of Professional Conduct. Having reviewed the petition,

IT IS ORDERED that the Petition for Consent Discipline be accepted and that Donald C. Douglas, Jr., Louisiana Bar Roll number 22338, be and he hereby is publicly reprimanded.

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

PER CURIAM

Respondent and the Office of Disciplinary Counsel submitted a joint petition for consent discipline, in which respondent acknowledges that he violated Rule 8.4(d) (engaging in conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice) of the Rules of Professional Conduct. Having reviewed the petition,

IT IS ORDERED that the Petition for Consent Discipline be accepted and that Donald C. Douglas, Jr., Louisiana Bar Roll number 22338, be and he hereby is publicly reprimanded.

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.

In re Douglas, 275 So. 3d 870 (La. 2019).

Pincite

275 So. 3d 870 (In re Douglas) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.