In re Ferrara

Supreme Court of Louisiana

In re Ferrara

167 So. 3d 618, 2015 La. LEXIS 1481, 2015 WL 3994278

CourtSupreme Court of Louisiana

DecidedJune 30, 2015

DocketNo. 2015-B-1196

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 167 So. 3d 618 (In re Ferrara) 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 Ferrara, 167 So. 3d 618, 2015 La. LEXIS 1481, 2015 WL 3994278 (La. 2015).

Pincite

Opinion

ATTORNEY DISCIPLINARY PROCEEDING

PER CURIAM.

pThe Office of Disciplinary Counsel (“ODC”) commenced an investigation into allegations that respondent promised or guaranteed a particular result or outcome of a representation. This misconduct occurred in the same time frame as the misconduct forming the basis of respondent’s earlier disciplinary matter, wherein he was suspended from the practice of law for one year and one day. Prior to the filing of new 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 Frank J. Ferrara, Jr., Louisiana Bar Roll number 5539, be adjudged guilty of additional violations which warrant discipline and which may be considered in the event [619]*619he applies for reinstatement from his suspension in In re: Ferrara, 13-0722 (La.4/26/13), 116 So.3d 654, after becoming eligible to do so.

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.

pThe Office of Disciplinary Counsel (“ODC”) commenced an investigation into allegations that respondent promised or guaranteed a particular result or outcome of a representation. This misconduct occurred in the same time frame as the misconduct forming the basis of respondent’s earlier disciplinary matter, wherein he was suspended from the practice of law for one year and one day. Prior to the filing of new 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 Frank J. Ferrara, Jr., Louisiana Bar Roll number 5539, be adjudged guilty of additional violations which warrant discipline and which may be considered in the event [619]*619he applies for reinstatement from his suspension in In re: Ferrara, 13-0722 (La.4/26/13), 116 So.3d 654, after becoming eligible to do so.

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)

167 So. 3d 618, 2015 La. LEXIS 1481, 2015 WL 3994278, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-ferrara-la-2015.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack