In re Frank

Supreme Court of Louisiana

In re Frank

569 So. 2d 950, 1990 La. LEXIS 2730, 1990 WL 178140

CourtSupreme Court of Louisiana

DecidedNovember 16, 1990

DocketNo. 89-OB-1979

StatusPublished

This text of 569 So. 2d 950 (In re Frank) 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 Frank, 569 So. 2d 950, 1990 La. LEXIS 2730, 1990 WL 178140 (La. 1990).

Pincite

Opinion

In re Frank, Mack I.; — Plaintiff(s); applying for Reinstatement.

Motion to transfer and require refiling denied. The motion to transfer to the Disciplinary Board and require refiling is denied. Because respondent’s application for reinstatement after disbarment was filed some nine months prior to the effective date of the new Rule 19, the application should have been processed and should now be processed in accordance with the procedure set forth in former Article 15, Section 12 of the Articles of Incorporation of the Louisiana State Bar Association, with the Disciplinary Board to act in place of the Committee on Professional Responsibility.

DENNIS, J., would apply this Court’s current rules rather than its superseded rules to this proceeding for reinstatement.

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

In re Frank, Mack I.; — Plaintiff(s); applying for Reinstatement.

Motion to transfer and require refiling denied. The motion to transfer to the Disciplinary Board and require refiling is denied. Because respondent’s application for reinstatement after disbarment was filed some nine months prior to the effective date of the new Rule 19, the application should have been processed and should now be processed in accordance with the procedure set forth in former Article 15, Section 12 of the Articles of Incorporation of the Louisiana State Bar Association, with the Disciplinary Board to act in place of the Committee on Professional Responsibility.

DENNIS, J., would apply this Court’s current rules rather than its superseded rules to this proceeding for reinstatement.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

569 So. 2d 950, 1990 La. LEXIS 2730, 1990 WL 178140, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-frank-la-1990.