In re Gonzalez

Supreme Court of Louisiana

In re Gonzalez

210 So. 3d 278, 2017 La. LEXIS 435

CourtSupreme Court of Louisiana

DecidedFebruary 24, 2017

DocketNO. 2017-B-0212

StatusPublished

This text of 210 So. 3d 278 (In re Gonzalez) 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 Gonzalez, 210 So. 3d 278, 2017 La. LEXIS 435 (La. 2017).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM

|7 The Office of Disciplinary Counsel (“ODC”) commenced an investigation into allegations that respondent failed to properly supervise a non-lawyer assistant and mishandled his client trust account. Prior to the filing of formal charges, respondent and the ODC submitted a joint petition for consent discipline, in which the parties stipulated that respondent has violated Rules 1.15(a), 5.3(b), and 8.4(a) of the Rules of Professional Conduct, and that the misconduct was negligent. Having reviewed the petition,

IT IS ORDERED that the Petition for Consent Discipline be accepted and that Romualdo Gonzalez, Louisiana Bar Roll number 6118, be and he hereby is publicly reprimanded.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that respondent shall enroll in and attend the Louisiana State Bar Association’s Ethics School and Trust Accounting School.

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.

Hughes, J., would reject the consent discipline.

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

PER CURIAM

|7 The Office of Disciplinary Counsel (“ODC”) commenced an investigation into allegations that respondent failed to properly supervise a non-lawyer assistant and mishandled his client trust account. Prior to the filing of formal charges, respondent and the ODC submitted a joint petition for consent discipline, in which the parties stipulated that respondent has violated Rules 1.15(a), 5.3(b), and 8.4(a) of the Rules of Professional Conduct, and that the misconduct was negligent. Having reviewed the petition,

IT IS ORDERED that the Petition for Consent Discipline be accepted and that Romualdo Gonzalez, Louisiana Bar Roll number 6118, be and he hereby is publicly reprimanded.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that respondent shall enroll in and attend the Louisiana State Bar Association’s Ethics School and Trust Accounting School.

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.

Hughes, J., would reject the consent discipline.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

210 So. 3d 278, 2017 La. LEXIS 435, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-gonzalez-la-2017.