In re Longo

Supreme Court of Louisiana

In re Longo

110 So. 3d 129, 2013 WL 1298106, 2013 La. LEXIS 584

CourtSupreme Court of Louisiana

DecidedApril 1, 2013

DocketNo. 2013-B-0482

StatusPublished

This text of 110 So. 3d 129 (In re Longo) 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 Longo, 110 So. 3d 129, 2013 WL 1298106, 2013 La. LEXIS 584 (La. 2013).

Pincite

Opinion

ATTORNEY DISCIPLINARY PROCEEDINGS

PER CURIAM.

Respondent was convicted of driving under the influence of alcohol and of a domestic violence charge. In addition, the Office of Disciplinary Counsel (“ODC”) commenced an investigation into allegations that he commingled client funds with personal funds in 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 violated Rules 1.15 (safekeeping property of clients or third persons) and 8.4(b) (commission of a criminal act that reflects adversely on the lawyer’s honesty, trustworthiness, or fitness as a lawyer) of the Rules of Professional Conduct. Having reviewed the petition,

IT IS ORDERED that the Petition for Consent Discipline be accepted and that Steven B. Longo, Louisiana Bar Roll number 30919, be suspended from the practice of law for a period of eighteen months, retroactive to October 14, 2011, the date of his interim suspension.

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 PROCEEDINGS

PER CURIAM.

Respondent was convicted of driving under the influence of alcohol and of a domestic violence charge. In addition, the Office of Disciplinary Counsel (“ODC”) commenced an investigation into allegations that he commingled client funds with personal funds in 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 violated Rules 1.15 (safekeeping property of clients or third persons) and 8.4(b) (commission of a criminal act that reflects adversely on the lawyer’s honesty, trustworthiness, or fitness as a lawyer) of the Rules of Professional Conduct. Having reviewed the petition,

IT IS ORDERED that the Petition for Consent Discipline be accepted and that Steven B. Longo, Louisiana Bar Roll number 30919, be suspended from the practice of law for a period of eighteen months, retroactive to October 14, 2011, the date of his interim suspension.

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)

110 So. 3d 129, 2013 WL 1298106, 2013 La. LEXIS 584, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-longo-la-2013.