In re Monahan

Supreme Court of Louisiana

In re Monahan

932 So. 2d 678, 2006 La. LEXIS 2126, 2006 WL 1883400

CourtSupreme Court of Louisiana

DecidedJune 30, 2006

DocketNo. 2006-B-1541

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 932 So. 2d 678 (In re Monahan) 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 Monahan, 932 So. 2d 678, 2006 La. LEXIS 2126, 2006 WL 1883400 (La. 2006).

Pincite

Opinion

ATTORNEY DISCIPLINARY PROCEEDINGS

PER CURIAM.

The Office of Disciplinary Counsel (“ODC”) commenced an investigation into allegations that respondent neglected his client’s legal matter and failed to communicate with his client. Following the institution of formal charges, respondent and the ODC submitted a joint petition for consent discipline in which respondent admitted that his conduct violated Rules 1.3 and 1.4 of the Rules of Professional Conduct. Having reviewed the petition,

IT IS ORDERED that the Petition for Consent Discipline be accepted and that Kevin Patrick Monahan, Louisiana Bar Roll number 1978, be suspended from the practice of law for a period of six months, with all but forty-five days deferred, followed by a one-year period of supervised probation governed by the terms and conditions set forth in the Petition for Consent Discipline. Any failure of respondent to comply with the conditions of probation, or any misconduct during the probationary period, may be grounds for making the deferred portion of the suspension execu-tory, or imposing additional discipline, as appropriate.

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.

TRAYLOR, J., dissents and would remand for further investigation.

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

ATTORNEY DISCIPLINARY PROCEEDINGS

PER CURIAM.

The Office of Disciplinary Counsel (“ODC”) commenced an investigation into allegations that respondent neglected his client’s legal matter and failed to communicate with his client. Following the institution of formal charges, respondent and the ODC submitted a joint petition for consent discipline in which respondent admitted that his conduct violated Rules 1.3 and 1.4 of the Rules of Professional Conduct. Having reviewed the petition,

IT IS ORDERED that the Petition for Consent Discipline be accepted and that Kevin Patrick Monahan, Louisiana Bar Roll number 1978, be suspended from the practice of law for a period of six months, with all but forty-five days deferred, followed by a one-year period of supervised probation governed by the terms and conditions set forth in the Petition for Consent Discipline. Any failure of respondent to comply with the conditions of probation, or any misconduct during the probationary period, may be grounds for making the deferred portion of the suspension execu-tory, or imposing additional discipline, as appropriate.

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.

TRAYLOR, J., dissents and would remand for further investigation.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

932 So. 2d 678, 2006 La. LEXIS 2126, 2006 WL 1883400, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-monahan-la-2006.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack