In re Monroe

Supreme Court of Louisiana

In re Monroe

121 So. 3d 1199, 2013 WL 5411139, 2013 La. LEXIS 2072

CourtSupreme Court of Louisiana

DecidedSeptember 27, 2013

DocketNo. 2013-B-1817

StatusPublished

This text of 121 So. 3d 1199 (In re Monroe) 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 Monroe, 121 So. 3d 1199, 2013 WL 5411139, 2013 La. LEXIS 2072 (La. 2013).

Pincite

Opinion

ATTORNEY DISCIPLINARY PROCEEDINGS

PER CURIAM.

| Respondent misused his client trust account by keeping his earned fees and other personal funds in the account and paying his secretary’s salary directly from the 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) and (b) 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 William C. Monroe, Louisiana Bar Roll number 9555, be and he hereby is publicly reprimanded. It is further ordered that respondent shall attend the next available session of Trust Accounting School offered by the Louisiana State Bar Association’s Practice Assistance Counsel.

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 misused his client trust account by keeping his earned fees and other personal funds in the account and paying his secretary’s salary directly from the 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) and (b) 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 William C. Monroe, Louisiana Bar Roll number 9555, be and he hereby is publicly reprimanded. It is further ordered that respondent shall attend the next available session of Trust Accounting School offered by the Louisiana State Bar Association’s Practice Assistance Counsel.

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)

121 So. 3d 1199, 2013 WL 5411139, 2013 La. LEXIS 2072, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-monroe-la-2013.