In re Sarama

Supreme Court of Louisiana

In re Sarama

65 So. 3d 151, 2011 La. LEXIS 1506, 2011 WL 2507077

CourtSupreme Court of Louisiana

DecidedJune 24, 2011

DocketNo. 2011-B-1072

StatusPublished

This text of 65 So. 3d 151 (In re Sarama) 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 Sarama, 65 So. 3d 151, 2011 La. LEXIS 1506, 2011 WL 2507077 (La. 2011).

Pincite

Opinion

ATTORNEY DISCIPLINARY PROCEEDINGS

PER CURIAM.

*

hThe Office of Disciplinary Counsel (“ODC”) commenced an investigation into allegations that respondent failed to promptly remit funds owed to a third-party medical provider. Respondent subsequently failed to cooperate with the ODC in its investigation of the complaint filed against him. This misconduct occurred in the same time frame as the misconduct forming the basis of respondent’s earlier disciplinary matters. Prior to the filing of new formal charges, respondent and the ODC submitted a joint petition for consent discipline. Having reviewed the petition,

IT IS ORDERED that the Petition for Consent Discipline be accepted and that Kenneth F. Sarama, Louisiana Bar Roll [152]*152number 1583, be adjudged guilty of additional violations which warrant discipline and which may be considered in the event he applies for readmission from his disbarment in In re: Sarama, 09-2101 (La.2/5/10), 26 So.3d 770, after becoming eligible to do so.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that respondent shall make restitution to Dr. George Anthon, Jr. as set forth in the Petition for Consent Discipline.

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.

Chief Justice Kimball not participating in the opinion.

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

ATTORNEY DISCIPLINARY PROCEEDINGS

PER CURIAM.

*

hThe Office of Disciplinary Counsel (“ODC”) commenced an investigation into allegations that respondent failed to promptly remit funds owed to a third-party medical provider. Respondent subsequently failed to cooperate with the ODC in its investigation of the complaint filed against him. This misconduct occurred in the same time frame as the misconduct forming the basis of respondent’s earlier disciplinary matters. Prior to the filing of new formal charges, respondent and the ODC submitted a joint petition for consent discipline. Having reviewed the petition,

IT IS ORDERED that the Petition for Consent Discipline be accepted and that Kenneth F. Sarama, Louisiana Bar Roll [152]*152number 1583, be adjudged guilty of additional violations which warrant discipline and which may be considered in the event he applies for readmission from his disbarment in In re: Sarama, 09-2101 (La.2/5/10), 26 So.3d 770, after becoming eligible to do so.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that respondent shall make restitution to Dr. George Anthon, Jr. as set forth in the Petition for Consent Discipline.

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.

Chief Justice Kimball not participating in the opinion.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

65 So. 3d 151, 2011 La. LEXIS 1506, 2011 WL 2507077, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-sarama-la-2011.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack