In re Stephens

Supreme Court of Louisiana

In re Stephens

645 So. 2d 1133, 1994 La. LEXIS 2749, 1994 WL 658640

CourtSupreme Court of Louisiana

DecidedNovember 18, 1994

DocketNo. 94-B-1924

StatusPublished

Cited by8 cases

This text of 645 So. 2d 1133 (In re Stephens) 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 Stephens, 645 So. 2d 1133, 1994 La. LEXIS 2749, 1994 WL 658640 (La. 1994).

Pincite

Opinion

DISCIPLINARY PROCEEDINGS

|1PER CURIAM.¹

Respondent, Eddie L. Stephens, was formally charged with failing to keep his client informed and notarizing a forged affidavit before filing it into the court record, in violation of Rules 1.1(a), 1.3, 1.4, 3.3(a), 3.4(b), 4.1(a) and (b), and 8.4(a), (b), (c), and (d).

The facts developed at the hearing indicated that respondent was retained to defend the St. Michael’s Spiritual Temple of Faith of Baton Rouge in connection with a suit for non-payment of a loan. After filing an answer in the suit, respondent had very little contact with his client. Later in the litigation, plaintiff filed a motion for summary judgment. In order to create a material issue of fact, respondent notarized and caused to be filed into the civil litigation an affidavit purporting to be the sworn statement of the Reverend Dorothy Powell. Shortly after formal charges were filed, respondent began serving a one-year suspension for an unrelated disciplinary violation involving the commingling and conversion of client funds.

In light of the above evidence, the hearing committee recommended that respondent be suspended for one year and one day, while the disciplinary board recommended that respondent be suspended for 18 months.

Upon review of the record of the disciplinary board’s findings and recommendations, and the record filed herein, it is the decision of the court that the disciplinary board’s recommendations be adopted.

Accordingly, it is ordered that Eddie L. Stephens be suspended from the practice of law for a period of 18 months to run consecutively from the suspension he began serving on October 1, |21993 in the matter of In Re: Eddie L. Stephens, Supreme Court No. 93-B-0939. All costs of this proceeding are assessed to respondent, and reinstatement is conditioned upon their payment.

SUSPENSION ORDERED.

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

DISCIPLINARY PROCEEDINGS

|1PER CURIAM.¹

Respondent, Eddie L. Stephens, was formally charged with failing to keep his client informed and notarizing a forged affidavit before filing it into the court record, in violation of Rules 1.1(a), 1.3, 1.4, 3.3(a), 3.4(b), 4.1(a) and (b), and 8.4(a), (b), (c), and (d).

The facts developed at the hearing indicated that respondent was retained to defend the St. Michael’s Spiritual Temple of Faith of Baton Rouge in connection with a suit for non-payment of a loan. After filing an answer in the suit, respondent had very little contact with his client. Later in the litigation, plaintiff filed a motion for summary judgment. In order to create a material issue of fact, respondent notarized and caused to be filed into the civil litigation an affidavit purporting to be the sworn statement of the Reverend Dorothy Powell. Shortly after formal charges were filed, respondent began serving a one-year suspension for an unrelated disciplinary violation involving the commingling and conversion of client funds.

In light of the above evidence, the hearing committee recommended that respondent be suspended for one year and one day, while the disciplinary board recommended that respondent be suspended for 18 months.

Upon review of the record of the disciplinary board’s findings and recommendations, and the record filed herein, it is the decision of the court that the disciplinary board’s recommendations be adopted.

Accordingly, it is ordered that Eddie L. Stephens be suspended from the practice of law for a period of 18 months to run consecutively from the suspension he began serving on October 1, |21993 in the matter of In Re: Eddie L. Stephens, Supreme Court No. 93-B-0939. All costs of this proceeding are assessed to respondent, and reinstatement is conditioned upon their payment.

SUSPENSION ORDERED.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

645 So. 2d 1133, 1994 La. LEXIS 2749, 1994 WL 658640, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-stephens-la-1994.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack