In re Vaughn

Supreme Court of Louisiana

In re Vaughn

701 So. 2d 145, 1997 La. LEXIS 2754, 1997 WL 590901

CourtSupreme Court of Louisiana

DecidedSeptember 19, 1997

DocketNo. 97-B-1862

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 701 So. 2d 145 (In re Vaughn) 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 Vaughn, 701 So. 2d 145, 1997 La. LEXIS 2754, 1997 WL 590901 (La. 1997).

Pincite

Opinion

In re Vaughn, David M.; — Plaintiffs); applying for reinstatement.

PER CURIAM.

*

On September 25, 1995, this court suspended petitioner, David M. Vaughn, from the practice of law for a period of thirty-six months, retroactive to the date of his interim suspension of June 24, 1993, based on his federal conviction for three counts of mail fraud. In Re: Vaughn, 95-0810 (La. 9/25/95), 660 So.2d 1202.

On December 12, 1996, petitioner filed for reinstatement, asserting that his suspension ended on June 23,1996. The Office of Disciplinary Counsel concurred in the petition for reinstatement. After oral argument before a board panel, the disciplinary board concluded that petitioner demonstrated to the satisfaction of the board that he possesses the requisite honesty and integrity to be reinstated to the practice of law and has demonstrated by clear and convincing evidence that he has satisfied the criteria for reinstatement set forth in Supreme Court Rule XIX, § 24.

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

Accordingly, it is ordered that the petition of David M. Vaughn, requesting reinstatement of his license to practice law, is hereby granted. All costs of these proceedings are assessed to petitioner.

REINSTATEMENT ORDERED.

VICTORY, TRAYLOR and KNOLL, JJ., would deny the reinstatement.

CALOGERO, C.J., not on panel. Rule IV, Part 2, § 3.

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

In re Vaughn, David M.; — Plaintiffs); applying for reinstatement.

PER CURIAM.

*

On September 25, 1995, this court suspended petitioner, David M. Vaughn, from the practice of law for a period of thirty-six months, retroactive to the date of his interim suspension of June 24, 1993, based on his federal conviction for three counts of mail fraud. In Re: Vaughn, 95-0810 (La. 9/25/95), 660 So.2d 1202.

On December 12, 1996, petitioner filed for reinstatement, asserting that his suspension ended on June 23,1996. The Office of Disciplinary Counsel concurred in the petition for reinstatement. After oral argument before a board panel, the disciplinary board concluded that petitioner demonstrated to the satisfaction of the board that he possesses the requisite honesty and integrity to be reinstated to the practice of law and has demonstrated by clear and convincing evidence that he has satisfied the criteria for reinstatement set forth in Supreme Court Rule XIX, § 24.

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

Accordingly, it is ordered that the petition of David M. Vaughn, requesting reinstatement of his license to practice law, is hereby granted. All costs of these proceedings are assessed to petitioner.

REINSTATEMENT ORDERED.

VICTORY, TRAYLOR and KNOLL, JJ., would deny the reinstatement.

CALOGERO, C.J., not on panel. Rule IV, Part 2, § 3.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

701 So. 2d 145, 1997 La. LEXIS 2754, 1997 WL 590901, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-vaughn-la-1997.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack