In Re Washington

Supreme Court of Louisiana

In Re Washington

46 So. 3d 1251, 2010 La. LEXIS 2363, 2010 WL 4367001

CourtSupreme Court of Louisiana

DecidedNovember 5, 2010

Docket2010-B-2257

StatusPublished

This text of 46 So. 3d 1251 (In Re Washington) 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 Washington, 46 So. 3d 1251, 2010 La. LEXIS 2363, 2010 WL 4367001 (La. 2010).

Pincite

Opinion

ATTORNEY DISCIPLINARY PROCEEDINGS

PER CURIAM. *

The Office of Disciplinary Counsel (“ODC”) commenced an investigation into allegations that respondent “pre-nota-rized” assignment of insurance benefits forms, thereby misrepresenting that the document was executed before her by the signer, whose identity she verified. Prior to the filing of formal charges, respondent and the ODC submitted a joint petition for consent discipline, in which the parties stipulated respondent has violated Rule 8.4(c) (conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit, or misrepresentation) of the Rules of Professional Conduct. Having reviewed the petition,

IT IS ORDERED that the Petition for Consent Discipline be accepted and that Yumeaka Robinson Washington, Louisiana Bar Roll number 22570, be and she hereby is publicly reprimanded.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED 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. *

The Office of Disciplinary Counsel (“ODC”) commenced an investigation into allegations that respondent “pre-nota-rized” assignment of insurance benefits forms, thereby misrepresenting that the document was executed before her by the signer, whose identity she verified. Prior to the filing of formal charges, respondent and the ODC submitted a joint petition for consent discipline, in which the parties stipulated respondent has violated Rule 8.4(c) (conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit, or misrepresentation) of the Rules of Professional Conduct. Having reviewed the petition,

IT IS ORDERED that the Petition for Consent Discipline be accepted and that Yumeaka Robinson Washington, Louisiana Bar Roll number 22570, be and she hereby is publicly reprimanded.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED 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)

46 So. 3d 1251, 2010 La. LEXIS 2363, 2010 WL 4367001, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-washington-la-2010.