Case ID: so3d_185/html/0733-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM, KNOLL,-J;,", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

In re Richard A. SCHWARTZ.
    No. 2016-B-0023.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    March 4, 2016.
   ATTORNEY DISCIPLINARY PROCEEDING^'

PER CURIAM,

hThe Office of Disciplinary Counsel (“ODC”) commenced- an investigation into allegations that respondent was arrested and charged with driving, under the influence of alcohol on three separate occasions. ■ Prior to the institution' of formal charges, respondent and the ODC'submit-ted a joint petition for consent discipline. Having Reviewed the petition,

' IT IS ORDERED that the Petition for Consent Discipline be accepted and that Richard A. Schwartz, Louisiana Bar Roll number 11853, be suspended from the practice of law for a period of thirty months, retroactive to March 6, 2013, the date of his interim suspension.

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.

KNOLL,-J., additionally concurs and assigns reasons... ,

KNOLL,-J;,

concurring with reasons:

|, Although I agree with the majority’s decision to aecept the consent discipline proposed by the parties, I.write separately to. emphasize respondent should not be reinstated to the practice of law unless and until he has presented clear and convincing evidence of. all of the reinstatement criteria, particularly Supreme Court Rule XIX, § 24(E)(3), which provides, in pertinent part:

Where alcohol or other drug abuse was a causative factor in the lawyer’s' misconduct, the lawyer shall not be reinstated or readmitted unless:
(a) the lawyer has pursued appropriate rehabilitative treatment;
(b) the lawyer has abstained from the use of alcohol or other drugs for at least one year; and
(c)the lawyer' is likely to continue to abstain from alcohol or other drugs,
[emphasis added].

Furthermore, in the event respondent is reinstated to the practice of law, he should be required to execute an appropriate recovery agreement with the Judges and Lawyers Assistance Program. Only through such continued monitoring can the court and public be assured that respondent has addressed his significant alcoholism problems and can maintain continued sobriety.