Opinion ID: 2534822
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 9

Heading: Count IIIThe LeBouef Matter

Text: In 2004, Emerite LeBouef retained respondent to represent her grandson, Glenn Ray LeBouef, in criminal cases pending against him in St. Mary, Lafayette, and Terrebonne Parishes. In the course of the representation, Ms. LeBouef delivered to respondent six checks totaling $56,863 to cover his attorney's fees and the restitution to be paid to her grandson's victims in the criminal cases. Rather than deposit these sums into a client trust account, respondent endorsed Ms. LeBouef's checks and cashed them or exchanged them for cashier's checks. With the exception of one payment of $2,237.50 forwarded to the Lafayette Parish District Attorney's Office, respondent did not remit the restitution due to Mr. LeBouef's victims and did not otherwise complete the representations he was retained to handle. [6] Moreover, following respondent's interim suspension from the practice of law on November 16, 2005, he failed to advise his client or the court he could not practice law, and he did not file a motion to withdraw as Mr. LeBouef's counsel of record until January 23, 2006. The ODC alleged respondent's conduct in the LeBouef matter violated the following provisions of the Rules of Professional Conduct: Rules 1.2(a), 1.3, 1.4, 1.15, 1.16(a), 3.3 (candor toward the tribunal), 5.5(a) (engaging in the unauthorized practice of law), 8.4(a), 8.4(c), and 8.4(d). The ODC also alleged respondent's conduct constituted a violation of Supreme Court Rule XIX, § 26, which requires a lawyer who is placed on interim suspension to notify all clients, adverse parties, and opposing counsel of his suspension and his disqualification to act as a lawyer after the effective date of the court's order. The rule further requires the lawyer to return client property, refund unearned fees, and withdraw from pending representations.