Opinion ID: 1681334
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Mitigation Hearing

Text: Because respondent did not dispute the ODC's allegations of misconduct, the hearing before the committee was limited to the issue of mitigation. The committee received documentary evidence submitted by both respondent and the ODC. The ODC presented testimony from five of respondent's former law partners. These witnesses testified they believed that respondent was living beyond his means and that his lifestyle was not consistent with the income he earned as an attorney. Respondent introduced medical reports and testimony in support of his contention that his misconduct was caused by a compulsive disorder. In particular, respondent relied on testimony from Chester Scrignar, M.D., a psychiatrist who had treated him since March 2004. [5] Dr. Scrignar diagnosed respondent as suffering from an impulse control disorder, not otherwise specified, and a major depressive disorder. Dr. Scrignar testified on direct examination that impulse control disorders involve the frontal lobe of the brain as well as a behavior component. Dr. Scrignar testified that in his opinion, respondent's diversion of funds that should have gone to his law firms is not a purely criminal act, but was driven by an impulse to gain relief from the physiological discomfort he was then experiencing. Dr. Scrignar acknowledged that there was a certain amount of premeditation involved in respondent's conduct, but nevertheless there was no question in his mind that a causal relationship existed between respondent's conduct and his impulse control disorder. Respondent also presented testimony from Richard Roniger, M.D., a psychiatrist who evaluated him solely for purposes of the disciplinary hearing. [6] Dr. Roniger diagnosed respondent as suffering from obsessive-compulsive disorder and dysthymic disorder. Dr. Roniger testified that because the amount of money respondent took from the law firms was relatively insignificant compared to his income, he believed respondent was seeking fulfillment, rather than money. On cross-examination, however, Dr. Roniger admitted that he was unaware that respondent appeared to have been living a lifestyle that was substantially higher than he could afford on his salary. In his own testimony before the committee, respondent admitted that he knew his actions were wrong. However, he explained that he diverted money from his law firms in order to make himself feel better when he had bad feelings inside of him. Respondent testified that he has changed immensely since he began treating with Dr. Scrignar. He further testified he voluntarily signed a two-year recovery agreement with the Lawyers Assistance Program (LAP) and regularly attended meetings with a depression support group in New Orleans sponsored by LAP.