Court Opinion

ID: 9670100
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-24 03:14:36.076879+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:16:02.457248
License: Public Domain

SANDERS, Justice
(concurring in part and dissenting in part).
I fully concur in the Conclusion that the respondent attorney has been guilty of professional misconduct that warrants disciplinary action. However, the record reflects that this is the first complaint made against him in twenty years of professional service. Restitution has been made. In view of these and the other circumstances of this case, I am of the opinion that suspension of the respondent for a period of two years (as recommended by the Commissioner) is the proper disposition. Such a suspension in the instant case will, in my opinion, achieve the primary objective of all disciplinary proceedings against members of the legal profession: the protection of the courts and the public. No greater penalty should be imposed than that which is required to accomplish this purpose. See In Re Craven, 204 La. 486, 15 So.2d 861 and In Re Novo, 200 La. 833, 9 So.2d 201.