Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

In re Terrell

Supreme Court of Louisiana

May 1, 2015

IN RE: JESSE PHILLIP TERRELL, JR

IN RE: Disciplinary Counsel; Jesse Philip Terrell, Jr.; - Other(s); Applying For Joint Petition for Consent Discipline.

Joint petition for consent discipline accepted.

Bernette J. Johnson, Jeannette Theriot Knoll, John L. Weimer, Greg G. Guidry, Jefferson D. Hughes, III. CLARK J., CRICHTON, J., dissents and assigns reasons.

OPINION

ATTORNEY DISCIPLINARY PROCEEDING

PER CURIAM

The Office of Disciplinary Counsel (" ODC" ) commenced an investigation into allegations tat respondent failed to properly supervise a non-lawyer employee, allowing the employee to commingle and convert client funds. Prior to the filing of formal charges, respondent and the ODC submitted a joint petition for consent discipline. Having reviewed the petition,

IT IS ORDERED that the Petition for Consent Discipline be accepted and that Jesse Phillip Terrell, Jr., Louisiana Bar Roll number 1147, be suspended from the practice of law for a period of one year and one day. It is further ordered that this suspension shall be deferred in its entirety and that respondent shall be placed on probation for a period of five years, subject to the conditions set forth in the petition for consent discipline. Any failure of respondent to comply with the conditions of probation, or any misconduct during the probationary period, may be grounds for making the deferred suspension executory, or imposing additional discipline, as appropriate.

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.

DISSENT

CLARK J., dissents and assigns reasons:

I respectfully dissent. I find the sanction imposed upon respondent too harsh. I do not find that the respondent was even

Page 239

negligent. All agree that he did not even cause harm to the public. The actual harm was caused by criminal conduct of a third person. The only harm was to respondent. In light of the significant mitigating factors present, I am not in favor of any punishment that exceeds a public reprimand. Accordingly, I would reject the petition for consent discipline.

CRICHTON, J., dissents and assigns reasons:

respectfully dissent. Upon close examination of the record, including the unique circumstances presented, I believe that a one year and one day deferred suspension is unduly harsh and a five-year probationary period is unwarranted. Therefore, I would reject the petition for consent discipline.


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.