Court: Supreme Court of Louisiana; October 15, 1984; Louisiana; State Supreme Court
Frank J. Larre was subjected to disciplinary action by the Louisiana State Bar Association for professional misconduct involving five specifications from three incidents. The Supreme Court of Louisiana found that Larre committed these acts and imposed a six-month suspension from practicing law.
In the first incident, he represented three clients in personal injury claims, settled the cases for a total of $4,735.00, but failed to disburse the funds, instead commingling and converting the money for personal use. In the second incident, he settled claims for another three clients, receiving $6,900.00, which he also failed to disburse and misappropriated. His trust account was seized in March 1982 due to a $2,000 debt, during which he withdrew funds for personal expenses.
Additionally, Larre was retained in March 1981 to file a bankruptcy petition and received a $300 advance fee, but he did not perform the work or communicate with the client, nor did he return the fee.
Larre presented evidence of significant emotional disturbances stemming from traumatic personal events, including the murder of his father-in-law and subsequent family issues, which contributed to his misconduct. He received psychiatric treatment and was diagnosed with severe depression, affecting his judgment and concentration. Despite these challenges, it was noted that he has since rehabilitated and is capable of practicing responsibly. Larre has reimbursed his clients, which, along with the absence of prior disciplinary actions, was considered as mitigating factors in the proceedings.
In the case of Louisiana State Bar Ass'n v. Larre', the court reaffirms that lawyer disciplinary proceedings aim to protect the public, uphold justice, and maintain professional standards as outlined in the Code of Professional Responsibility. The severity of the discipline is determined by the nature of the offense, considering both aggravating and mitigating factors. The Commissioner recommended a six-month suspension for Respondent Larre', concluding that the misconduct warranted more than a reprimand, but the mitigating factors justified a shorter suspension. The court concurred with this assessment, imposing a six-month suspension from the practice of law, effective upon the judgment's finality.
