Narrative Opinion Summary
The Office of Disciplinary Counsel (ODC) in Louisiana initiated reciprocal discipline proceedings against an attorney following a three-year suspension by the Supreme Court of Wisconsin for professional misconduct in seven client matters. This misconduct included conversion of estate funds, misrepresentation, and lack of diligence, among other violations. Upon receiving notice of the Wisconsin suspension, the attorney failed to respond to an opportunity provided by the Louisiana court to contest the imposition of reciprocal discipline. The court examined Rule XIX. 21(D), which permits modification of identical discipline under certain conditions, but found no applicable exceptions. Emphasizing deference to the Wisconsin court's findings, the court noted that it might have considered a more severe penalty if the misconduct had occurred in Louisiana. Consequently, the court affirmed the Wisconsin-imposed three-year suspension, which follows a prior two-month suspension in 2007 for related misconduct. Judge Benjamin Jones participated in the ruling as Justice Pro Tempore.
Legal Issues Addressed
Conditions for Modifying Identical Disciplinesubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The court assessed whether conditions existed to modify the discipline but found none applicable, thereby affirming the original suspension.
Reasoning: The court referenced Rule XIX. 21(D), which outlines conditions under which identical discipline could be modified, noting that none of the exceptions applied in this case.
Deference to Original Jurisdiction's Findingssubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The Louisiana court deferred to the findings and disciplinary measures imposed by the Wisconsin Supreme Court despite contemplating harsher penalties.
Reasoning: The court emphasized the importance of deference to the Wisconsin court's findings, indicating that while it might have considered harsher penalties had the misconduct occurred in Louisiana, it chose to uphold the Wisconsin ruling.
Notice and Opportunity to Contest Reciprocal Disciplinesubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The court provided the attorney with thirty days to contest the imposition of reciprocal discipline, which he failed to do.
Reasoning: After notifying Nunnery and allowing him thirty days to contest the reciprocal discipline, he failed to respond.
Reciprocal Discipline under Supreme Court Rule XIXsubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The Louisiana court initiated reciprocal discipline proceedings following notification of a suspension by another jurisdiction, specifically Wisconsin.
Reasoning: Reciprocal discipline proceedings were initiated against Willie J. Nunnery by the Office of Disciplinary Counsel (ODC) following a three-year suspension imposed by the Supreme Court of Wisconsin due to misconduct in seven client matters.