Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

137 So. 3d 11

In re Clark

Supreme Court of Louisiana

Decided April 4, 2014

Supreme Court of Louisiana · decided 2014-04-04

Cited by 3 later decisions — most recently December 2019

2 state decisions

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 2014-04-04

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

¶1ATTORNEY DISCIPLINARY PROCEEDINGS

PER CURIAM.

¶2hThe Office of Disciplinary Counsel (“ODC”) commenced an investigation into allegations that respondent neglected a legal matter, failed to communicate with a client, and failed to promptly refund an unearned fee. Following the filing of formal charges, respondent refunded the fee and thereafter she and the ODC submitted a joint petition for consent discipline. Having reviewed the petition,

¶3IT IS ORDERED that the Petition for Consent Discipline be accepted and that Sonceree Smith Clark, Louisiana Bar Roll number 19275, be and she hereby is publicly reprimanded.

¶4IT 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.

/137/so3d/11 · .json · Public domain