IN RE: Ronald Sidney HALEY (2021)

Supreme Court of Louisiana.2021-12-07No. No. 2021-B-01466

Summary · law.co

Holding. The court accepted the joint petition for consent discipline and suspended Ronald Sidney Haley, Jr. from the practice of law for one year and one day, with all but six months deferred pending successful completion of Ethics School.

The Office of Disciplinary Counsel investigated Ronald Sidney Haley, Jr. for neglecting a legal matter, failing to communicate with a client, improperly attempting to settle a malpractice claim, and refusing to return a client's file. Haley and the ODC jointly petitioned for consent discipline, with Haley admitting violations of six professional conduct rules.

The court accepted the joint petition and suspended Haley from practicing law for one year and one day. However, all but six months of the suspension was deferred, conditioned on his successful completion of the Louisiana State Bar Association's Ethics School. The court also ordered Haley to pay all costs and expenses of the proceeding, plus legal interest beginning thirty days after the judgment becomes final. One justice dissented, believing the suspension was too lenient and would have imposed a one-year-and-one-day suspension without any deferral.

Summary generated by law.co from the public-domain opinion. The opinion text itself is public domain.

Key issues

Client neglect and failure to communicate
Improper settlement of malpractice claim
Failure to return client file
Appropriate discipline for multiple professional conduct violations

Procedural posture

The respondent and the Office of Disciplinary Counsel jointly petitioned the court for consent discipline following an investigation into alleged professional misconduct.

Authorities cited

No cited authorities resolved to law.co cases yet.

Opinion · public domain

Joint petition for consent discipline accepted. See per curiam.

ATTORNEY DISCIPLINARY PROCEEDING

The Office of Disciplinary Counsel (“ODC”) commenced an investigation into allegations that respondent neglected a legal matter, failed to communicate with a client, inappropriately attempted to settle a malpractice claim with a client, and failed to return a clients file upon request. Respondent and the ODC submitted a joint petition for consent discipline in which respondent admitted that his conduct violated Rules 1.3, 1.4, 1.8, 1.16, 8.4(a), and 8.4(d) of the Rules of Professional Conduct. Having reviewed the petition, IT IS ORDERED that the Petition for Consent Discipline be accepted and that Ronald Sidney Haley, Jr., Louisiana Bar Roll number 30900, be suspended from the practice of law for a period of one year and one day. All but six months of this suspension shall be deferred, subject to respondents successful completion of the Louisiana State Bar Associations Ethics School. Any failure of respondent to complete Ethics School, or any misconduct during the deferral period, may be grounds for making the deferred portion of the 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 courts judgment until paid.

I dissent from this per curiam. Respondent has admitted violations of Rules 1.3, 1.4, 1.8, 1.16, 8.4(a), and 8.4(d) of the Rules of Professional Conduct. In my view, discipline of a one year and one day suspension with all but six months deferred is unduly lenient. Under the facts presented, I would instead impose a suspension of one year and one day with no deferment period. See In re: Greenhouse, 20-1115 (La. 11/10/20), 303 So. 3d 1023 (Crichton, J., would reject consent discipline).

Crichton, J., would reject consent discipline and assigns reasons.