Joint petition for consent discipline accepted. See per curiam.
The Office of Disciplinary Counsel (“ODC”) commenced an investigation into allegations that respondent mishandled his client trust account, resulting in multiple instances of commingling and conversion of client funds, failed to abide by a disciplinary board order to attend the Louisiana State Bar Associations Trust Accounting School, failed to reduce contingency fee agreements to writing, and failed to cooperate with the ODC in its investigation. Following the filing of formal charges, respondent and the ODC submitted a joint petition for consent discipline in which respondent admitted to violating Rules 1.5(c), 1.15(a)(b)(f), 3.4(c), 8.1(c), and 8.4(c) of the Rules of Professional Conduct. Having reviewed the petition,
IT IS ORDERED that the Petition for Consent Discipline be accepted and that Michael Thomas Joseph, Jr., Louisiana Bar Roll number 32880, be suspended from the practice of law for a period of eighteen months, with six months deferred, followed by a one-year period of probation subject to the conditions set forth in the petition for consent discipline. The probationary period shall commence from the date respondent and the ODC execute a formal probation plan. 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 courts judgment until paid.
Crichton, J., would reject consent discipline as too lenient.
Genovese, J., would reject consent discipline as too lenient.
McCallum, J., would reject consent discipline as too lenient.