The Louisiana Supreme Court has disbarred an attorney for conversion of estate funds.

Justice Crichton dissented in favor of permanent disbarment. 

The retention

Laura M. Keith, a former resident of New Orleans who now lives in Italy, retained respondent to handle the succession of her mother. Ms. Keith was the only heir of the estate.

The conduct 

The record of this deemed admitted matter reflects that respondent received $280,475 on behalf of his client in connection with the succession of her mother. Respondent has never provided an accounting for these funds despite numerous requests from his client. Rather, due to his inability to account for the funds, respondent has simply declared them to be his attorney’s fees without any further explanation. Respondent also caused a significant delay in the resolution of the succession matter, failed to communicate with his client, and failed to place an advance deposit into his client trust account. This conduct violates the Rules of Professional Conduct as charged.

Sanction

we find that respondent’s conduct warrants disbarment. Respondent clearly acted in bad faith in preparing Ms. Keith’s accounting, as he knew that it was not supported by any documentation whatsoever. The magnitude and duration of the deprivation have been extensive. Respondent should have provided Ms. Keith with an accounting with each disbursement of funds made in 2012, 2013, and 2014, and a final accounting should have been provided at the conclusion of the representation; however, only one accounting was provided in  2017, and only after repeated requests by Ms. Keith and a complaint to the ODC. When she received the accounting, there was no breakdown of respondent’s professional time reflected therein and instead only a line item for $280,745 in attorney’s fees. While respondent admitted in his 2017 sworn statement that he did not know how much of this fee he had earned – which suggests he had not earned all of it – to date respondent has not reimbursed any of the fee to Ms. Keith. Indeed, as previously stated, respondent has acknowledged that he no longer has Ms. Keith’s funds in his possession.

He must also provide a detailed accounting and make full restitution. (Mike Frisch)