Post: Question for Hardy Parkerson re: client solicitation
Posted by Curious on 11/17/04
Hi Hardy,
What's this about? I found it in the LA Supreme Court
Disciplinary Reports at www.ladb.org
http://www.lasc.org/news_releases/1996/1996-116.asp
FROM: CLERK OF SUPREME COURT OF LOUISIANA
On the 7th day of November, 1996, the following action was
taken by the Supreme Court of Louisiana in the case(s)
listed below:
96-B - 2491 IN RE: HARDY M. PARKERSON
See Per Curiam
WATSON, J. - not on panel.
http://www.ladb.org/NXT/gateway.dll?
f=templates&fn=default.htm
SUPREME COURT OF LOUISIANA
NO. 96-B-2491
IN RE: HARDY M. PARKERSON
DISCIPLINARY PROCEEDINGS
PER CURIAM
************************************************************
***************
Respondent, Hardy M. Parkerson, was formally charged
with engaging in misconduct contary to the Rules of
Professional Conduct. Count I charged respondent with
soliciting professional employment in person from persons
with whom respondent did not have a family or prior
professional relationship. Count I further charged that
respondent's motive behind this solicitation was his own
pecuniary gain. This solicitation violates Rules 7.2 (a),
8.4 (a) and 8.4 (d) of the Rules of Professional Conduct.
Initially, respondent denied that he had violated any of
the Rules of Professional Conduct. Subsequent to
respondent's initial denial, respondent filed a Petition
For Consent Discipline. In his Petition For Consent
Discipline, respondent stated he could nat successfully
defend against the charges against him. Respondent
requested that he be suspended from the practice of law for
a period of sixty (60) days, deferred subject to a one year
period of probation, under the following terms and
conditions: (1) Respondent shall not violate any of the
Rules of Professional Conduct during the period of
probation; (2) Respondent shall earn an additional three
(3) hours of ethics over and above the customary fifteen
(15) hours of continuing legal education required during
the year 1996; (3) Respondent will accept the issuance of a
Public Reprimand for the misconduct engaged in; (4)
Respondent will issue a letter of apology directed to the
Complainant who was solicited, acknowledging his misconduct
and expressing his regret for the infraction and the harm
which he has done to the public and. to the Bar; (5)
Respondent shall make immediate and complete payment of all
disciplinary costs assessed against him.
Both the Hearing Committee and the Disciplinary Board
concurred with respondent's proposed consent discipline.
According to the Hearing Committee and the Disciplinary
Board, respondent's proposed sanction is consistent with
the gravity of the u. tense respondent is charged with.
Upon review of the Hearing Committee and Disciplinary
Board's findings and recommendations, and the record filed
herein, and the seriousness of the offense that respondent
is charged with, it is the decision of the Court that the
proposed consent discipline be adopted.
Accordingly, it is ordered that Hardy M. Parkerson be
suspended from the practice of law for a period of sixty
(60 days), deferred subject to a one year period of
probation under the following terms and conditions:
1) Respondent shall not violate any of the Rules
of Professional Conduct during the period
of probation;
2) Respondent shall earn an additional three (3)
hours of ethics over and above the customary
fifteen (15) hours of continuing legal education
required during the year 1996;
3) Respondent will accept the issuance of a Public
Reprimand for the misconduct he engaged in;
4) Respondent will issue a letter of apology
directed to the Complainant who was
solicited, acknowledging his misconduct
and expressing his regret for the infraction and the harm
which he has done to the public and to the
Bar;
5) Respondent shall make immediate and complete
payment of all disciplinary costs assessed
against him.
DEFERRED SUSPENSION ORDERED
Watson, J., not on panel. See Rule IV, Part 2, ' 3.
End of Document
Posts on this thread, including this one
- Question for Hardy Parkerson re: client solicitation, 11/17/04, by Curious.
- Re: Question for Hardy Parkerson re: client solicitation, 11/17/04, by chexndamail.
- Re: Question for Hardy Parkerson re: client solicitation, 11/17/04, by roosta.
- Re: Question for Hardy Parkerson re: client solicitation, 11/17/04, by Turtle.
- Re: Question for Hardy Parkerson re: client solicitation, 2/11/05, by Justin Thibodeaux, Unlicensed Attorney at Law.
- Re: Question for Hardy Parkerson re: client solicitation, 2/11/05, by Holy Smokes.
- Re: Question for Hardy Parkerson re: client solicitation, 2/11/05, by Helen Mouton.
- Re: Question for Hardy Parkerson re: client solicitation, 2/11/05, by J.T..
- Re: Question for Hardy Parkerson re: client solicitation, 2/11/05, by Holy Smokes.
- Re: Question for Hardy Parkerson re: client solicitation, 2/12/05, by chexndamail.
- Re: THIS IS FIUNNY! - Re: Question for Hardy Parkerson re: , 2/12/05, by Louis de ville Claverstone.
- Re: THIS IS FIUNNY! - Re: Question for Hardy Parkerson re:, 2/12/05, by Louia de ville Claverstone.
- Re: THIS IS FIUNNY! - Re: Question for Hardy Parkerson re:, 2/12/05, by Billy Treesling, J.D..
- Re: THIS IS FUNNY! - Re: Question for Hardy Parkerson re:, 2/12/05, by Texas Shyster.
- Re: THIS IS FUNNY! - Re: Question for Hardy Parkerson re:, 2/12/05, by chexndamail.