Opinion
NO. 2019-B-1474
11-05-2019
ATTORNEY DISCIPLINARY PROCEEDING
PER CURIAM
Respondent failed to cooperate with the Office of Disciplinary Counsel ("ODC") in its investigation of three complaints filed against him. Following the filing of formal charges, respondent and the ODC submitted a joint petition for consent discipline. Having reviewed the petition,
IT IS ORDERED that the Petition for Consent Discipline be accepted and that Douglas L. Uzee, Jr., Louisiana Bar Roll number 12992, be and he hereby is suspended from the practice of law for a period of one year and one day, with all but sixty days deferred. This suspension shall be retroactive to October 1, 2019, the date of respondent's interim suspension. Following the active portion of the suspension, respondent shall be placed on supervised probation for two years, subject to the conditions set forth in the Petition for Consent Discipline. The probationary period shall commence from the date respondent, the probation monitor, 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 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 court's judgment until paid.
Crichton, J., dissents and assigns reasons.
CRICHTON, J., dissents and assigns reasons:
I would reject the joint petition for consent discipline. Specifically, I find the repeated violations of Rules 8.1(b) (knowing failure to respond to a lawful demand for information from an admissions or disciplinary authority) and 8.1(c) (failure to cooperate with the Office of Disciplinary Counsel) of the Rules of Professional Conduct to be serious and quite aggravating in this case. At the very least, I believe that this misconduct warrants a more substantial discipline than a partially-deferred suspension.