In Re: Frank J. LaBRUZZO

Supreme Court of Louisiana
June 25, 2024
Chief Deputy Clerk of Court
For the Court
The Supreme Court of the State of Louisiana
IN RE: FRANK J. LaBRUZZO
No. 2024-B-00601
_ _
_ _ _ _
I
N RE: Disciplinary Counsel - Applicant Other; Frank John LaBruzzo - Applicant
Other; Joint Petition for Consent Discipline;
_ _ _ _ _ _
June 25, 2024
Joint petition for consent discipline accepted. See per curiam.
Crichton, J., additionally concurs and assigns reasons.
JLW
JDH
SJC
JTG
WJC
JBM
PDG
06/25/2024 "See News Release 030 for any Concurrences and/or Dissents."

SUPREME COURT OF LOUISIANA
NO. 2024-B-0601
IN RE: FRANK J. LaBRUZZO
ATTORNEY DISCIPLINARY PROCEEDINGS
PER CURIAM
Respondent pleaded guilty to one count of conspiracy to commit wire fraud,
a felony violation of 18 U.S.C. § 371 . Prior to the filing of formal charges,
respondent and the Office of Disciplinary Counsel submitted a joint petition for
consent discipline, in which respondent acknowledges that his conduct constitutes a
violation of Rules 8.4(a), 8.4(b), 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
Frank J. LaBruzzo , Louisiana Bar Roll number 26771, be suspended from the
practice of law for a period of three years ,1 retroactive to November 16, 2023 , the
date of his interim suspension.
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 t his court’s
judgment until paid.
1 Although we feel respondent may benefit from a period of probation, we decline to impose
probation at this time because the actual period of suspension is greater than one year and one day,
thereby necessitating a formal application for reinstatement. This court has “typically declined to
impose probationary periods or conditions in cases in which the sanction will require application
for and reinstatement to the practice of law.” In re: Hollis, 13-2568 (La. 3/14/14), 135 So. 3d 596,
599 n.2. Imposition of probation and conditions of probation may be considered if and when
respondent applies for reinstatement after becoming eligible to do so.
06/25/24