DocketDrift

Real-time tracking of state judicial trends.

Outcomes

Public record · Human review · No verdicts asserted

Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite Louisiana State Bar Ass'n v. Wilkinson, 562 So. 2d 902.

65 citing documents.

  • In re Schwehm 860 So. 2d 1108 La. 2003
    Supreme Court Rule XIX, § 19(E); In re: Boudreau, 02-0007 (La.4/12/02), ; Louisiana State Bar Ass’n v. Wilkinson
  • In Re Rome 856 So. 2d 1167 La. 2003
    Supreme Court Rule XIX, § 19(E); In re: Boudreau, 02-0007 (La.4/12/02)
  • In re Kirchberg 856 So. 2d 1162 La. 2003
    Supreme Court Rule XIX, § 19(E); In re: Boudreau, 02-0007 (La.4/12/02), ; Louisiana State Bar Ass’n v. Wilkinson
  • In re Laudumiey 849 So. 2d 515 La. 2003
    In re: Bankston, 01-2780 (La.3/8/02), ; Louisiana State Bar Ass’n v. Wilkinson
  • In re Lynch 840 So. 2d 508 La. 2003
    Supreme Court Rule XIX, § 19(E); In re: Boudreau, 02-0007 (La.4/12/02), ; Louisiana State Bar Ass’n v. Wilkinson
  • In re Nevitte 827 So. 2d 1135 La. 2002
    Supreme Court Rule XIX, § 19(E); In re: Boudreau, 02-0007 (La.4/12/02), ; Louisiana State Bar Ass’n v. Wilkinson
  • In re Boudreau 815 So. 2d 76 La. 2002
    Supreme Court Rule XIX, § 19(E); Louisiana State Bar Ass’n v. Wilkinson
  • In re Bankston 810 So. 2d 1113 La. 2002
    DISCUSSION In Louisiana State Bar Ass’n v. Wilkinson, this court set forth the considerations present in a disciplinary proceeding based on the attorney’s conviction of a criminal offense: In an attorney disciplinary proceeding based on the lawyer’s criminal conviction, the issue of his guilt may not be relitigated.
  • In re Scott 805 So. 2d 137 La. 2002
    Louisiana State Bar Ass’n v. Wilkinson
  • In Re Spring 801 So. 2d 327 La. 2001
    Supreme Court Rule XIX, § 19(E)
  • In re Gaudin 785 So. 2d 763 La. 2001
    Louisiana State Bar Ass’n v. Wilkinson
  • In re Ferrouillet 764 So. 2d 948 La. 2000
    See also Louisiana State Bar Ass’n v. Wilkinson, (thirty-month suspension imposed on lawyer convicted of aiding and abetting wire fraud; court found “substantial mitigating factors warranted a downward deviation from the baseline sanction of disbarment”); Louisiana State Bar Ass’n v. Rosenthal, (court rejected disbarment in favor of
  • In Re King 646 So. 2d 326 La. 1994
  • In Re Quaid 646 So. 2d 343 La. 1994
  • Louisiana State Bar Ass'n v. Boutall 597 So. 2d 444 La. 1992