Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite Succession of Wallace, 574 So. 2d 348.

42 citing documents.

Ike Spears v. William W. Hall La. 2026
Theresa Fisher v. Steven Harter, Jr. La. 2024
The Meunier decision was cited with approval by this court in (La.
In Re: David Band, Jr. La. 2024
S hould respondent fail to comply with these conditions, or should he commit any misconduct during the period of probation, his conditional r einstatement to 1 See generally Succession of Wallace , (La.
In Re: Tara Elwell La. 2024
In Re: William A. Roe La. 2023
Willard O. Lape, III v. Thomas Adair Brown and Thomas Costanza La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2021
In re Coop. Endeavor Agreement Between 42nd Dist. Indigent Defender Office & 42nd Judicial District Office of Dist. … 255 So. 3d 707 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2018
1987), and Succession of Wallace , (La.
Warren Montgomery, in His Official Capacity as District Attorney for St. Tammany Parish v. St. Tammany Parish Government, … La. 2018
Additionally, Respondents argue that the Louisiana Rules for Professional Conduct prohibit the District Attorney from representing the Parish Government, citing to (La.
Gillio v. Hanover American Insurance Co. 212 So. 3d 588 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2017
In re Cortigene 144 So. 3d 915 La. 2014
In we stated: This court has exclusive and plenary power to define and regulate all facets of the practice of law, including the admission of attorneys to the bar, the professional responsibility and conduct of lawyers, the discipline, suspension and disbarment of lawyers, and the client-attorney relationship.
Skannal v. Jones Odom Davis & Politz, L.L.P. 124 So. 3d 500 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
Louisiana’s Regulation of Attorney-Client Fee Contracts The Louisiana Supreme Court explained its powers to regulate the practice of law in as follows: This court has exclusive and plenary power to define and regulate all facets of the practice of law, including the admission of attorneys to the bar, the professional responsibility and conduct of lawyers, the discipline, suspension and disbarment of lawyers, and the client-attorney relationship
St. Pierre v. Northrop Grumman Shipbuilding, Inc. 102 So. 3d 1003 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2012
The Louisiana Supreme Court has held that “death of the client itself terminates the client-attorney relationship by operation of law; therefore, there is no necessity for a rule requiring the attorney to withdraw when the client dies.” (-65 (La.1977); (La.App.
Hodges v. Reasonover 103 So. 3d 1069 La. 2012
As we stated in : This court has exclusive and plenary power to define and regulate all facets of the practice of law, including the admission of attorneys to the bar, the professional responsibility and conduct of lawyers, the discipline, suspension and disbarment of lawyers, and the client-attorney relationship.
Teague v. St. Paul Fire and Marine Ins. Co. 10 So. 3d 806 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
the court observed that “[t]he Rules of Professional Conduct have the force and effect of substantive law.” Id., 06-950 at p. 5, 956 So.2d at 692 .
Clegg v. USAGENCIES INS. CO. 985 So. 2d 781 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2008
-52 (La.1991) (scholarly explanation of public policy reasons underlying the client's right *784 of withdrawal and how the right developed over time under different rationales, including jurisprudential rule and various versions of disciplinary rules governing the practice of law); Barranger, Barranger and Jones v
Adrienne Patout Smith v. Roy Patout La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2007
Smith v. Patout 956 So. 2d 689 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2007
Disaster Restoration Dry Cleaning, L.L.C. v. Pellerin Laundry Machinery Sales Co. 927 So. 2d 1094 La. 2006
Lacrouts v. Succession of Longo 923 So. 2d 717 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2005
In Re Succession of Sporl 900 So. 2d 1054 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2005
Successions of Tanner 895 So. 2d 584 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2005
In Re Stamps 874 So. 2d 113 La. 2004
on Bar Admissions, 00-1360 (La.2/21/01), ; In re Bar Exam Class Action, 99-2880 (La.2/18/00), ; Ex Parte Steckler, 179 La.
Lowenburg v. Council of New Orleans 859 So. 2d 804 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2003
In re Laudumiey 849 So. 2d 515 La. 2003
Co., 00-0414 (La.5/15/01), ; In re: Bar Exam Class Action, 99-2880 (La.2/18/00), ; (La.
Williams v. City of New Orleans ex rel. Public Belt Railroad Commission of New Orleans 831 So. 2d 947 La. 2002
Committee on Bar Admissions, 00-1360 (La.2/21/01), ; In Re Bar Exam Class Action, 99-2880 (La.2/18/00)
Succession of Daigle 822 So. 2d 83 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2002
Succession of Stewart v. Succession of Turner 818 So. 2d 264 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2002
The Turner heirs also cite for the proposition that a succession is a process, not an entity.
Horrell v. Horrell 808 So. 2d 363 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2001
Chittenden v. State Farm Mut. Auto Ins. Co. 788 So. 2d 1140 La. 2001
As we stated in : This court has exclusive and plenary power to define and regulate all facets of the practice of law, including the admission of attorneys to the bar, the professional responsibility and conduct of lawyers, the discipline, suspension and disbarment of lawyers, and the client-attorney relationship.
Bester v. SUPREME COURT COM. ON BAR ADM. 779 So. 2d 715 La. 2001
In Re Bar Exam Class Action, 752 So.2d at 160 ; Ex Parte Steckler, 179 La.
Richardson v. Richardson 774 So. 2d 1264 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2000
Gulf Wide Towing v. F.E.
In Re Bar Exam Class Action 752 So. 2d 159 La. 2000
Chittenden v. STATE FARM MUT. AUTO. INS. 748 So. 2d 641 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1999
Moreover, as recently as 1991, the Supreme Court in made this observation *647 concerning the Rules of Professional Conduct at p. 356: "The disciplinary rules are rules of reason that should be interpreted and applied with reference to the purposes of maintaining appropriate professional standards and protecting the public and the courts from substandard atto
In Re Succession of Parham 755 So. 2d 265 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1999
Succession of Hackney 707 So. 2d 1302 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1998
Alco Collections, Inc. v. Poirier 680 So. 2d 735 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1996
-99 (La.1989); Saucier v. Hayes Dairy Products, Inc., (Dennis, J. dissenting from opinion on original hearing).
Midboe v. Com'n on Ethics for Pub. Empl. 646 So. 2d 351 La. 1994
Relying on the Louisiana Supreme Court's exclusive and plenary power to regulate the practice of law and the Court's pronouncement in that legislative rules which supplant disciplinary rules must fall, the district court pronounced the ethics code statutes and the Commission's conclusions unconstitutional as applied and enjoined their enforcement against Midboe.
In Re Quaid 646 So. 2d 343 La. 1994
Succession of Crowe v. Henry 602 So. 2d 243 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1992
Soderquist v. Kramer 595 So. 2d 825 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1992
Chaffin v. Chambers 577 So. 2d 1125 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1991
However, in appears the following: This court has exclusive and plenary power to define and regulate all facets of the practice of law, including the admission of attorneys to the bar, the professional responsibility and conduct of lawyers, the discipline, suspension and disbarment of lawyers, and the client-attor
THIBAUT v. Smith and Loveless 576 So. 2d 532 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1990
and the authorities cited therein.