Introducing ATLASLearn more
Legal Opinion

In re Hebert

Supreme Court of Louisiana

Decided May 29, 2009No. 2008-B-2785PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

*84811ATTORNEY DISCIPLINARY PROCEEDINGS

2Per curiam

This disciplinary matter arises from formal charges filed by the Office of Disciplinary Counsel (“ODC”) against respondent, Edward Hebert, II, an attorney licensed to practice law in Louisiana, but currently ineligible to practice.1

UNDERLYING FACTS

On April 4, 2003, Dantrell Bolling hired respondent to represent him in a personal injury matter. On March 29, 2004, respondent filed a lawsuit on behalf of Mr. Bolling. However, he withheld service of the lawsuit on the defendants, and none of the defendants were ever served. Respondent also provided Mr. Bolling…

Also in this document: Dissent.

3Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Louisiana State Bar Ass'n v. WhittingtonSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1984
  2. Louisiana State Bar Ass'n v. ReisSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1987
  3. In Re CaulfieldSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1996
  4. In Re PardueSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1994
  5. In Re QuaidSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1994

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

4Cited by4 opinions

  1. In Re FordSupreme Court of Louisiana · 2010
  2. In Re MillerSupreme Court of Louisiana · 2010
  3. In re HebertSupreme Court of Louisiana · 2017
  4. In re HebertSupreme Court of Louisiana · 2012

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

View API DocsGet API Key

Powered by the Exa API