# In re Robertson

> Supreme Court of Louisiana · October 16, 2009 · 19 So. 3d 1186

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/4826608

## Case

- **Full name:** In re Darryl L. ROBERTSON
- **Court:** Supreme Court of Louisiana
- **Decided:** October 16, 2009
- **Citations:** 19 So. 3d 1186; 2009 La. LEXIS 2969; 2009 WL 3321491
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurring in part by Weimer
- **Judges:** Johnson, Period, Reasons, Suspension, Victory, Weimer
- **Cited by:** 1 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/4826608

## Opinion text

WEIMER, J.,
concurring in part and dissenting in part.
hi agree with the majority that discipline should be imposed. However, I believe a period of non-deferred suspension should be imposed.
The hearing committee found as a matter of fact that actual harm occurred to respondent’s client, whose suit was dismissed as a result of respondent’s inaction. As noted by the majority, respondent failed to provide ODC with a timely or adequate response to the complaint, necessitating the issuance of a subpoena to obtain respondent’s sworn statement. Together, this suggests that a period of non-deferred suspension is appropriate. See In re: Jeffers, 03-3345 (La.4/14/04), 870 So.2d 1017 .

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/4826608. Public record. Not legal advice.