IN RE: Appeal of the DECISION OF the DISCIPLINARY BOARD NO. 21-PDB-034 (2022)

Remanded to the Office of Disciplinary Counsel for further investigation. See order.

ORDER

On the showing made, we are unable to determine whether the disciplinary board acted arbitrarily, capriciously or unreasonably in approving the dismissal of the complaint against respondent. Supreme Court Rule XIX, § 30(C). However, given the allegations made by the complainant, we believe the disciplinary board erred in not directing that the matter be investigated further pursuant to Supreme Court Rule XIX, § 30(A). Accordingly, this matter is remanded to the Office of Disciplinary Counsel to conduct further investigation pursuant to Supreme Court Rule XIX, § 11(B).

NEW ORLEANS, LOUISIANA, this _ day of _, 2022.

FOR THE COURT:

/s/ _

JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT OF LOUISIANA

I dissent from the order remanding this matter to the Office of Disciplinary Counsel (“ODC”) for further investigation. In my view, Mr. Plattsmier and his staff conducted a thorough and extensive investigation, ultimately concluding that his office would not be able to prove by clear and convincing evidence any violation of the Rules of Professional Conduct. See In Re: Banks, 09-1212 (La. 10/2/09), 18 So.3d 57 (this Court, as trier of fact is disciplinary proceedings, conducts an independent review of the record to determine whether the alleged misconduct has been proven by clear and convincing evidence), citing In re: Quaid, 94-1316 (La. 11/30/94), 646 So.2d 343; and Louisiana State Bar Ass'n v. Boutall, 597 So.2d 444 (La.1992). The Hearing Committee thereafter unanimously affirmed the ODC's dismissal of the complaint. The underlying circumstances of this matter are undoubtedly peculiar, but a review of the record before us confirms that an exhaustive investigation has already been conducted. See La. S. Ct. Rule XIX, § 30 (C) (“[t]he Court will not consider the appeal unless the complainant shows that the board acted arbitrarily, capriciously, or unreasonably.”) Therefore, I do not believe any of ODC's valuable time and additional resources should further devoted to this matter. Accordingly, I dissent from the majority's order of remand and would dismiss the appeal.

Crichton, J., dissents and assigns reasons. Crain, J., dissents. McCallum, J., dissents.