Preview:

SUPREME COURT OF LOUISIANA NO. 96-B-0425 IN RE: CHERYL HENSLEY DISCIPLINARY PROCEEDINGS PER CURIAM* Respondent, Cheryl Hensley, violated Rule 1.3 (diligence), Rule 3.3 (candor toward the tribunal), and Rule 8.4 (misconduct) in the representation of her clients, Ray and Marie Jackson. Despite having been retained to assist Ray Jackson in

the preparation of his will in July 1990 and despite respondent's knowledge that Ray Jackson suffered from leukemia, a lifethreatening disease, respondent did not draft a will for Ray Jackson until March 8, 1991. On March 12, 1991, Ray Jackson died

intestate, as respondent failed to bring him the drafted will for his signature prior to his death. On March 21, 1991, Marie Jackson brought respondent a will in olographic form, claiming that it was Ray Jackson's last will and testament. Respondent testified before the Hearing

Committee that the will was an obvious forgery and that, upon confrontation, Marie Jackson admitted to having drafted the document. Two days later, Marie Jackson presented respondent

with a second will in olographic form, claiming again that it was Ray Jackson's last will and testament. Respondent had this

second will authenticated by the decedent's mother and sister and then filed the will for probate. In so doing, respondent

knowingly failed to disclose the prior forgery attempt to the court. well. After a formal hearing, the Hearing Committee found that respondent had violated Rule 1.3 (diligence), Rule 3.3 (candor toward the tribunal), and Rule 8.4 (misconduct), but found several mitigating factors, including remorse, no pattern The probated will was later discovered to be a forgery as

*

Kimball, J., not on panel.

Rule IV, Part 2,

Download 96-B-0425.pdf

Louisiana Law