In re O'Keefe
46 So. 3d 1240
La.2010Background
- Respondent Michael H. O’Keefe, Jr. is a Louisiana attorney, currently on interim suspension due to a federal conviction.
- He was indicted in the Eastern District of Louisiana on conspiracy to defraud the U.S., conspiracy to commit money laundering, and monetary transactions in property derived from unlawful activity related to a HUD house-flipping scheme.
- He pled guilty to making false statements in a HUD transaction, sentenced to 18 months in federal prison, and ordered to pay $686,565.55 in restitution.
- Citywide Mortgage, Inc., of which respondent was president, assisted low-income buyers with HUD-insured loans; the scheme involved fraudulent loan applications, inflated appraisals, and straw buyers.
- HUD-backed loans formed about 65% of Citywide’s business and the scheme caused substantial HUD losses due to defaults by straw buyers.
- ODC charged respondent with violations of Rules 8.4(a), (b), and (c) of the Rules of Professional Conduct; respondent admitted the factual allegations but disputed some framing, and a hearing was held.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Does respondent's federal fraud conviction warrant permanent disbarment? | O’Keefe: argues conduct warrants disbarment; baseline is disbarment. | O’Keefe: acknowledges the crime and sanctions are warranted; requests consideration of mitigating factors. | Yes; permanent disbarment warranted. |
| Is Guideline 6 (insurance fraud) applicable to this case's conduct for permanent disbarment? | Board: Guideline 6 supports permanent disbarment given fraud-like conduct. | O’Keefe: guideline not applicable since crime title is false statements, not fraud. | Guideline 6 applicable; supports permanent disbarment. |
| Should respondent be permanently barred from readmission in light of the conviction? | Board: readmission should be permanently barred. | Respondent: seeks opportunity for readmission after punishment. | Permanent disbarment with no readmission. |
Key Cases Cited
- In re: Kirchberg, 856 So.2d 1162 (La. 2003) (conduct analogous to insurance/fraud-like schemes supports permanent disbarment)
- In re: Boudreau, 815 So.2d 76 (La. 2002) (conviction controls; sole issue is discipline extent)
- Louisiana State Bar Ass’n v. Wilkinson, 562 So.2d 902 (La. 1990) (discipline determined by seriousness of offense and circumstances)
- In re: King, 33 So.3d 873 (La. 2010) (discourages blaming procedural labels; sole issue is sanction given conviction)
- Perez, 550 So.2d 188 (La. 1989) (baselines and aggravating/mitigating factors guide discipline)