Louisiana State Bar Association v. Amberg
Louisiana Supreme Court
573 So. 2d 1093 (1991)
- Written by Angela Patrick, JD
Facts
Joseph Amberg (defendant) was licensed to practice law in Louisiana. Amberg accepted retainers, i.e., advance payments for services, from three separate clients for three separate matters, and accepted a fourth client on a contingency-fee basis. Amberg did no work or only some work on these matters. Each of the four clients repeatedly called Amberg’s office for updates or information, but Amberg never returned their calls or provided updates. Eventually, the three clients each requested refunds of their retainers, and all four clients requested copies of their files. Amberg did not provide any of the refunds or files. Each of these four clients and a fifth client complained to the state’s bar association (plaintiff) about Amberg. Amberg did not respond to many of the bar association’s communications, nor did he adequately cooperate with the bar association’s efforts to investigate the complaints. The bar association filed disciplinary actions against Amberg with the Louisiana Supreme Court regarding these five clients’ complaints, and those actions were combined into one matter. The bar alleged that Amberg had violated several ethical duties, including his client duties of diligence and communication and his bar duty of cooperating with an investigation. Amberg claimed that he had finally refunded one client’s retainer, but he admitted he had not refunded the other two. At a hearing on the misconduct allegations, Amberg claimed that his personal life had been a mess for several years as he went through a divorce, lost his house in the divorce, moved offices, had a fire at his new office that destroyed files, and dealt with his ex-wife trying to commit suicide. Amberg admitted that he had not been diligent about returning client phone calls or bar communications during this time period. In a separate disciplinary matter, Amberg had been recently suspended from practicing law for three years for mishandling client funds during this same period of personal turmoil. The court considered whether to discipline Amberg.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Marcus, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 899,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 47,000 briefs, keyed to 994 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.

