BOARD OF PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITY (2011)
Archived Content: This document is formally archived for historical reference. The original PDF remains the official record for legal purposes.
Need help? Please use the Assistance Request Form below.
Original PDF Document
Download Official Record (moncier-1766-2-rel.pdf)
Alternative Accessible HTML
Accessible Alternative: This HTML version is an automatically processed accessible alternative. While it provides a searchable format, the text extraction may contain formatting or character errors. The original PDF remains the authoritative official record.
Need a different format? Use the Request Assistance Form.
BOARD OF PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITY
OF THE
SUPREME COURT OF TENNESSEE
10 CADILLAC DRIVE, SUITE 220
BRENTWOOD, TENNESSEE 37027
TELEPHONE: (615) 361-7500
(800) 486-5714
FAX: (615) 367-2480
E-MAIL: ethics@tbpr.org
Website: www.tbpr.org
RELEASE OF INFORMATION
RE: HERBERT S. MONCIER, BPR #001910
CONTACTS: SANDY GARRETT
BOARD OF PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITY
615-361-7500
June 2, 2011
KNOXVILLE LAWYER SUSPENDED
On June 1, 2011, Herbert S. Moncier, of Knoxville, Tennessee, was suspended by the Tennessee
Supreme Court for a period of eleven (11) months and twenty-nine (29) days with the first forty-five (45) days
being active suspension and the remaining ten and one-half (10 ½) months of probation, pursuant to Rule 9,
Section 8.5. The Supreme Court imposed the following conditions upon Ms. Moncierâs probation of ten and
one-half (10 ½) months: Mr. Moncier shall complete an additional twelve (12) hours of ethics continuing legal
education and the Board shall assign Mr. Moncier a practice monitor to monitor Mr. Moncierâs practice and
court appearances for the duration of his probation.
Mr. Moncier violated the Rules of Professional Conduct in his representation of a criminal client in a
federal case by engaging in a conflict of interest in violation of Rule 1.7 and by engaging in conduct intending
to disrupt the proceeding in violation of Rules 3.4(e) and 3.5(e). In his representation of a client in state court,
Mr. Moncier violated Rules 3.4(c), 3.5(e) and 8.4(a) and (d) by repeatedly interjecting insurance issues into the
proceeding during the punitive damages phase of the trial after the Court clearly gave notice to Mr. Moncier
that such questions would not be tolerated and by engaging in conduct intending to disrupt the proceeding.
Mr. Moncier was ordered to pay the expenses and costs of the disciplinary proceeding against him,
pursuant to Rule 9, Section 4.7 of the Rules of the Supreme Court and was ordered to fully comply in all
respects with the requirements and obligations of suspended attorneys as set forth in Rule 9, Section 18.1 of the
Rules of the Supreme Court.
Moncier 1766-2.doc
PLEASE NOTE
YOU MAY SUBSCRIBE TO RECEIVE INFORMATIONAL RELEASES, FORMAL ETHICS
OPINIONS, NEWSLETTERS AND ANNUAL REPORTS ELECTRONICALLY BY SIGNING IN AT
THE BOARDâS WEBSITE
www.tbpr.org/Subscriptions