Current through Register Vol. 50, No. 3, March 20, 2024
A. The board is authorized to discipline
architects and architectural firms in accordance with the provisions of the
licensing law and its rules. In considering the appropriate discipline to be
imposed, the board may consider any aggravating or mitigating circumstances
proven by clear and convincing evidence.
B. Aggravating circumstances which may
increase the discipline to be imposed include, but are not limited to:
1. conduct giving rise to serious
reservations about the capability of the licensee or certificate holder to
effectively and safely practice;
2.
prior disciplinary actions in any jurisdiction;
3. dishonest or selfish motive;
4. a pattern of misconduct;
5. multiple offenses;
6. lack of cooperation with the board's
investigation;
7. submission of
false evidence, false statements, or other deceptive practices during the
disciplinary process;
8. refusal to
acknowledge wrongful nature of conduct;
9. vulnerability of victim;
10. substantial experience in the practice of
architecture;
11. indifference to
making restitution; and
12. illegal
conduct, including that involving the use of controlled substances.
C. Mitigating circumstances which
may reduce the discipline to be imposed include, but are not limited to:
1. a long term of distinctive service to the
profession;
2. self reporting of
the offense or of additional projects of which the board was unaware;
3. absence of a prior disciplinary
record;
4. absence of dishonest or
selfish motive;
5. personal or
emotional problems;
6. timely good
faith effort to make restitution or to rectify consequences of
misconduct;
7. full and free
disclosure to disciplinary board or cooperative attitude toward
proceedings;
8. inexperience in the
practice of architecture;
9.
character or reputation;
10.
physical disability;
11. mental
disability or chemical dependency including alcoholism or drug abuse when:
a. there is medical evidence that the
licensee or certificate holder is affected by a chemical dependency or mental
disability;
b. the chemical
dependency or mental disability caused the misconduct;
c. the licensee's recovery from the chemical
dependency or mental disability is demonstrated by a meaningful and sustained
period of successful rehabilitation; and
d. the recovery arrested the misconduct and
recurrences of that misconduct is unlikely;
12. delay in disciplinary
proceedings;
13. imposition of
other penalties or sanctions;
14.
remorse;
15. remoteness of prior
offenses.
D. The
following factors should not be considered as either aggravating or mitigating:
1. forced or compelled restitution;
2. agreeing to the client's demand for
certain result;
3. withdrawal of
complaint against the architect;
4.
resignation prior to completion of disciplinary proceedings;
5. complainant's recommendation as to
sanction; and
6. failure of injured
client to complain.
AUTHORITY NOTE:
Promulgated in accordance with
R.S.
37:144.
