On Wednesday, September 10, 2025, the Louisiana Supreme Court suspended attorney Salvador Randazzo from practicing law for three years, with eighteen months deferred. The suspension stems from formal charges filed by the Office of Disciplinary Counsel (ODC) following complaints by Judge Darren Roy of the 34th Judicial District Court.
The case is entitled “In the Matter of Salvador Randazzo,” with case number 2025-B-0772.
The disciplinary proceedings arose from Randazzo’s conduct during a case in Judge Roy’s court, specifically Docket No. 15-1017, involving the Randazzo family. Judge Roy alleged that between May 5 and May 26, 2021, Randazzo made inappropriate statements in phone calls and voicemails to the judge’s office and staff. These statements included derogatory remarks about parties involved in the litigation and judges who had previously presided over the case, discussions about the litigation itself, and inquiries to the judge’s staff about how Judge Roy might rule on various issues.
Randazzo also made statements about potential future actions depending on Judge Roy’s rulings, discussed disciplinary complaints he had filed against other attorneys and judges, and questioned a staff member about her family and work history. He also referenced a judge who had served time in federal prison, implying Judge Roy should avoid a similar fate, and accused Judge Roy of favoring other parties.
Following these communications, Judge Roy issued an order on May 27, 2021, directing all parties to contact the court via email only. However, Randazzo continued to send emails containing unnecessary ex parte information and statements intended to influence the judge, including false statements about Judge Roy’s integrity.
In addition to the phone calls and emails, Judge Roy’s complaint cited two pleadings filed by Randazzo containing false accusations and statements demonstrating a reckless disregard for the truth regarding Judge Roy’s integrity. These pleadings included accusations that Judge Roy deliberately withheld court orders to impede Randazzo’s appellate rights and that the judge had engaged in ex parte communications.
The ODC alleged that Randazzo’s conduct violated several Rules of Professional Conduct, including rules against seeking to influence a judge improperly, engaging in ex parte communications, making false statements about a judge’s qualifications or integrity, and engaging in conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice.
The Hearing Committee, after a formal hearing on February 24, 2025, found that Randazzo had violated these rules. Randazzo did not attend the hearing, although someone claiming to be his sister contacted the disciplinary board, saying he was ill and/or hospitalized. The committee found the testimony of Judge Roy and his staff credible, concluding that Randazzo intentionally violated duties owed to the legal system and the legal profession.
The committee cited aggravating factors, including a dishonest or selfish motive, obstruction of the disciplinary proceeding, refusal to acknowledge the wrongful nature of his conduct, and his extensive experience in law.
While the committee initially considered disbarment, the baseline sanction according to the ABA Standards, it ultimately recommended a three-year suspension with eighteen months deferred, considering analogous cases.
The Supreme Court adopted this recommendation, ordering Randazzo’s suspension and assessing him with the costs and expenses of the disciplinary proceedings.
According to Avvo, Mr. Randazzo is a lawyer in Madisonville, LA. He acquired his law license in Louisiana in 1982.
A copy of the original filing can be found here.
