Estate Violations Draw Suspension

The Nebraska Supreme Court has suspended a Lincoln lawyer for 18 months

The respondent practiced law since 1976, including handling estate matters. The violations arise from the respondent’s charging and collecting excessive fees in several estate matters over a 2-year period and, in at least one instance, making false statements in court pleadings and to the relator related to the excessive fees. He also improperly maintained his trust account. Most facts are not in dispute in this case and were stipulated by the respondent and the relator at trial, or acknowledged in the respondent’s testimony.

The referee’s findings and recommendation

With respect to the discipline to be imposed, the referee recommended suspension of the respondent’s license to practice law for a period of 1 to 2 years. The referee noted in the report that the respondent had no prior instances of misconduct or discipline, but found that the respondent “was not candid with the Referee.” With respect to the respondent’s attitude, the referee found that although the respondent “admitted many of the allegations, he did so reluctantly, tended to minimize or explain away his conduct as error, oversight or carelessness.” The referee report acknowledges that the respondent was not charged with misappropriation of client funds in the “Wysong Matter,” but “[t]he record, however, would amply support such a charge had [the relator] seen fit to bring one.”

In mitigation, the referee noted that the respondent was 72 to 73 years old at the time of trial and is an honorably discharged veteran of the U.S. Army who served as a combat infantry medic during the Vietnam War. The respondent has been a member in good standing with the Nebraska State Bar Association since 1976, with no record of prior disciplinary actions against him. The respondent offered eight letters of support attesting to his good character. He was responsive and cooperative with the relator throughout the disciplinary investigation.

A one to two year recommendation was split

We have considered the record, the findings which have been established by clear and convincing evidence, and the applicable law. Upon due consideration, the court finds that the range of the referee’s recommendation is appropriate, and we hereby impose an 18-month suspension.

The case is STATE EX REL. COUNSEL FOR DIS. v. PEARSON. (Mike Frisch)