The Nevada Supreme Court has remanded a disciplinary matter where an attorney and the State Bar submitted an agreed resolution

The agreement provides for a 30-month suspension, consisting of 12 months of actual suspension followed by a stayed suspension of 18 months during which Michaelides will be on probation and subject to certain conditions.

Michaelides has admitted to the facts supporting the violations. The record therefore establishes that Michaelides failed to notify the district court and take appropriate remedial actions when Michaelides’ non-lawyer employee made a court appearance by remote audio purporting to be Michaelides, failed to notify his client of the continued hearing date for his case, causing the client to miss that hearing and resulting in a delay of his divorce case, and failed to timely comply with SCR 115’s notice provisions concerning his suspension in Docket No. 83876. The record therefore also establishes that Michaelides committed some of these acts while this court was considering discipline for similar misconduct and the others immediately after this court suspended him for that misconduct. See In re Discipline of Michaelides, No. 83876, 2022 WL 510003 (Nev. Feb. 18, 2022) (Order of Suspension).

Rejection

we are not convinced that the agreed-upon discipline is sufficient to serve the purpose of attorney discipline—to protect the public, the courts, and the legal profession. See State Bar of Nev. v. Claiborne, 104 Nev. 115, 213, 756 P.2d 464, 527-28 (1988). Thus, we reject the conditional guilty plea agreement and remand this matter for further proceedings.

The case is IN THE MATTER OF DISCIPLINE OF THOMAS C. MICHAELIDES. remanded on February 9, 2024.