State ex re. Counsel for Dis. v. Island, 296 Neb. 624

Respondent Bell Island represented a woman (the client) whose 2-year-old daughter was murdered in 2008; the client had given inconsistent statements to police before Island’s involvement and then declined further statements.
A grand jury later indicted the client (accessory after the fact) and Dustin Chauncey (intentional child abuse resulting in death); Chauncey’s trial proceeded in February 2015.
Prosecutor James Zimmerman sought the client’s testimony; the client invoked the Fifth Amendment, the court ordered her to testify, and she was held in contempt after consulting with Island and refusing.
While the trial was ongoing, Island authorized a press release stating the prosecution’s version of events “forces [the client] to either lie or face perjury charges,” implicitly questioning Zimmerman’s integrity.
The Counsel for Discipline charged Island with violating multiple Nebraska Rules of Professional Conduct (trial publicity, truthfulness in statements, and misconduct). A referee found violations of §§ 3-503.6, 3-504.1(a), and 3-508.4(a) and (d) and recommended a public reprimand; neither party filed exceptions, and the Nebraska Supreme Court granted judgment on the pleadings and imposed a public reprimand.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether Island violated rules by issuing a public statement that could prejudice the adjudicative proceeding and contained false/misleading assertions	Relator: Island knowingly made false/materially misleading statements and an extrajudicial public statement likely to prejudice the proceeding, violating §§ 3-503.6 and 3-504.1(a)	Island: (implicitly) disputed allegations in answer but did not file exceptions to referee findings; argued conduct did not warrant greater discipline	Court: Agreed with referee — Island violated §§ 3-503.6 and 3-504.1(a) by issuing the press release that questioned prosecutor’s integrity and risked prejudice to the trial
Appropriate discipline for the violations	Relator: Public reprimand (and costs) appropriate given offense, need for deterrence, and protection of bar’s reputation	Island: No exceptions; mitigation offered—regret, lack of intent to impugn integrity, limited prior discipline	Court: Public reprimand imposed, considering aggravating (offensive public release; prior public reprimand) and mitigating factors (remorse; no other discipline)

State ex rel. Counsel for Dis. v. Ubbinga, 295 Neb. 995 (referee findings may be final when no exceptions filed)
State ex rel. Counsel for Dis. v. Thebarge, 289 Neb. 356 (2014) (disciplinary proceeding is a trial de novo on the record)
State ex rel. Counsel for Dis. v. Sundvold, 287 Neb. 818 (disciplinary charges require clear and convincing evidence)
State ex rel. Counsel for Dis. v. Tighe, 295 Neb. 30 (standard for proving disciplinary violations)
State v. Chauncey, 295 Neb. 453 (criminal conviction of Chauncey at trial referenced in factual background)