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

In July 2016 the Counsel for Discipline filed one-count formal charges against attorney Bell Island for a press release he issued on behalf of his client during a 2015 murder trial.
The press release accused the prosecutor (Zimmerman) of seeking testimony that would force the client “to either lie or face perjury,” and was distributed to the media while the co-defendant’s trial was ongoing.
A referee found Island violated Nebraska Rules of Professional Conduct §§ 3-503.6 (trial publicity), 3-504.1(a) (truthfulness in statements to others), and 3-508.4(a) and (d) (misconduct); the referee rejected allegations that Island violated his oath or § 3-504.4.
Neither party filed exceptions to the referee’s report; Counsel for Discipline moved for judgment on the pleadings under Neb. Ct. R. § 3-310(L).
The Nebraska Supreme Court accepted the referee’s findings as final, concluded the violations were proved by clear and convincing evidence, granted the motion, and imposed a public reprimand.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether Island violated rules by issuing the press release	The press release was a knowingly false/misleading extra‑judicial statement that prejudiced the proceeding and violated §§ 3-503.6, 3-504.1(a), 3-508.4(a),(d)	Island denied the allegations in his answer and later said he regretted the wording and did not intend to impugn the prosecutor	Court held Island violated §§ 3-503.6, 3-504.1(a), and 3-508.4(a),(d) based on referee’s findings
Whether Island violated his oath and § 3-504.4 (respect for third persons)	Counsel argued the press release disrespected third persons and violated the oath	Island disputed the charge; referee found no violation of oath or § 3-504.4	Court adopted referee’s finding: no violation of oath or § 3-504.4
Whether the referee’s findings are final without exceptions	Counsel moved for judgment on the pleadings because no exceptions were filed	Island did not file exceptions	Court treated referee’s factual findings as final and granted the motion
Appropriate discipline for the misconduct	Counsel sought discipline proportionate to prejudicial extra‑judicial statements	Island pointed to mitigation (regret, no intent, limited prior discipline)	Court imposed a public reprimand, noting aggravating and mitigating factors

State ex rel. Counsel for Dis. v. Ubbinga, 295 Neb. 995 (recognizing referee’s findings may be final when no exceptions filed)
State ex rel. Counsel for Dis. v. Thebarge, 289 Neb. 356 (disciplinary proceedings are 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 (standards for proving attorney misconduct and assessing discipline)