State ex rel. Counsel for Dis. v. Garrison, 296 Neb. 550

Dustin A. Garrison, admitted to Nebraska bar in 2008, represented a client in a vehicle injury claim arising in August 2008 after another lawyer was suspended; no written engagement agreement was signed.
Garrison filed suit in Nebraska (naming Serco, Inc. as a New Jersey corporation and the driver Devin Witt) and obtained a default judgment; later appellate reversal required vacatur of that default judgment.
Service and identification issues: the vehicle and driver were associated with an entity in Borger, Texas, and Serco entities denied employment of Witt; later proper service was effected by successor counsel on the Texas entity and the Texas claims were dismissed.
Throughout the litigation, Garrison communicated with the client via Facebook but repeatedly failed to adequately explain case status or respond to client inquiries; he also discussed contingency-fee percentage (agreeing to 33%).
Counsel for Discipline charged violations of the attorney oath and multiple Nebraska Rules of Professional Conduct (competence, diligence, communication, fees, and misconduct). Garrison filed a conditional admission admitting the violations and waived further proceedings.
The Nebraska Supreme Court accepted the conditional admission, suspended Garrison for 90 days, and conditioned reinstatement on one year of monitored probation with detailed monitoring requirements.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Competence/diligence (Rule 3-501.1, 3-501.3)	Garrison failed to competently and diligently pursue the correct defendant and prosecute the client’s claim.	Garrison conditionally admitted the violations and did not contest the factual allegations.	Court found violations of competence and diligence rules.
Communication (Rule 3-501.4(a),(b))	Garrison failed to adequately explain case status and answer client questions despite repeated requests.	Garrison admitted the failures and waived contest.	Court found violations of communication rules.
Fees (Rule 3-501.5(b),(c))	Fee arrangement/communication about contingency fee was inadequate or problematic in context of representation.	Garrison acknowledged fee issues in his conditional admission.	Court found violations related to fee rules.
Misconduct and sanction (Rule 3-508.4(a); disciplinary process §3-313)	Discipline sought for professional misconduct and proposed sanction.	Garrison tendered a conditional admission consenting to discipline and proposed sanction (90-day suspension + monitored probation).	Court approved conditional admission, suspended Garrison 90 days and imposed 1 year monitored probation upon reinstatement, with detailed monitoring terms and costs.

Carrel v. Serco Inc., 291 Neb. 61 (reversing trial court and remanding with directions to vacate default judgment)