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

Dustin A. Garrison, admitted 2008, practiced in Beatrice, Nebraska; Counsel for Discipline filed one-count formal charges (Aug 2016).
Client injured in Aug 2008 by vehicle driven by Devin Witt, vehicle tied to “SERCO” in Borger, Texas; initial Texas counsel suspended and Garrison took over in July 2009 without a signed engagement agreement.
Garrison sued a different corporate entity (Serco, Inc. of New Jersey) in Nebraska, obtained a default judgment in 2013, and pursued garnishment and collection efforts despite facts indicating the New Jersey entity was unrelated and had never employed Witt.
The Nebraska Supreme Court reversed and ordered vacatur of the default judgment in Carrel v. Serco Inc.; the case was later refiled properly against the Texas SERCO and Witt by successor counsel, and the Texas claims were dismissed.
During the representation, Garrison repeatedly gave evasive or insufficient communications to the client via Facebook, discussed contingency fees (33%), failed to adequately explain status, and ultimately moved to withdraw in July 2015.
Garrison conditionally admitted violations of his oath and several Nebraska Rules of Professional Conduct and accepted a stipulated sanction: 90-day suspension followed by one year of monitored probation upon reinstatement, with detailed monitoring requirements and payment of costs.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether Garrison breached competence (Rule 3-501.1) by suing the wrong corporate entity	Counsel for Discipline: Garrison pursued claims against an unrelated New Jersey Serco and failed to investigate properly	Garrison: (through conditional admission) did not contest facts but sought resolution by conditional admission	Court found violation of Rule 3-501.1 and accepted conditional admission
Whether Garrison failed to act with diligence (Rule 3-501.3)	Discipline: delays, inadequate case management, pursuit of judgment despite identity issues	Garrison: waived contest via conditional admission	Court found violation of Rule 3-501.3
Whether Garrison failed to communicate adequately (Rule 3-501.4(a),(b))	Discipline: client received evasive Facebook messages and inadequate explanations	Garrison: waived contest via conditional admission	Court found violation of Rule 3-501.4(a),(b)
Whether fee issues and misconduct justify discipline (Rules 3-501.5(b),(c) and 3-508.4(a))	Discipline: improper fee handling/fee disclosures and misconduct in prosecution	Garrison: waived contest and accepted stipulated discipline	Court found violations of fee and misconduct rules and imposed 90-day suspension + 1 year monitored probation upon reinstatement

Carrel v. Serco Inc., 291 Neb. 61 (Neb. 2015) (reversed trial court and directed vacatur of default judgment against Serco in New Jersey)