State ex rel. Counsel for Dis. v. Gast, 298 Neb. 203

Background

William E. Gast, admitted 1973, faced formal charges alleging unauthorized practice of law while administratively suspended (June 30, 2015–Jan 22, 2016) and filing frivolous pleadings in long-running "Florida v. Countrywide Truck" litigation.
Gast continued to represent client Connie Surber during his 2015–2016 suspension, failed to notify the client, the court, or opposing counsel, and later self-reported only after opposing counsel threatened to report him.
Relator (Counsel for Discipline) requested documents and a written response; Gast largely failed to cooperate with the disciplinary investigation and did not answer the formal charges or brief mitigation.
Gast had a recent prior disciplinary proceeding in which he was suspended and was sanctioned for communications with a judge and for filing a frivolous recusal motion in the Countrywide Truck litigation; the Supreme Court previously suspended him (2017 decision).
The Court granted Relator’s motion for judgment on the pleadings (facts deemed admitted) and considered only appropriate discipline; it adopted Relator’s recommendation: an indefinite suspension of at least 1 year (to run consecutively to his prior suspension), conditioned reinstatement requirements, and payment of costs.

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Did Gast engage in unauthorized practice while suspended?	Relator: Gast continued representing Surber during administrative suspension and failed to withdraw or notify client/court.	Gast: No substantive defense in record; previously testified he did not represent clients after suspension (but inconsistent).	Held: Facts admitted; Court found unauthorized practice and pattern of noncompliance.
Did Gast file frivolous pleadings in Countrywide Truck litigation?	Relator: Several filings (including a recusal motion) were frivolous and sanctioned by district court.	Gast: Challenged by prior proceedings; did not contest factual allegations here.	Held: Court treated prior findings and district court sanction as evidence of frivolous filings and misconduct.
Is failure to cooperate with disciplinary process an aggravating factor?	Relator: Gast’s lack of timely responses and failure to participate undermines discipline process and warrants harsher sanction.	Gast: No response or mitigation in record to counter this claim.	Held: Court held noncooperation is significant aggravation and diminishes mitigating weight of self-report.
What discipline is appropriate?	Relator: Indefinite suspension of at least 1 year, reinstatement conditioned on sworn showing of fitness and addressing violations; costs.	Gast: No brief or argument presented to mitigate sanction.	Held: Court adopted Relator’s recommendation: indefinite suspension minimum 1 year (beginning March 3, 2018), consecutive to prior suspension, with reinstatement requirements and costs.

Key Cases Cited

State ex rel. Counsel for Dis. v. Gast, 296 Neb. 687, 896 N.W.2d 583 (Neb. 2017) (prior disciplinary decision involving Gast informing sanction and suspension analysis)
State ex rel. Counsel for Dis. v. Carbullido, 278 Neb. 721, 773 N.W.2d 141 (Neb. 2009) (cumulative misconduct can justify severe sanctions, including disbarment)
State ex rel. Counsel for Dis. v. Tonderum, 286 Neb. 942, 840 N.W.2d 487 (Neb. 2013) (disciplinary proceedings are de novo on the record)
State ex rel. Counsel for Dis. v. Keith, 286 Neb. 551, 840 N.W.2d 456 (Neb. 2013) (suspension for continuing to represent client after administrative suspension)
State ex rel. Counsel for Dis. v. Tighe, 295 Neb. 30, 886 N.W.2d 530 (Neb. 2016) (failure to respond timely is aggravating and shows disrespect for disciplinary jurisdiction)
State ex rel. Counsel for Dis. v. Wickenkamp, 277 Neb. 16, 759 N.W.2d 492 (Neb. 2009) (nonresponse to inquiries threatens credibility of disciplinary proceedings)
Burns v. Burns, 296 Neb. 184, 892 N.W.2d 135 (Neb. 2017) (court may take judicial notice of its own records and prior proceedings)