State ex rel. Counsel for Dis. v. Primmer, 309 Neb. 538

Respondent Chad D. Primmer was admitted to the Nebraska bar in 2003 and was also an active Iowa bar member.
On Jan. 11, 2021, the Iowa Supreme Court found Primmer violated Iowa trust-account and professional-conduct rules (failed monthly reconciliations, no check register, missing client ledgers, inadequate client notice/accounting on withdrawals, and false annual certification).
Iowa imposed a 60-day suspension plus costs; Primmer voluntarily consented to temporary suspension in an affidavit attached to the Iowa order.
Nebraska Counsel for Discipline filed a motion for reciprocal discipline under Neb. Ct. R. § 3-321, asserting the Iowa rules are equivalent to Nebraska professional-conduct rules governing trust accounts and misconduct.
Nebraska issued an order to show cause; Primmer responded by agreeing to identical discipline to that imposed in Iowa.
The Nebraska Supreme Court granted reciprocal discipline and imposed an immediate 60-day suspension, directing compliance with suspension-notification and cost-payment requirements.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether Nebraska should impose reciprocal discipline based on Iowa's judgment	Iowa's determination is conclusive; rules are equivalent so reciprocal discipline is proper	Primmer consented to identical discipline (no relitigation)	Granted reciprocal discipline; imposed suspension based on Iowa judgment
What sanction is appropriate	Identical 60-day suspension (as imposed by Iowa)	Agreed to identical 60-day suspension	Court imposed a 60-day suspension effective immediately (noting it could have chosen a different sanction if case originated in Nebraska)

State ex rel. Counsel for Dis. v. Murphy, 283 Neb. 982 (Neb. 2012) (reciprocal-discipline principles; prior jurisdictional finding of misconduct is generally conclusive and not relitigable)