State ex rel. Counsel for Dis. v. Pearson
310 Neb. 256
| Neb. | 2021Background
- Gary R. Pearson, admitted to the Nebraska bar in 1976, was the respondent in a disciplinary proceeding initiated by the Counsel for Discipline (relator).
- Formal charges were filed in October 2020 and later amended to four counts alleging (a) charging/collecting excessive fees in three estate matters (Wysong, Truax, Jaunzemis), (b) making false statements in court pleadings and to the relator (Wysong), and (c) improper maintenance of his client trust account.
- The referee held an evidentiary hearing, found violations of multiple Nebraska Rules of Professional Conduct (competence, unreasonable fee, safekeeping client funds, candor to tribunal, false statements, and general misconduct) and concluded Pearson also violated his attorney oath (§ 7-104).
- The referee recommended suspension of Pearson’s law license for 1–2 years, noting no prior discipline but criticizing Pearson’s candor and tendency to minimize misconduct; the record included mitigating evidence (age, Vietnam veteran status, character letters, cooperation).
- The Nebraska Supreme Court granted the relator’s motion for judgment on the pleadings, adopted the referee’s findings as proved by clear and convincing evidence, and imposed an 18‑month suspension with directions to comply with disciplinary rules and to pay costs.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Pearson charged and collected unreasonable fees in estate matters | Relator: Pearson billed and collected excessive fees in Wysong, Truax, and Jaunzemis, violating Rule 3-501.5(a) | Pearson: Characterized errors as oversight, carelessness, or permissible billing for services rendered | Court: Relator proved violations by clear and convincing evidence; Pearson charged unreasonable fees in those matters |
| Whether Pearson made false statements to tribunal and disciplinary authorities | Relator: Pearson made false statements in court pleadings and to the relator in the Wysong matter, violating candor and disciplinary rules | Pearson: Denied intent or minimized inaccuracies as mistakes | Court: Found false statements established and violations of Rules 3-503.3(a)(1) and 3-508.1(a) |
| Whether Pearson failed to safekeep client funds (trust account) | Relator: Pearson improperly maintained client trust account, mingling or retaining personal funds, violating Rule 3-501.15 | Pearson: Presented explanations but conceded trust account handling was improper; framed as oversight | Court: Proven by clear and convincing evidence; violation of Rule 3-501.15(b) |
| Appropriate discipline for multiple ethics violations | Relator: Sought meaningful suspension within established range to protect public and deter others | Pearson: Mitigating factors (long good-standing practice, veteran, character letters, no prior discipline) warrant leniency | Court: Adopted referee’s recommended range and imposed an 18‑month suspension, required compliance with reinstatement rules and payment of costs |
Key Cases Cited
- State ex rel. Counsel for Dis. v. Wolfe, 301 Neb. 117 (2018) (discusses standard of proof in disciplinary proceedings and factors for determining discipline)