State of Nebraska ex rel.Counsel for Discipline of the Nebraska Supreme Court, relator,
Lennox J. Simon, respondent.
Original action. Judgment of disbarment.
Heavican, C.J., Wright, Connolly, Stephan, McCormack, Miller-Lerman, an d Cassel, JJ.
The District of Columbia Court of Appeals disbarred respondent, Lennox J. Simon.
The Counsel for Discipline of the Nebraska Supreme Court, relator, filed a motion for reciprocal discipline against respondent. We grant the motion for reciprocal discipline and impose the same discipline as the District of Columbia Court of Appeals.
Respondent was admitted to the practice of law in the State of Nebraska on May 17, 1985. Respondent was also admitted to the practice of law in the District of Columbia. On June 28, 2013, respondent was suspended from the practice of law in the State of Nebraska for nonpayment of his Nebraska State Bar Association dues. Respondent had been an inactive member of the Nebraska bar for many years prior to his suspension.
On August 1, 2013, the District of Columbia Court of Appeals issued an order which disbarred respondent. See In re Simon, 73 A.3d 107 (D.C.2013). Respondent's case before the District of Columbia Court of Appeals generally involved his misappropriation of funds from the estate of an incapacitated person.
On August 22, 2013, relator filed a motion for reciprocal discipline pursuant to Neb. Ct. R. § 3-321 of the disciplinary rules. On August 28, we filed an order to show cause as to why we should not impose reciprocal discipline. Respondent did not respond to the order to show cause. On September 23, [287 Neb. 79] relator filed a response to the order to show cause, in which relator requested that we impose the same discipline as the District of Columbia Court of Appeals and enter an order disbarring respondent from the practice of law in the State of Nebraska. Relator also noted that respondent failed to respond to the order to show cause and to make a showing as to why he should not be disbarred.
The basic issues in a disciplinary proceeding against an attorney are whether discipline should be imposed and, if so, the type of discipline appropriate under the circumstances. State ex rel. Counsel for Dis. v. Kleinsmith, 285 Neb. 312, 826 N.W.2d 860 (2013). In a reciprocal discipline proceeding, a judicial determination of attorney misconduct in one jurisdiction is generally conclusive proof of guilt and is not subject to relitigation in the second jurisdiction. Id. Based on the record before us, we find that respondent has engaged in misconduct.
Neb. Ct. R. § 3-304 of the disciplinary rules provides that the following may be considered as ...