State of Nebraska ex rel. Counsel for Discipline of the Nebraska Supreme Court, relator.
Frank E. Robak, Sr., respondent.
Disciplinary Proceedings. Violation of a disciplinary rule
concerning the practice of law is a ground for discipline.
Disciplinary Proceedings: Rules of the Supreme Court. Under
Neb. Ct. R. § 3-304, the Nebraska Supreme Court may
impose one or more of the following disciplines: (1)
disbarment; (2) suspension; (3) probation in lieu of or
subsequent to suspension, on such terms as the court may
designate; or (4) censure and reprimand.
Disciplinary Proceedings. To determine whether and to what
extent discipline should be imposed in an attorney discipline
proceeding, the Nebraska Supreme Court considers the
following factors: (1) the nature of the offense, (2) the
need for deterring others, (3) the maintenance of the
reputation of the bar as a whole, (4) the protection of the
public, (5) the attitude of the offender generally, and (6)
the offender's present or future fitness to continue in
the practice of law.
With respect to the imposition of attorney discipline in an
individual case, the Nebraska Supreme Court evaluates each
attorney discipline case in light of its particular facts and
For purposes of determining the proper discipline of an
attorney, the Nebraska Supreme Court considers the
attorney's acts both underlying the events of the case
and throughout the proceeding, as well as any aggravating or
Responding to inquiries and requests for information from the
Counsel for Discipline is an important matter, and an
attorney's cooperation with the discipline process is
fundamental to the credibility of attorney disciplinary
action. Judgment of suspension.
Neb. 749] Julie L. Agena, Assistant Counsel for Discipline,
appearance for respondent.
Heavican, C.J., Miller-Lerman, Cassel, Stacy, Funke, Papik,
and Freudenberg, JJ.
Counsel for Discipline of the Nebraska Supreme Court,
relator, filed formal charges against Frank E. Robak, Sr.,
for violations of the Nebraska Rules of Professional Conduct
and his oath of office as an attorney. Robak failed to
respond. We then granted relator's motion for judgment on
the pleadings limited to the facts but reserved ruling on the
appropriate discipline. Robak defaulted in submitting a
brief. We now conclude that the uncontested violations and
the state of our record mandate that we indefinitely suspend
Robak from the practice of law.
was admitted to the practice of law in Nebraska in September
1983. At all relevant times, he engaged in the practice of
law in Omaha, Nebraska.
record in this case is composed of the uncontested formal
charges. In May 2013, C.H. retained Robak to represent him in
a civil action and paid Robak $5, 000. Over the following 3
years, Robak sporadically communicated with C.H., with the
communication mostly being initiated by C.H. Robak repeatedly
told C.H. that he was working on ...