State ex rel. Nebraska State Bar Ass'n v. Blanchard

• Decision Date: 17 December 1965
• Docket Number: No. 35577,35577
• Citation: 138 N.W.2d 804,179 Neb. 452
• Parties: The STATE of Nebraska ex rel. NEBRASKA STATE BAR ASSOCIATION, Relator, v. Robert H. BLANCHARD, Respondent.
• Court: Nebraska Supreme Court

Page 804

138 N.W.2d 804

179 Neb. 452

The STATE of Nebraska ex rel. NEBRASKA STATE BAR ASSOCIATION, Relator, v. Robert H. BLANCHARD, Respondent.

No. 35577.

Supreme Court of Nebraska.

Dec. 17, 1965.

Syllabus by the Court

The disbarment of an attorney is required where he converted the proceeds of a judgment collected for a client and refused to return an unearned retainer after his withdrawal from a case, all in violation of Canons 11 and 44 of the Canons of Professional Ethics adopted by the Supreme Court of this state.

Clarence A. H. Meyer, Atty. Gen., C. C. Sheldon, Asst. Atty. Gen., Lincoln, for relator.

Frederick D. Williams, Omaha, for respondent.

Heard before WHITE, C. J., and CARTER, SPENCER, BOSLAUGH, BROWER, and McCOWN, JJ.

CARTER, Justice.

The State on the relation of the Nebraska State Bar Association instituted disciplinary proceedings against respondent as an attorney. J. R. Swenson was appointed by the court as referee, and the record of the hearing had before him and his report were filed on September 20, 1965. Respondent has filed no exceptions to the referee's report in accordance with Rule III, section 8, Revised Rules of the Supreme Court, 1963, which provides: 'Within 10 days after the filing of such report, either party may file written exceptions to such report. If no exceptions are filed, the court in its discretion may consider the findings final and conclusive, and on motion shall enter such order as the evidence and law require.' The relator now moves that the report be approved and confirmed, and that an appropriate disciplinary order be entered.

The findings of the referee are as follows: 'The respondent has violated Rule No. 11 of the Canons of Professional Ethics promulgated and adopted by the Nebraska State Bar Association in converning to his own use the sum of $260.47 received by him in his capacity as attorney for Ervin Underwood. The respondent has likewise violated the said Rule No. 11 in failing to refund to his client, Frances Sims, the sum of $51.00 received by him as a retainer in an action from which he subsequently desired to withdraw despite a promise by the respondent to make such refund. The respondent has likewise violated Rule No. 44 in circumstances surrounding his withdrawal from representation of the said Frances Sims. The referee, therefore, recommends that the respondent be subjected to disciplinary action by the Supreme Court of the State of Nebraska.'

Rule No. 11 of the Canons of...