State ex rel. Counsel for Dis. v. McCarty

- 484 -
Nebraska Supreme Court Advance Sheets
321 Nebraska Reports
STATE EX REL. COUNSEL FOR DIS. v. McCARTY
Cite as 321 Neb. 484
State of Nebraska ex rel. Counsel for Discipline
of the Nebraska Supreme Court, relator, v.
Ryan C. McCarty, respondent.
___ N.W.3d ___
Filed May 22, 2026. 	No. S-25-699.
1. Disciplinary Proceedings. 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.
2. Disciplinary Proceedings: States: Proof. 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.
3. Disciplinary Proceedings: States. Although a judicial determination of
attorney misconduct in another state is generally given conclusive effect,
the Nebraska Supreme Court is entitled, in a reciprocal discipline action,
to independently assess the facts and independently determine the appro-
priate disciplinary action to be taken against the attorney in Nebraska.
4. Disciplinary Proceedings. In a disciplinary proceeding, an isolated
incident not representing a pattern of conduct is considered a mitigating
factor.
5. ____. The Nebraska Supreme Court imposes disciplinary sanctions to
deter others from misconduct in order to protect the public and to main-
tain the reputation of the bar as a whole.
Original action. Judgment of probation.
Justin C. Dawson, Assistant Counsel for Discipline, for
relator.
Ryan C. McCarty, pro se on brief, and Adam J. Sipple, of
Sipple Law, for respondent.
Nebraska Supreme Court Online Library
www.nebraska.gov/apps-courts-epub/
10/18/2026 12:45 AM CDT

- 485 -
Nebraska Supreme Court Advance Sheets
321 Nebraska Reports
STATE EX REL. COUNSEL FOR DIS. v. McCARTY
Cite as 321 Neb. 484
Funke, 	C.J., 	Cassel, 	Stacy, 	Papik, 	Freudenberg,
Bergevin, and Vaughn, JJ.
Per Curiam.
INTRODUCTION
The Supreme Court of Missouri entered an order regarding
the respondent, Ryan C. McCarty. The relator, the Counsel for
Discipline of the Nebraska Supreme Court, moved for recipro-
cal discipline of the respondent pursuant to Neb. Ct. R. § 3-321
of the disciplinary rules. We grant the motion for reciprocal
discipline and impose a term of probation, in lieu of suspen-
sion, upon conditions.
BACKGROUND
The respondent was admitted to the practice of law in the
State of Nebraska on September 15, 2020, and has also been
admitted to the practice of law in the State of Missouri. He
is currently an inactive member of the Nebraska State Bar
Association and an active, but suspended, member of the State
Bar of Missouri.
On July 22, 2025, the Supreme Court of Missouri issued an
order in which it found that the respondent violated the Missouri
Rules of Professional Conduct. It found the respondent violated
“Rules 4-1.9(c)(l) and 4-1.9(c)(2).” It explained that “Rule
4-1.9 governs an attorney’s duties to former clients and extends
the duty of confidentiality enshrined in Rule 4-1.6.”
The charges arose from the respondent’s breach of client
confidentiality. The underlying facts generally involved the
respondent’s disclosing confidential information related to his
representation of his former client to the public and others.
The Supreme Court of Missouri found that the respondent
revealed information related to his representation of his for-
mer client and used that information to the client’s disadvan-
tage. It said that the information disseminated was not gener-
ally known and that the respondent disclosed the information
without the client’s informed consent or implied authorization
in order to carry out representation.

- 486 -
Nebraska Supreme Court Advance Sheets
321 Nebraska Reports
STATE EX REL. COUNSEL FOR DIS. v. McCARTY
Cite as 321 Neb. 484
The order “suspended [the respondent] indefinitely from the
practice of law with no leave to apply for reinstatement for one
year.” By its terms, the 1-year period proscribing application
for reinstatement would expire on July 22, 2026.
In September 2025, the relator moved for reciprocal disci-
pline in this court pursuant to § 3-321. The operative motion
stated that the above-cited Supreme Court of Missouri rules
are in sum and substance the equivalent to Neb. Ct. R. of
Prof. Cond. §§ 3-501.6(a) (rev. 2019) (confidentiality of infor-
mation) and 3-501.9(c)(1) and (2) (duties to former clients).
We entered an order to show cause as to why this court
should or should not enter an order imposing the identical
discipline, or greater or lesser discipline, as the court deems
appropriate. The relator filed a response that requested recipro-
cal discipline of suspension for 1 year. The respondent filed
a response in which he requested that this court “decline to
impose identical discipline, or any discipline whatsoever.”
After considering the parties’ responses, we directed them to
brief the issue of appropriate discipline. Thereafter, the matter
proceeded to oral argument and was submitted.
ANALYSIS
[1,2] 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. 1 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. 2 The Supreme Court of Missouri made such a
determination of misconduct here. We reject the respondent’s
attempt to relitigate that determination.
1 State ex rel. Counsel for Dis. v. Panick, 311 Neb. 627, 973 N.W.2d 710
(2022).
2 State ex rel. Counsel for Dis. v. Campbell, 318 Neb. 23, 13 N.W.3d 97
(2024).

- 487 -
Nebraska Supreme Court Advance Sheets
321 Nebraska Reports
STATE EX REL. COUNSEL FOR DIS. v. McCARTY
Cite as 321 Neb. 484
Our disciplinary rules set forth the discipline that may be con-
sidered for attorney misconduct. The disciplinary options are:
(1) Disbarment by the Court; or
(2) Suspension by the Court; or
(3) Probation by the Court in lieu of or subsequent to
suspension, on such terms as the Court may designate; or
(4) Censure and reprimand by the Court; or
(5) Temporary suspension by the Court; or
(6) Private reprimand by the Committee on Inquiry or
Disciplinary Review Board. 3
This court may, in its discretion, impose one or more of the
disciplinary sanctions set forth above. 4
[3] Another disciplinary rule 5 provides, in part, that upon
receipt of appropriate notice that a member of Nebraska’s bar
has been disciplined in another jurisdiction, this court may
enter an order imposing the identical discipline, or greater or
lesser discipline as the court deems appropriate. Although a
judicial determination of attorney misconduct in another state
is generally given conclusive effect, the Nebraska Supreme
Court is entitled, in a reciprocal discipline action, to inde-
pendently assess the facts and independently determine the
appropriate disciplinary action to be taken against the attor-
ney in this state. 6
Upon due consideration of the record, and the facts as deter-
mined by the Supreme Court of Missouri, we determine that
the appropriate reciprocal discipline is probation, in lieu of sus-
pension, upon conditions. Four reasons underlie our decision to
vary from the discipline imposed by Missouri.
The respondent’s inactive membership status already pro-
tects the public in Nebraska. The respondent asserts that he
has been on inactive status since May 18, 2023. The relator
3 Neb. Ct. R. § 3-304(A).
4 § 3-304(B).
5 § 3-321(A).
6 State ex rel. Counsel for Dis. v. Panick, supra note 1.

- 488 -
Nebraska Supreme Court Advance Sheets
321 Nebraska Reports
STATE EX REL. COUNSEL FOR DIS. v. McCARTY
Cite as 321 Neb. 484
states the same. Inactive members are precluded from practic-
ing law in Nebraska. 7
The discipline we impose is based solely upon the reci-
procity dictated by our rules. 8 We see nothing to suggest that
the respondent failed to timely notify the relator of the disci-
pline imposed by Missouri. Nor do we see any suggestion of
misconduct occurring in or related to Nebraska.
[4] Other than the Missouri proceeding underlying the recip-
rocal proceeding now before us, the record does not disclose
any disciplinary complaints, proceedings, or dispositions. In a
disciplinary proceeding, an isolated incident not representing
a pattern of conduct is considered a mitigating factor. 9
[5] Finally, our choice of discipline best allows assessment
of reinstatement to active status upon the circumstances then
existing. We impose disciplinary sanctions to deter others
from misconduct in order to protect the public and to maintain
the reputation of the bar as a whole. 10 Our disposition accom-
plishes both goals. Therefore, we exercise our discretion to
impose a different level of discipline.
CONCLUSION
The motion for reciprocal discipline is granted. The respond-
ent is placed on probation, in lieu of suspension, upon
conditions.
During the period of probation, the respondent shall not
engage in the practice of law in Nebraska and shall not vio-
late any rule of professional conduct as a lawyer in any other
jurisdiction. As a further condition of probation, at the time
of application for reinstatement to active membership and in
addition to the requirements to submit an application with the
7 See Neb. Ct. R. § 3-803(B)(2)(b) (rev. 2025).
8 See § 3-321.
9 State ex rel. Counsel for Dis. v. Pierson, 281 Neb. 673, 798 N.W.2d 580
(2011).
10 State ex rel. Counsel for Dis. v. Janousek, 267 Neb. 328, 674 N.W.2d 464
(2004).

- 489 -
Nebraska Supreme Court Advance Sheets
321 Nebraska Reports
STATE EX REL. COUNSEL FOR DIS. v. McCARTY
Cite as 321 Neb. 484
Attorney Services Division and to pay the required fees and
dues, the respondent shall be required to submit to a character
and fitness review before the Nebraska State Bar Commission
consisting of updating information the commission uses to
determine character and fitness to practice; to pay the fees and
costs of investigation, including any further inquiry or hearing
before the commission; and to show his fitness at that time to
practice law. The period of probation shall continue until the
respondent successfully obtains reinstatement to active mem-
bership in the Nebraska State Bar Association and complies
with all requirements of this judgment.
The respondent is directed to pay costs and expenses in
accordance with Neb. Rev. Stat. §§ 7-114 and 7-115 (Reissue
2022) and Neb. Ct. R. §§ 3-310(P) (rev. 2023) and 3-323(B) of
the disciplinary rules within 60 days after an order imposing
costs and expenses, if any, is entered by the court. Upon any
failure to comply with this judgment, the respondent shall be
subject to punishment for contempt of this court.
Judgment of probation.