In Re: Discipline of Dustin Dingman

• Court: Nevada Supreme Court
• Decided: September 11, 2017
• Docket: 72370
• Status: Unpublished

Opinion

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA

IN THE MATTER OF DISCIPLINE OF No. 72370 DUSTIN L. DINGMAN, BAR NO. 7678. FILED SEP 1 1 2017 OH A. BROWN

MB

ORDER APPROVING CONDITIONAL GUILTY PLEA AGREEMENT This is an automatic review of a Southern Nevada Disciplinary Board hearing panel's recommendation that this court approve, pursuant to SCR 113, a conditional guilty plea agreement in exchange for a stated form of discipline for attorney Dustin L. Dingman. Under the agreement, Dingman admitted to violations of RPC 1.15(a) (safekeeping property in trust account), RPC 1.15(b) (commingling funds), RPC 1.15(d) (notice and delivery of funds), and RPC 1.15(e) (holding disputed property). The agreement provides for a six-month-and-one-day suspension, the payment of $38,015.49 in restitution, payment of the costs of the disciplinary proceedings, and completion of 15 Continuing Legal Education (CLE) credits in the area of law-office management. The State Bar has the burden of showing by clear and convincing evidence that Dingman committed the violations charged. In re Discipline of Drakulich, 111 Nev. 1556, 1566, 908 P.2d 709, 715 (1995). Here, however, Dingman has admitted to the facts and violations alleged in the complaint. The record therefore establishes that Dingman violated the above-referenced rules by misappropriating client funds from his trust account.

SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA

(0) 941.7A II - 3cS3'cr-LD four In determining the appropriate discipline, we weigh potential or actors: "the duty violated, the lawyer's mental state, the existence of ctual injury caused by the lawyer's misconduct, and the Lerner, 124 Nev. ggravating and mitigating factors." In re Discipline of itted violating 1232, 1246, 197 P.3d 1067, 1077 (2008). Dingman adm the admitted duties owed to his clients (safekeeping property), but priation of funds violations reflect negligent misconduct as the misappro t settlement was a result of Dingman's assistant failing to pay out clien not received funds. Dingman's clients were harmed because they have nces (multiple funds owed to them. There are two aggravating circumsta law) and five offenses and substantial experience in the practice of d, absence of mitigating circumstances (absence of prior disciplinary recor make restitution a dishonest or selfish motive, timely good faith effort to disclosure to or to rectify consequences of misconduct, full and free proceeding, and disciplinary authority or cooperative attitude toward remorse). SCR 102.5. , see Based on the most serious instance of misconduct at issue ium of Professional Standards for Imposing Lawyer Sanctions, Compend Ass'n 2015) rThe Responsibility Rules and Standards 452 (Am. Bar the sanction ultimate sanction imposed should at least be consistent with a number of for the most serious instance of misconduct among aggravating and violations."), the baseline sanction before considering 4.42(b), Standard mitigating circumstances is suspension, see id. Standard by Dingman's 4.12. Considering the duties violated, the injury caused mstances, we misconduct, and the aggravating and mitigating circu oved. See SCR conclude that the guilty plea agreement should be appr 113(1). SUPREME Counr OF NEVADA

e 2 (01 1947A Accordingly, we hereby suspend attorney Dustin L. Dingman from the practice of law in Nevada for a period of six months and one day. Prior to applying for reinstatement, Dingman must pay restitution as provided in the plea agreement, attend in person and complete 15 CLE credits in law-office management and report those credits directly to the Office of Bar Counsel, and engage in no further conduct constituting a violation of the Nevada Rules of Professional Conduct. Dingman shall also pay the costs of the disciplinary proceedings including $2,500 pursuant to SCR 120, $139.75 in bank record costs, $3,216.25 in trust account audit costs, and the court reporter costs. The parties shall comply with SCR 115 and SCR 121.1. It is so ORDERED.

C.J. erry

Douglas Gibbons

74-4 , J. Hardesty

_AatAlsus, ,J. Parraguirre Stiglich

cc: Chair, Southern Nevada Disciplinary Board Dingman Law Offices C. Stanley Hunterton, Bar Counsel, State Bar of Nevada Kimberly K. Farmer, Executive Director, State Bar of Nevada Perry Thompson, Admissions Office, U.S. Supreme Court SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA

CO) 194Th 3