In Re: Discipline of William O'Mara ( 2015 )

 and he
he formal hearing about the true identity of Maureen Lidster,
a letter
enied that the Maureen Lidster named in the will was his wife in
of the
o the State Bar. The State Bar filed a complaint alleging violations
interest:
ollowing rules of professional conduct: RPC 1.8(c) (conflict of
al), RPC
current clients: specific rules), RPC 3.3 (candor towards the tribun
ssion and
4.1 (truthfulness in statements to others), RPC 8.1(a) (bar admi
that the
disciplinary matters), and RPC 8.4 (misconduct). The panel found
incing
violations alleged in the complaint were proven by clear and conv
dishonest
evidence. The panel found the following aggravating factors: (1)
ents; or
or selfish motive; (2) submission of false evidence; false statem
refusal to
other deceptive practices during the disciplinary hearing; (3)
antial
acknowledge the wrongful nature of the conduct; and (4) subst
lack of
experience in the practice of law. The panel found that O'Mara's
ating
prior disciplinary history and character and reputation were mitig
from
factors. Further, the panel recommended that O'Mara be suspended
plinary
the practice of law for six months and pay the costs of the disci
proceeding.
This court's automatic review of a disciplinary panel's findings
f,
and recommendations is de novo. SCR 105(3)(b); In re Discipline of Stuhf
h the
108 Nev. 629, 633, 837 P.2d 853, 855 (1992). "Althoug
is not
recommendations of the disciplinary panel are persuasive, this court
ine the
bound by the panels findings and recommendation, and must exam
Discipline of
record anew and exercise independent judgment." In re
Bar has
Schaefer, 117 Nev. 496, 515, 25 P.3d 191, 204 (2001). The State
O'Mara
the burden of showing by clear and convincing evidence that
, 111 Nev.
committed the violations charged. In re Discipline of Drakulich
1556, 1566, 908 P.2d 709, 715 (1995).
SUPREME COURT
Of
NEVADA
2
(0) 1947A
While we conclude that clear and convincing evidence
upports the panel's findings of misconduct, we do not agree that the
aners recommended discipline is commensurate with the misconduct
ommitted. Therefore, we hereby suspend William Michael O'Mara from
ated
the practice of law for one year. O'Mara shall pay the costs associ
the
with the disciplinary proceedings within 30 days from his receipt of
State Bar's bill of costs, see SCR 120, and shall comply with SCR
115 and
SCR 116. The State Bar shall comply with SCR 121.1.
It is so ORDERED.

Chair, Southern Nevada Disciplinary Board
William B. Terry, Chartered
Stan Hunterton, Bar Counsel, State Bar of Nevada
Kimberly Farmer, Executive Director, State Bar of Nevada
Perry Thompson, Admissions Office, United States Supreme Court
SUPREME COURT
OF
NEVADA
5
(0) 1947A