In Re: Discipline of Loren Datlof ( 2015 )

 (d) full restitution of the fees collected from the clients named in the
complaint for a total of $17,075.00; (e) participation in and agreement to
binding arbitration in any fee dispute matters filed during the
probationary period; (f) any new grievance determined to rise to a level
warranting discipline will be considered a violation of probation; and (g)
any future failure to respond to the State Bar will result in a
recommendation that the stayed suspension be imposed. The agreement
also provides for a public reprimand upon successful completion of
probation and for Datlof to the pay the costs of the disciplinary
proceedings (excluding bar counsel and staff salaries).
Based on our review of the record, we conclude that the guilty
plea agreement should be approved. See SCR 113(1). In determining the
appropriate discipline, this court has considered four factors to be
weighed: "the duty violated, the lawyer's mental state, the potential or
actual injury caused by the lawyer's misconduct, and the existence of
aggravating or mitigating factors." In re Discipline of Lerner, 124 Nev.
1232, 1246, 197 P.3d 1067, 1077 (2008). Considering these factors, we
agree that a suspension is appropriate. See ABA Standards for Imposing
Lawyer Sanctions, Compendium of Professional Responsibility Rules and
Standards, Standard 4.42 (2015) (indicating that suspension is
appropriate for lack of diligence where "lawyer knowingly fails to perform
services for a client and causes injury or potential injury to a client" or
engages in a pattern of neglect and causes injury or potential injury to a
client"); id. Standard 7.2 (indicating that suspension is appropriate for
violations of duties owed as a professional where "lawyer knowingly
engages in conduct that is a violation of a duty owed as a professional and
causes injury or potential injury to a client, the public, or the legal
system"). Further, considering the aggravating factors (multiple offenses
SUPREME COURT
OF
NEVADA
2
(0) 1947A eo
and vulnerable victims) and mitigating factors (free and full disclosure
and cooperative attitude, inexperience in the practice of law, physical
disability, interim rehabilitation, and remorse) found by the hearing
panel, we also agree that the suspension should be stayed provided that
Datlof successfully completes a probationary period.
We hereby impose a one-year suspension. The suspension
shall be stayed subject to Datlof successfully completing a three-year
probationary period subject to the conditions set forth above. The
probationary period shall commence upon entry of this order. Datloff
must comply with all of the conditions in the plea agreement, as outlined
above, and shall pay the costs of the disciplinary proceedings, excluding
bar counsel and staff salaries, within 30 days of receipt of the State Bar's
bill of costs. See SCR 120. If Datlof successfully completes the
probationary period, the State Bar shall issue the public reprimand
attached to the amended conditional guilty plea agreement.
It is so ORDERED.
oga-tc , C.J.
Hardesty
Pickering
SUPREME COURT
OF
NEVADA
3
( 0) 194 Th
DOUGLAS and SAITTA, JJ., dissenting:
We dissent because, having considered the relevant factors, we
are not convinced that a stayed suspension is sufficient to protect the
public. We therefore would reject the amended conditional guilty plea
agreement and remand for further proceedings.
J.
Dougla
/ '
J.
cc: Chair, Southern Nevada Disciplinary Board
Loren C. Datlof
Stan Hunterton, Bar Counsel, State Bar of Nevada
Kimberly K. Farmer, Executive Director, State Bar of Nevada
Perry Thompson, Admissions Office, United States Supreme Court
SUPREME COURT
OF
NEVADA
4
(0) 1947A e