State ex rel. Counsel for Dis. v. Dorsey

to be completely credible. The district court also found that
their testimony effectively rebutted any presumed prejudice.
There is nothing in the record to support drawing a different
conclusion. The district court did not abuse its discretion in
overruling Collins’ motion for new trial. This assignment of
error has no merit.
CONCLUSION
For each of the foregoing reasons, we affirm the district
court’s judgment.
A ffirmed.
STaTe ex reL. COUNSeL FOr dIS. v. dOrSey 	865
Cite as 283 Neb. 865
StAte of NebrASkA ex rel . C ouNSel for diSCipliNe
of the NebrASkA Supreme C ourt, relAtor ,
v. JoSeph m. dorSey, reSpoNdeNt.
812 N.W.2d 302
Filed May 11, 2012. 	No. S-12-223.
Original action. Judgment of disbarment.
heAviCAN, C.J., Wright, C oNNolly, StephAN, mCC ormACk ,
and miller-lermAN, JJ.
per C uriAm.
INTrOdUCTION
This case is before the court on the voluntary surrender of
license filed by respondent, Joseph M. dorsey, on March 22,
2012. The court accepts respondent’s voluntary surrender of his
license and enters an order of disbarment.
STaTeMeNT OF FaCTS
respondent was admitted to the practice of law in the
State of Nebraska on June 25, 1973. respondent was also
licensed to practice law in the district of Columbia, but the
district of Columbia Court of appeals disbarred him from the
practice of law on december 14, 1983, for obtaining money
fraudulently and dishonestly and thereby engaging in conduct
involving moral turpitude. See In re Dorsey, 469 a.2d 1246
(d.C. 1983).
Nebraska Supreme Court Online Library
www.nebraska.gov/apps-courts-epub/
11/01/2026 04:42 AM CST

On March 15, 2012, the Committee on Inquiry of the First
disciplinary district filed a motion for reciprocal discipline
and an application for temporary suspension of respondent’s
license. an order to show cause with respect to this motion
and this application was entered on March 21. On March 22,
respondent filed a voluntary surrender in which he admitted that
on december 14, 1983, he had been disbarred by the district
of Columbia Court of appeals. respondent further stated that
he did not inform the Nebraska Supreme Court or the Nebraska
State Bar association of this disciplinary action taken against
him. respondent further stated that he does not challenge or
contest the truth of the allegations being made against him. He
further stated that he freely and voluntarily waived his right to
notice, appearance, or hearing prior to the entry of an order of
disbarment and consented to the entry of an immediate order
of disbarment.
aNaLySIS
Neb. Ct. r. § 3-315 of the disciplinary rules provides in
pertinent part:
(a) Once a Grievance, a Complaint, or a Formal Charge
has been filed, suggested, or indicated against a member,
the member may voluntarily surrender his or her license.
(1) The voluntary surrender of license shall state in
writing that the member knowingly admits or knowingly
does not challenge or contest the truth of the suggested
or indicated Grievance, Complaint, or Formal Charge
and waives all proceedings against him or her in connec-
tion therewith.
Pursuant to § 3-315 of the disciplinary rules, we find that
respondent has voluntarily surrendered his license to practice
law and knowingly does not challenge or contest the truth
of the allegations made against him. Further, respondent has
waived all proceedings against him in connection therewith.
We further find that respondent has consented to the entry of
an order of disbarment.
CONCLUSION
Upon due consideration of the court file in this matter,
the court finds that respondent has stated that he freely,
866 	283 NeBraSka rePOrTS

knowingly, and voluntarily admits that he does not contest the
allegations being made against him. The court accepts respond-
ent’s voluntary surrender of his license to practice law, finds
that respondent should be disbarred, and hereby orders him
disbarred from the practice of law in the State of Nebraska,
effective immediately. In view of the acceptance of respond-
ent’s voluntary surrender, the motion for reciprocal discipline
and the application for temporary suspension are denied as
moot. respondent shall forthwith comply with all terms of
Neb. Ct. r. § 3-316 of the disciplinary rules, and upon failure
to do so, he shall be subject to punishment for contempt of
this court. accordingly, respondent is directed to pay costs
and expenses in accordance with Neb. rev. Stat. §§ 7-114 and
7-115 (reissue 2007) and Neb. Ct. r. §§ 3-310(P) and 3-323
of the disciplinary rules within 60 days after an order impos-
ing costs and expenses, if any, is entered by the court.
JudgmeNt of diSbArmeNt.
STaTe ex reL. COUNSeL FOr dIS. v. dOrSey 	867
Cite as 283 Neb. 865