IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA
IN THE MATTER OF DISCIPLINE OF No. 686f !LED
BRIAN R. BLOOMFIELD, BAR NO. 8349.
MAR 2 5 2016
eACIE
Clatic PP
e
ORDER OF DISBARMENT
This is an automatic review under SCR 105(3)(b) - of a
Southern Nevada Disciplinary Board hearing panel's recommendation
that attorney Brian R. Bloomfield be suspended from the practice of law
for five years based on violations of RPC 1.1 (competence), RPC 1.15(a)
(safekeeping property), RPC 3.1 (meritorious claims and contentions), RPC
3.3(a) (candor towards tribunal), RPC 3 4 (fairness to opposing party and
counsel), RPC 4.1 (truthfulness in statements to others), RPC 5.3
(responsibilities regarding non-lawyer assistants), RPC 8.4(a) (violation or
attempt to violate the RPC), RPC 8.4(b) (criminal act that reflects
adversely on the lawyer's honesty, trustworthiness, or fitness), RPC 8.4(c)
(conduct involving dishonesty), and RPC 8.4(d) (conduct prejudicial to the
administration of justice)) The panel further recommends that
Bloomfield be required to (1) pay the costs of the disciplinary proceedings,
(2) complete at least eight hours of continuing legal education in ethics
each year during his suspension, (3) refrain from engaging in the
commission of any other criminal offenses, and (4) successfully complete
'This court temporarily suspended Bloomfield from the practice of
law and referred him for disciplinary proceedings in June 2014. In re
Discipline of Brian Bloomfield, Docket No. 65705 (Order of Temporary
Suspension and Referral to Disciplinary Board, June 24, 2014).
SUPREME COURT
OF
NEVADA
(0) 1947A gigg'
a(
ho - (5111 5__J
the Multistate Professional Responsibility Exam before applying for
reinstatement. If reinstatement is granted at the end of the suspension
period, the panel recommends that Bloomfield be mentored for the first 18
months of his restored practice by an attorney approved by Bar Counsel
and that the mentor provide monthly reports to the State Bar identifying
Bloomfield's progress and/or concerns.
The sole issue in this appeal is the appropriate discipline. We
review de novo the disciplinary panel's findings and recommendations.
SCR 105(3)(b); In re Discipline of Stuhff, 108 Nev. 629, 633, 837 P.2d 853,
855 (1992). 2 The purpose of attorney discipline is to protect the public, the
courts, and the legal profession, not to punish the attorney. State Bar of
Nev. v. Claiborne, 104 Nev. 115, 213, 756 P.2d 464, 527-28 (1988). 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).
The violations here are related to Bloomfield's guilty pleas to
two category C felonies (offering false instrument for filing or record and
forgery) and two gross misdemeanors (conspiracy to commit a crime and
destroying evidence) and conduct related to those offenses. In particular,
Bloomfield knowingly submitted false and forged documents showing his
2 SCR 105(3)(b) has been amended to give deference to a disciplinary
panel's factual findings. See In re Amendments to Court Rules Regarding
Attorney Discipline, Specifically, SCR 105, ADKT 0505 (Order Amending
Supreme Court Rule 105, November 5, 2015). This change has no effect in
this case, as the recommended discipline is grounded on criminal conduct
admitted to in Bloomfield's guilty plea and the facts are undisputed.
SUPREME COURT
OF
NEVADA
2
(0) 1941A
clients had completed court-ordered counseling or community service and
misrepresented to the court and the district attorney that his clients had
completed the required counseling or community service when he knew in
fact they had not.
In the absence of mitigating factors, disbarment is appropriate
in cases where an attorney has (1) engaged in "serious criminal conduct"
that includes as a necessary element intentional interference with the
administration of justice, misrepresentation, or fraud, ABA Standards for
Imposing Lawyer Sanctions, Compendium of Professional Responsibility
Rules and Standards, Standard 5.11(a) (2015); (2) engaged in "intentional
conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit, or misrepresentation that
seriously adversely reflects on the lawyer's fitness to practice," id.
Standard 5.11(b); or (3) made false statements or submitted false
documents with the intent to deceive the court, causing serious injury to a
party or causing significant or potentially significant adverse effects on
the legal process, id. Standard 6.11. As there is no dispute that
Bloomfield engaged in such conduct, we consider the mitigating factors
that the hearing panel determined warrant suspension rather than
disbarment. The hearing panel recognized Bloomfield's lack of a prior
discipline history, his personal or emotional problems, and his cooperation,
and it particularly focused on his remorse and positive character witnesses
in determining that he had a potential for redemption, indicating that
there is a chance for Bloomfield to become a valuable member of the legal
community. Even considering the mitigating circumstances, we are
convinced that based on the seriousness of the violations, the duties
violated, and the adverse effects on the legal process, as well as several
aggravating factors, including dishonest or selfish motive and multiple
SUPREME COURT
OF
NEVADA
3
(0) 1947A e
offenses, disbarment is necessary to protect the public, the courts, and the
legal profession.
We hereby disbar attorney Brian R. Bloomfield from the
practice of law in Nevada. Such disbarment is irrevocable. SCR 102(1).
Bloomfield shall pay the costs of the disciplinary proceeding within 30
days from the date of this order. See SCR 120(1). The parties shall
comply with the relevant provisions of SCR 121.1.
It is so 0 LI ERED.
Parraguirre
/--(cAdi Le-g-Vc J. , J.
Hardesty Douglas
, J.
Saitta
, J.
Pickering
cc: Chair, Southern Nevada Disciplinary Board
William B. Terry, Chartered
Stan 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
4
(0) 1947A e
VS.