Here is a link to a strange opinion by the Oregon Supreme Court in which the Court imposes an 18 month suspension. What makes the opinion strange in my view is the fact that the Court explicitly refuses to explain its reasoning. It simply says that "We . . . conclude that an 18-month suspension is the appropriate sanction. An explanation of the extensive facts related to the four matters underlying this proceeding and of the appropriateness of the sanction would not benefit the bench, bar, or public."
I don't know but it seems to me that a little guidance so that other lawyers can learn from this one's mistakes and misconduct wouldn't hurt....
The case is called In re Goff and it is available here.
Thanks to the Legal Profession blog for the link.