pro quo arrangement for her to work in his office in exchange for some of her debt to him After discovering Zelotes's and Terry's personal relationship, Michael filed a motion in the divorce court to disqualify Zelotes from representing Terry. The court granted the motion, and afterward, Terry and Zelotes ceased their relationship.

The Connecticut State Bar found that Zelotes violated Connecticut Rules of Professional Conduct 1.7(a)(2) (conflict of interest: current clients) and CRPC 8.4 (misconduct). Nevada's comparable rules appear to be Rule of Professional Conduct 1.7(a)(2) (conflict of interest: current clients) and PRC 8.4 (misconduct). In aggravation, the Connecticut bar considered Zelotes past disciplinary history, his lack of remorse, and his failure to perceive the risks associated with his actions.

In mitigation, the bar considered Zelotes's belief that his actions were benevolent and for Terry's benefit. On appeal, the Connecticut appellate court affirmed the Connecticut superior court's decision to suspend Zelotes for five months.

Pursuant to SCR 114(5), a final adjudication in another jurisdiction that an attorney has engaged in misconduct conclusively establishes the misconduct for purposes of Nevada's reciprocal disciplinary rules. SCR 114(4) provides that this court shall impose identical reciprocal discipline unless the attorney demonstrates, or this court finds, that one of four exceptions applies. None of those exceptions is present here.

Accordingly, we grant the petition for reciprocal discipline.

Attorney Zenas Zelotes is hereby suspended from the practice of law in

SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA (0) 1947A es.

Nevada for five months, retroactive to August 1, 2014. Zelotes and the State Bar shall comply with SCR 115 and SCR 121.1.

It is so ORDERED.

C.J.

, J.

Hardesty

Saitta

CC: David A. Clark, Bar Counsel Kimberly K. Farmer, Executive Director, State Bar of Nevada Zenas Zelotes Perry Thompson, Admissions Office, United States Supreme Court

SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA (0) I947A 4040