731 P.2d 48). 93 . See, e.g., In re Buckalew, 731 P.2d at 53-56 (identifying as mitigating factors mental and emotional problems, cooperation and disclosure after law partner discovered misconduct, and no record of prior misconduct). The dissent distinguishes In re Buckalew and other cases in which : we have imposed disbarment on the grounds that the attorneys' conduct in those cases -was far more culpable, Dissent at 393-94, While this may be true, extreme cases do not establish the minimum threshold for imposing a sanction, Rather our case law guides us in evaluatmg the ABA-recommended baseline. 94 . Dissent at 392-93 (citing In re Purdy, No. S-08996 (Alaska Supreme Court Order, Mar. 26, 1999)). 95 . See supra Part IV.A.3. 96 . See In re Ivy, 350 P.3d 758, 762-65 (Alaska 2015) (<HOLDING>). 97 . See supra Part IV.A.2. 98 . See, eg.,
holding that the federal rules of civil procedure apply in diversity eases where they are on point unless they both directly conflict with state law and are invalid under the constitution or the rules enabling act holding that rules 33 and 34 did not apply to ivys misconduct because these rules are intended to govern attorneys when they are acting as advocates and not in thelr personal capacities holding that the federal expert witness compensation rules are in direct conflict with the state rules even when the state rules allow for a greater recovery recognizing professional rules are not intended to run to personal benefit of attorneys adversaries holding that pleading rules are substantive