Friday, May 25, 2012

No Suspension Necessary

The Iowa Supreme Court rejected a proposed suspension of at least six months and imposed a public reprimand on an attorney who had a substantial rcord of prior discipline.

The attorney represented a client in a forclosure action. He arranged to purchase the property from the client, agreeing to pay off the mortgage and sell the property back to the client after she obtained financing for the purchase.

The court found that the attorney did not violate the "business transactions with client" rule because he terminated the attorney-client relationship prior to the deal. He did, however, violate the rule prohibiting adversity with a former client in a substantially related matter. He also had failed to timely cooperate with the bar investigation.

The court rejected the sanction proposed by the Attorney Disciplinary Board because the misconduct took place in the time period prior to its 2007 order of a 30 day suspension. (Mike Frisch)

Bar Discipline & Process | Permalink

TrackBack URL for this entry:

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference No Suspension Necessary:


Post a comment