Preview:

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF IOWA
No. 61 / 06-2061 Filed August 24, 2007 IOWA SUPREME COURT ATTORNEY DISCIPLINARY BOARD, Complainant, vs. GREGORY J. HUMPHREY, Respondent.

On review of the findings and recommendations of the Supreme Court Grievance Commission.

Grievance

Commission

found

several

violations

of

attorney LICENSE

disciplinary rules and recommended a "private reprimand." SUSPENDED.

Charles L. Harrington and David J. Grace, Des Moines, for complainant.

Mark McCormick, Des Moines, for respondent.

2 LARSON, Justice. The Iowa Supreme Court Attorney Disciplinary Board filed a complaint Humphrey with with our Grievance Commission of our charging Code of Gregory J.

several

violations

Professional

Responsibility for Lawyers.1

All of the alleged violations arose out of The commission

Humphrey's representation of six probate estates.

found that the respondent "made certain errors in conducting his probate practice, [but] the same were not the result of any dishonest acts but were more in the nature of inexperience." The commission

recommended a "private reprimand"2 with restrictions on any future probate practice by the respondent. The board filed an application with our court for permission to appeal this decision, as provided by Iowa Court Rule 35.11(2). We granted the application and now consider the case de novo on the record made before the commission. See Iowa Ct. R. 35.10(1). We disagree with the sanction proposed by the commission

and order that the respondent's license to practice law be suspended for a period of not less than six months. I. Standard of Review. We review attorney disciplinary proceedings under well-established principles. Our review is de novo. See Iowa Ct. R. 35.10(1); Iowa

Supreme Ct. Attorney Disciplinary Bd. v. Lesyshen, 712 N.W.2d 101, 104 (Iowa 2006). In making that determination,

Iowa Rules of Professional Conduct became effective July 1, 2005, replacing the Iowa Code of Professional Responsibility for Lawyers. However, the conduct involved in this case occurred prior to the effective date of the new rules.
2Under Iowa Court Rule 35.9, the Grievance Commission "shall dismiss the complaint, issue a private admonition, or recommend to the supreme court that the attorney be reprimanded or the attorney's license to practice law be suspended or revoked." This rule does not provide for a "private reprimand."

1The

3 " `[w]e give respectful consideration to the Grievance Commission's findings and recommendations, but are not bound by them.' The Board must prove attorney misconduct by a convincing preponderance of the evidence. This burden is less than proof beyond a reasonable doubt, but more than the preponderance standard required in the usual civil case. Once misconduct is proven, we `may impose a lesser or greater sanction than the discipline recommended by the grievance commission.' " Iowa Supreme Ct. Attorney Disciplinary Bd. v. Gottschalk, 729 N.W.2d 812, 815 (Iowa 2007) (quoting Iowa Supreme Ct. Attorney Disciplinary Bd. v. Conrad, 723 N.W.2d 791, 791

Download IOWA SUPREME COURT ATTORNEY DISCIPLINARY BOARD vs. GREGORY J. HUMPHREY.pdf

Iowa Law