Iowa Supreme Ct. Atty. Disc. Bd. v. Conrad, No. 06-1145.

CourtUnited States State Supreme Court of Iowa
Writing for the CourtLarson
Citation723 N.W.2d 791
PartiesIOWA SUPREME COURT ATTORNEY DISCIPLINARY BOARD, Complainant, v. Edward M. CONRAD, Respondent.
Decision Date17 November 2006
Docket NumberNo. 06-1145.

Page 791

723 N.W.2d 791
IOWA SUPREME COURT ATTORNEY DISCIPLINARY BOARD, Complainant,
v.
Edward M. CONRAD, Respondent.
No. 06-1145.
Supreme Court of Iowa.
November 17, 2006.

Charles L. Harrington and Laura M. Roan, Des Moines, for complainant.

Edward M. Conrad, Sigourney, pro se.

LARSON, Justice.


Edward Conrad, an attorney from Sigourney, was cited by the Iowa Supreme Court Attorney Disciplinary Board with violations of several disciplinary rules. Our Grievance Commission found, based largely on stipulated facts, that Conrad had failed to render an accounting to a client as requested and failed to respond to the board's notices of his client's ethical complaint. The commission recommended a public reprimand, but we conclude he should be suspended for one month.

I. Review.

In attorney disciplinary matters, our scope of review is well established:

Where "no appeal is taken or application for permission to appeal is filed . . . [we] proceed to review de novo the record made before the commission and determine the matter without oral argument or further notice to the parties." "We give respectful consideration to the Grievance Commission's findings and

Page 792

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. Bd. of Prof'l Ethics & Conduct v. Lett, 674 N.W.2d 139, 142 (Iowa 2004) (citations omitted).

II. Facts.

The parties' stipulation of facts shows the following: Conrad has been a licensed lawyer in Iowa since 1989. On April 1, 2004, he was employed by Shane Williams to petition for modification of a dissolution decree. Conrad received an advance fee of $1000, which he deposited in his trust account. When Williams became dissatisfied with the respondent's services, he requested an accounting on two occasions. Conrad failed to provide the accounting until after this complaint was filed on December 7, 2004.

On December 17, 2004, the board sent a notice of William's complaint and asked for the respondent's reply. The respondent received the notice on December 22, 2004, but did not respond. On January 13, 2005, the board sent a second notice to Conrad. This notice advised him that, pursuant to court rules, the respondent must respond within ten days or the board could file a complaint with the Grievance Commission. The respondent acknowledged receipt of this letter on...

To continue reading

Request your trial
23 practice notes
  • Iowa Supreme Court Attorney Disciplinary Bd. v. Powell, No. 12–1516.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Iowa
    • May 3, 2013
    ...disciplinary violations [830 N.W.2d 358]by a convincing preponderance of the evidence. Iowa Supreme Ct. Att'y Disciplinary Bd. v. Conrad, 723 N.W.2d 791, 792 (Iowa 2006). We give respectful consideration to the commission's findings and recommendations, but are not bound by them. Iowa Supre......
  • Iowa Supreme Court Attorney Disciplinary Bd. v. Lustgraaf, No. 10-0425.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Iowa
    • December 17, 2010
    ...burden of proving attorney misconduct by a convincing preponderance of the evidence. Iowa Supreme Ct. Att'y Disciplinary Bd. v. Conrad, 723 N.W.2d 791, 792 (Iowa 2006). As frequently stated, " 'This burden is less than proof beyond a reasonable doubt, but more than the preponderance standar......
  • ATTY. DISCIPLINARY BD. v. Carpenter, No. 09-1343.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Iowa
    • April 16, 2010
    ...burden of proving attorney misconduct by a convincing preponderance of the evidence. Iowa Supreme Ct. Att'y Disciplinary Bd. v. Conrad, 723 N.W.2d 791, 792 (Iowa "This burden is less than proof beyond a reasonable doubt, but more than the preponderance standard required in the usual civil c......
  • Iowa Supreme Court Attorney Disciplinary Bd. v. Wheeler, No. 12–0632.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Iowa
    • December 7, 2012
    ...must prove disciplinary violations by a convincing preponderance of the evidence. Iowa Supreme Ct. Att'y Disciplinary Bd. v. Conrad, 723 N.W.2d 791, 792 (Iowa 2006). This imposes a greater burden than a preponderance-of-the-evidence standard, but lesser than proof beyond a reasonable doubt.......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
23 cases
  • Iowa Supreme Court Attorney Disciplinary Bd. v. Powell, No. 12–1516.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Iowa
    • May 3, 2013
    ...disciplinary violations [830 N.W.2d 358]by a convincing preponderance of the evidence. Iowa Supreme Ct. Att'y Disciplinary Bd. v. Conrad, 723 N.W.2d 791, 792 (Iowa 2006). We give respectful consideration to the commission's findings and recommendations, but are not bound by them. Iowa Supre......
  • Iowa Supreme Court Attorney Disciplinary Bd. v. Lustgraaf, No. 10-0425.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Iowa
    • December 17, 2010
    ...burden of proving attorney misconduct by a convincing preponderance of the evidence. Iowa Supreme Ct. Att'y Disciplinary Bd. v. Conrad, 723 N.W.2d 791, 792 (Iowa 2006). As frequently stated, " 'This burden is less than proof beyond a reasonable doubt, but more than the preponderance standar......
  • ATTY. DISCIPLINARY BD. v. Carpenter, No. 09-1343.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Iowa
    • April 16, 2010
    ...burden of proving attorney misconduct by a convincing preponderance of the evidence. Iowa Supreme Ct. Att'y Disciplinary Bd. v. Conrad, 723 N.W.2d 791, 792 (Iowa "This burden is less than proof beyond a reasonable doubt, but more than the preponderance standard required in the usual civil c......
  • Iowa Supreme Court Attorney Disciplinary Bd. v. Wheeler, No. 12–0632.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Iowa
    • December 7, 2012
    ...must prove disciplinary violations by a convincing preponderance of the evidence. Iowa Supreme Ct. Att'y Disciplinary Bd. v. Conrad, 723 N.W.2d 791, 792 (Iowa 2006). This imposes a greater burden than a preponderance-of-the-evidence standard, but lesser than proof beyond a reasonable doubt.......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT