Iowa Supreme Court Attorney Disciplinary Board v. Verla Jean Bartley
860 N.W.2d 331
| Iowa | 2015Background
- Verla Jean Bartley, admitted 1961, served as counsel for executors in two probate estates (Shepherd opened 2001; Gergis opened 2005); she retired from active practice Jan. 1, 2014 and has no prior discipline.
- In both estates Bartley completed most substantive work but delayed closing: Shepherd remained open ~12 years (2001–2013) with over five years after the final report; Gergis closed in 2013 after ~8 years.
- Bartley accepted and collected probate fees before court approval and deposited payments into the firm business account (or withdrew them prematurely) instead of holding funds in the client trust account.
- In Shepherd she failed to file tax returns timely and left creditor claims unresolved; she then made knowing misrepresentations to the court and her firm (including fabricated documents) about the tax and creditor status.
- Bartley self-reported some misconduct to the Disciplinary Board; the parties stipulated to violations and a 60‑day suspension, but the Grievance Commission recommended 180 days and the Supreme Court imposed a six‑month suspension and taxed costs against Bartley.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Board) | Defendant's Argument (Bartley) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1) Neglect of client matters (Iowa R. Prof. Conduct 32:1.3) | Bartley failed to act with reasonable diligence; estates remained open years after work was done and delinquency notices were ignored. | Delays were tied to tax clearances and complex issues; much work was completed earlier. | Court held Bartley violated rule 32:1.3 for prolonged delays and failure to timely close estates. |
| 2) Improper fee handling / trust account violations (Iowa R. Prof. Conduct 32:1.15; Ct. R. 7.2/45.7) | Bartley accepted and took fees before court approval and failed to deposit advance fees into client trust account. | Fees were within statutory calculation and later approved by the court; she argues they were earned. | Court held fees were taken prematurely and trust‑account rule violated; subsequent court approval does not excuse early receipt. |
| 3) Misrepresentations to court and firm (Iowa R. Prof. Conduct 32:3.3; 32:8.4(c)) | Bartley knowingly falsified documents and made false statements to the tribunal and her firm, prejudicing administration of justice. | Some statements concerned complicated tax status; but she did not cause substantial client harm. | Court found knowing misrepresentations and fabricated documents; violations of 32:3.3 and 32:8.4(c). |
| 4) Appropriate sanction | Board/stipulation recommended 60‑day suspension. | Bartley relied on mitigating factors: long spotless career, client support, limited actual harm, self‑report, retirement. | Court imposed a six‑month suspension (no reinstatement for six months), citing aggravating factors (experience, multiple violations, sustained misrepresentations) that outweighed mitigation. |
Key Cases Cited
- Iowa Supreme Ct. Att’y Disciplinary Bd. v. Carter, 847 N.W.2d 228 (Iowa 2014) (standard of de novo review in attorney discipline).
- Iowa Supreme Ct. Att’y Disciplinary Bd. v. Clarity, 838 N.W.2d 648 (Iowa 2013) (burden: convincing preponderance; stipulations to violations not binding on court).
- Iowa Supreme Ct. Att’y Disciplinary Bd. v. Van Ginkel, 809 N.W.2d 96 (Iowa 2012) (discipline for neglect, misrepresentations, early receipt of fees).
- Iowa Supreme Ct. Att’y Disciplinary Bd. v. Morris, 847 N.W.2d 428 (Iowa 2014) (fees taken in violation of probate rule violate rule 32:1.5(a)).
- Iowa Supreme Ct. Att’y Disciplinary Bd. v. McGinness, 844 N.W.2d 456 (Iowa 2014) (dishonesty to tribunal warrants substantial suspension).
- Iowa Supreme Ct. Att’y Disciplinary Bd. v. Gottschalk, 729 N.W.2d 812 (Iowa 2007) (misrepresentation is a serious breach often warranting more severe sanction).