Iowa Supreme Court Attorney Disciplinary Board v. Heather Marie Kingery
871 N.W.2d 109
Iowa2015Background
- Board charged Kingery with multiple Rule violations after four complaints; commission found violations and recommended six-month suspension with reinstatement conditions.
- Kingery struggled with bipolar disorder and alcoholism; underwent detox and treatment; had no practice since fall 2013 but maintained some employment.
- Kingery repeatedly failed to appear for court proceedings and neglected clients across numerous criminal and civil matters.
- Commission credited mitigating factors (no prior discipline, remorse, rehabilitation efforts) and increasing factors (harm to clients, number of matters affected).
- Court conducted de novo review and imposed a sixty-day suspension with selective reinstatement conditions rather than the commission’s longer suspension and broader conditions.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Kingery’s neglect violated Rule 32:1.3 | Board contends pattern of neglect across multiple clients violated 1.3 | Kingery argues mitigating factors outweigh violations | Kingery’s neglect violated 32:1.3 |
| Whether Kingery violated client communication duties (32:1.4(a)(3)-(4)) | Board shows repeated failure to update and respond to clients | Kingery acknowledges conduct but attributes to health issues | Kingery violated 32:1.4(a)(3)-(4) in multiple matters |
| Whether Kingery violated mandatory withdrawal (32:1.16(a)(2)) | Board asserts condition impaired ability; withdrawal required | Kingery contends not applicable given treatment progress | Kingery violated 32:1.16(a)(2) based on health condition and impairment of representation |
| Whether a sixty-day suspension with conditions is appropriate | Board supports suspension due to harm and appetite for deterrence | Kingery seeks lower sanction given mitigating factors | Sixty-day suspension appropriate; some reinstatement conditions adopted |
Key Cases Cited
- Iowa Supreme Ct. Att’y Disciplinary Bd. v. Hedgecoth, 862 N.W.2d 354 (Iowa 2015) (sanction factors and neglect range in disciplinary cases)
- Iowa Supreme Ct. Att’y Disciplinary Bd. v. Hoglan, 781 N.W.2d 279 (Iowa 2010) (withdrawal and multiple matters considered in sanctioning)
- Iowa Supreme Ct. Att’y Disciplinary Bd. v. Van Ginkel, 809 N.W.2d 96 (Iowa 2012) (sixty-day suspension for neglect with other misconduct considered)
- In re Patton, 69 A.3d 11 (Md. 2013) (comparative discussion on alcoholism mitigation in sanctions)
- Dean, 855 N.W.2d 186 (Iowa 2014) (rehabilitative cessation as mitigating factor in sanctioning)