Iowa Supreme Court Attorney Disciplinary Board v. Kenneth F. Dolezal
841 N.W.2d 114
Iowa2013Background
- Kenneth F. Dolezal, admitted 1983, previously disciplined; his license was suspended in April 2011 for 30 days and remained suspended because he did not pay required costs. The present complaint concerns post‑suspension conduct.
- The Board alleged misconduct across four matters: the Steven Carter estate, the Marie Sadecky estate, and Social Security representation of John Dean and Jill Hazen.
- In the Carter and Sadecky probate matters Dolezal: delayed closing estates, failed to deposit estate cash into a trust account, did not maintain trust/time ledgers, and refused or delayed turning over client files despite court orders. He also submitted post‑suspension billing for work including responding to disciplinary inquiries.
- Dolezal loaned $2,000 to the Carter administrator without written disclosure or documentation and later sought fees from the Carter estate, asserting creditor status.
- While suspended he signed SSA appointment forms for clients, explicitly answered that he had not been suspended or disbarred, continued to represent at hearings, and used letterhead stating he was an "Attorney at Law, Currently under suspension." He also failed to notify at least one client of his suspension as required.
- The Grievance Commission found multiple rule violations and recommended revocation; the Iowa Supreme Court found numerous violations but imposed an indefinite suspension with no reinstatement possible for two years, conditioned on proof of fitness to practice.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Did Dolezal fail to act with reasonable diligence (32:1.3)? | Persistent delays in closing estates and failure to complete required probate tasks. | Claimed matters were closed or was responding to client requests. | Violated 32:1.3 for prolonged delinquency (Sadecky and Carter matters). |
| Were fees charged unreasonable (32:1.5(a))? | He billed post‑suspension for tasks (e.g., responding to disciplinary inquiries, giving notice) that did not benefit the client. | Fees reflect hourly rate for work performed. | Violated 32:1.5(a); billing for self‑protective tasks was unreasonable. |
| Did the loan to Carter violate conflict/business‑transaction rules (32:1.8(a), 32:1.8(e))? | Loan is a business transaction requiring written disclosure and consent; no records were kept. | Loan was altruistic, no interest charged, not a business transaction; not connected to litigation. | Violated 32:1.8(a) (no required written disclosure/consent). No violation of 32:1.8(e) because loan was not litigation‑related. |
| Did Dolezal mishandle client funds / trust account rules (32:1.15, Ct. R. 45.1)? | Kept estate cash in office vault and failed to deposit into trust account or maintain ledgers. | Claimed client requested vault storage. | Violated 32:1.15 and Ct. R. 45.1; client request does not excuse withholding trust deposit. |
| Did he fail to surrender files / disobey court orders (32:1.16(d), 32:3.4(c), 32:8.4(d))? | Failed to turn over files timely despite court orders, causing multiple hearings and contempt proceedings. | Claimed attorney’s lien or other justifications. | Violated 32:1.16(d), 32:3.4(c), and 32:8.4(d) (conduct prejudicial to administration of justice). |
| Did he make false statements to an administrative tribunal and practice while suspended (32:3.3, 32:5.5, Ct. R. 35.23(1))? | Signed SSA forms denying suspension and continued representing clients at SSA hearings while suspended; failed to notify clients. | Argued SSA disclosures relate only to misconduct suspensions and that nonattorneys may represent claimants before SSA. | Violated 32:3.3(a)(1) (false statements to SSA) and 32:5.5/35.13(3)/35.23(1) (unauthorized practice while suspended and failure to notify clients). |
Key Cases Cited
- Iowa Supreme Ct. Att’y Disciplinary Bd. v. Dolezal, 796 N.W.2d 910 (Iowa 2011) (prior suspension and disciplinary history)
- Iowa Supreme Ct. Att’y Disciplinary Bd. v. McCuskey, 814 N.W.2d 250 (Iowa 2012) (suspension for practicing during suspension and related violations)
- Iowa Supreme Ct. Att’y Disciplinary Bd. v. Netti, 797 N.W.2d 591 (Iowa 2011) (multiple violations including misrepresentations and practicing while suspended; two‑year reinstatement bar)
- Iowa Supreme Ct. Att’y Disciplinary Bd. v. Hearity, 812 N.W.2d 614 (Iowa 2012) (candor to tribunal and practicing while suspended)
- Iowa Supreme Ct. Att’y Disciplinary Bd. v. Kennedy, 837 N.W.2d 659 (Iowa 2013) (indefinite suspension where mental‑health mitigation considered)
- Iowa Supreme Ct. Att’y Disciplinary Bd. v. Cunningham, 812 N.W.2d 541 (Iowa 2012) (lengthy suspension for neglect, misrepresentations, failure to turn over files, and noncooperation)