Iowa Supreme Court Attorney Disciplinary Board v. Paul J. Bieber
824 N.W.2d 514
| Iowa | 2012Background
- Bieber is an Iowa attorney practicing in Scott County with no prior discipline.
- He pled guilty in federal court to misprision of a felony and received three years’ federal probation and restitution of $37,969.99.
- The criminal transaction involved an inflated real estate sale price of $155,000 vs. $100,000 and a $55,000 cash-back to buyers, concealed from the lender Interbay Funding.
- Bieber represented Woods (seller) at closing and prepared documents reflecting the inflated price and a value declaration, and he issued the $55,000 refund to the buyers.
- The Iowa Board alleged multiple Rule violations; the Grievance Commission found violations and recommended indefinite suspension for six months; the Court conducted de novo review and imposed six months’ indefinite suspension with no reinstatement.
- Mitigating factors included lack of prior discipline, cooperation, restitution payment, remorse, and community service; aggravating factors included involvement in multiple similar transactions and the existence of a felony conviction.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Did Bieber violate Rule 32:1.2(d)? | Board: yes, Bieber knowingly assisted fraud. | Bieber: he knew price was inflated but not material to lender. | Yes, Bieber violated 32:1.2(d). |
| Did Bieber violate Rule 32:4.1(a)-(b)? | Board: yes, false statements of material fact were made; materiality established. | Bieber: questioned materiality due to liar-loan context. | Yes, Bieber violated 32:4.1(a)-(b). |
| Did Bieber violate Rule 32:8.4(b)? | Board: guilty plea plus conduct shows dishonesty affecting fitness. | Bieber: acknowledges misconduct but argues no intent to steal; not a theft. | Yes, Bieber violated 32:8.4(b). |
| Did Bieber violate Rule 32:1.16(a)(1)? | Board: he should have withdrawn to avoid facilitating fraud. | Bieber: continued representation despite knowledge of fraud. | Yes, Bieber violated 32:1.16(a)(1). |
| What sanction is appropriate? | Board: six-month suspension was warranted or greater due to felony fraud. | Bieber: six months is excessive; plea and remorse support lesser sanction. | Indefinite suspension with no reinstatement for six months. |
Key Cases Cited
- Nelsen v. Iowa Supreme Ct. Att’y Disciplinary Bd., 807 N.W.2d 259 (Iowa 2011) (revoked attorney for aiding clients in defrauding a bank; emphasizes conversion of funds as a basis for discipline)
- Vinyard v. Iowa Supreme Ct. Bd. of Prof'l Ethics & Conduct, 656 N.W.2d 127 (Iowa 2003) (revoke where attorney engaged in a lengthy pattern of dishonest conduct involving fraud)
- Hall v. Comm. on Prof'l Ethics & Conduct, 463 N.W.2d 30 (Iowa 1990) (revocation when attorney lied to obtain a bank loan; reflects seriousness of deceit)