Iowa Supreme Court Attorney Disciplinary Board v. Bryan J. Humphrey
812 N.W.2d 659
Iowa2012Background
- Humphrey, admitted to the Iowa bar in 1981, represented the Victorys in an unwritten contingent-fee arrangement to settle their Amco Insurance claim.
- He stopped actively pursuing the claim in October 2008 and largely ceased communication, despite extensive client inquiries and later Board requests.
- The Victorys sent numerous texts and certified letters; Humphrey responded minimally, largely through the adjuster, and largely after delays.
- Final Amco payment of $13,272.54 was obtained by the Victorys without Humphrey receiving any portion.
- Humphrey admitted the fee agreement was unwritten and that he did not respond to the Board’s inquiries; the Grievance Commission found multiple rule violations.
- The Board filed a complaint alleging violations of Rules 32:1.3, 32:1.4(a)(3), 32:1.4(a)(4), 32:1.5(c), and 32:8.1(b); the Commission recommended five-year suspension, which the Court ultimately altered to an indefinite suspension with no reinstatement for three months.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Did Humphrey violate multiple rules through neglect, poor communication, and fee practices? | Board proved neglect, poor communication, and unwritten contingency fee. | Humphrey admitted only the fee-writing violation; others contested. | Yes; violations of 32:1.3, 32:1.4(a)(3), 32:1.4(a)(4), 32:1.5(c), and 32:8.1(b) were established. |
| Is an indefinite suspension with a three-month reinstatement bar appropriate? | Aggravating history and neglect justify substantial discipline. | Current violations were limited and did not involve fraud or client harm. | Indefinite suspension with no reinstatement for three months warranted. |
Key Cases Cited
- Iowa Supreme Ct. Bd. of Prof'l Ethics & Conduct v. Moorman, 683 N.W.2d 549 (Iowa 2004) (neglect constitutes serious professional incompetence and harm to clients)
- Iowa Supreme Ct. Att’y Disciplinary Bd. v. Casey, 761 N.W.2d 53 (Iowa 2009) (neglect in multiple matters with other misconduct supports suspension)
- Iowa Supreme Ct. Att’y Disciplinary Bd. v. Tompkins, 733 N.W.2d 661 (Iowa 2007) (public reprimand for neglect; factors for suspension considered)
- Iowa Supreme Ct. Att’y Disciplinary Bd. v. van Ginkel, N.W.2d (Iowa 2012) (neglect cases with aggravating factors may justify suspension)