Iowa Supreme Court Attorney Disciplinary Board v. Eric K. Parrish
2011 Iowa Sup. LEXIS 55
Iowa2011Background
- Parrish is an Iowa attorney since 1999 practicing in Des Moines, primarily in criminal defense and personal injury.
- The Attorney Disciplinary Board alleged Parrish violated multiple Iowa Rules of Professional Conduct and Iowa Court Rules, focusing on trust-account handling.
- In Ward (Montgomery Ward) matter, Ward paid a $10,000 retainer, deposited to Parrish’s trust, and Parrish withdrew $10,000 before earning them without contemporaneous notice or full accounting.
- Ward was sentenced in 2006 for methamphetamine possession and theft; Ward ultimately sought a final bill and refunds, and a 2009 fee arbitration ordered a refund of $8,467.46, which Parrish had not issued.
- In Bixler matter, Bixler paid $5,000 retainer and $3,000 later; Parrish withdrew funds before earning, did not provide contemporaneous notices or full accounting, and later refunded none of the unearned balance; billing inconsistencies and rate changes also occurred.
- The Grievance Commission found violations and recommended a public reprimand with refunds and continuing-education requirements; upon de novo review, the Iowa Supreme Court suspended Parrish’s license for sixty days and ordered refunds and education as conditions for reinstatement.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Parrish violated trust-account and accounting rules by withdrawing unearned fees. | Board asserts improper advance-fee withdrawals and lack of timely accounting. | Parrish acknowledges inadequate tracking and accounting but disputes misappropriation liability. | Parrish violated trust-account and accounting rules; sanctions warranted. |
| Whether Parrish's conduct violated Rule 32:8.4(c) (dishonesty/misrepresentation). | Board alleges repeated misrepresentations to Ward about refunds. | Court requires scienter; no demonstrated knowing misrepresentation found. | No violation of 32:8.4(c) proven beyond negligence. |
| Whether suspension is the appropriate discipline given the violations. | Public reprimand sufficient for minor patterns; no prior pattern noted. | Pattern of trust-account violations and prior admonitions justify harsher sanctions. | Sixty-day license suspension appropriate given aggravating factors and recidivist pattern. |
Key Cases Cited
- Iowa Supreme Ct. Att’y Disciplinary Bd. v. Apland, 577 N.W.2d 50 (Iowa 1998) (advance fees and improper handling—unearned fees must be refunded)
- Iowa Supreme Ct. Att’y Disciplinary Bd. v. Earley, 729 N.W.2d 437 (Iowa 2007) (sanction framework for multiple rule violations; aggravating factors)
- Iowa Supreme Ct. Att’y Disciplinary Bd. v. Piazza, 756 N.W.2d 690 (Iowa 2008) (public reprimand for failure to place advance fee in trust and provide accounting)
- Iowa Supreme Ct. Att’y Disciplinary Bd. v. Plumb, 766 N.W.2d 626 (Iowa 2009) (suspension when violations involve neglect and trust-account mismanagement)
- Iowa Supreme Ct. Att’y Disciplinary Bd. v. Sobel, 779 N.W.2d 782 (Iowa 2010) (public reprimand for failure to provide accounting; emphasizes discipline under multiple failures)