Iowa Supreme Court Attorney Disciplinary Board Vs. James Robert Axt
2010 Iowa Sup. LEXIS 117
| Iowa | 2010Background
- Axt is an Iowa attorney with a long history in private practice and public service, including time as an administrative law judge.
- He has chronic alcohol use and depression, with hospitalizations in 1983 and 1987.
- In 1997, he committed domestic abuse against his wife, resisted arrest, and was admonished by the Board; a second admonition followed in 2001 for an outburst.
- He was convicted of operating a motor vehicle while intoxicated in 2001, and later faced charges for assault on a police officer and interference with official acts.
- In 2009, after a lengthy drinking binge, he pled guilty to domestic abuse assault with intent to inflict serious injury and received a suspended sentence; a five-year no-contact order was imposed.
- Axt’s conduct led to a grievance commission recommendation for revocation; the Iowa Supreme Court suspended his license for two years and required evidence of treatment and compliance with reinstatement rules.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether criminal convictions and no-contact violations violate 32:8.4(b). | Axt’s conduct demonstrates disrespect for the law. | Axt contends the criminal acts and no-contact violations do not automatically establish rule 8.4(b). | Yes, 8.4(b) violated. |
| Whether the conduct violated 32:8.4(d) about prejudice to administration of justice. | Board argues violations of no-contact orders and domestic abuse were prejudicial to the administration of justice. | Axt contends the acts were personal and unrelated to the practice of law. | No, not proven; no violation of 8.4(d) established. |
| What is an appropriate sanction given the misconduct? | Board seeks significant sanction based on pattern and prior misconduct. | Axt argues for lesser sanction considering rehabilitation and lack of client harm. | Two-year suspension; enhanced due to pattern and prior misconduct, with conditions for reinstatement. |
Key Cases Cited
- Iowa Supreme Ct. Att’y Disciplinary Bd. v. Templeton, 784 N.W.2d 761 (Iowa 2010) (criminal conviction not per se a violation; focus on conduct and impact)
- Iowa Supreme Ct. Att’y Disciplinary Bd. v. Ruth, 636 N.W.2d 86 (Iowa 2001) (sanctions for domestic abuse and related offenses vary by extent of misconduct)
- Iowa Supreme Ct. Bd. of Prof’l Ethics & Conduct v. Polson, 569 N.W.2d 612 (Iowa 1997) (aggravating factors in disciplinary sanctions)
- Iowa Supreme Ct. Bd. of Prof’l Ethics & Conduct v. Alexander, 574 N.W.2d 322 (Iowa 1998) (enhanced sanctions for multiple disciplinary violations)
- Iowa Supreme Ct. Att’y Disciplinary Bd. v. Isaacson, 750 N.W.2d 104 (Iowa 2008) (reaffirming factors in determining disciplinary sanctions)
- Iowa Supreme Ct. Bd. of Prof’l Ethics & Conduct v. Clauss, 530 N.W.2d 453 (Iowa 1995) (aggravating factors from prior misconduct)