923 N.W.2d 575
Iowa2019Background
- Matthew Noel, an Iowa lawyer contracted with the State Public Defender (SPD) from 2008–2014, billed the SPD for mileage and for family team meeting fees he did not attend.
- An SPD audit and state auditor investigation found at least $14,697.45 in overpayments: $2,364 for family team meeting fees and $12,333.45 for excessive mileage claims (over 35,000 miles reimbursed).
- Noel pled guilty to two counts of fourth-degree theft (billing for family team meetings he did not attend) and agreed to restitution for mileage overpayments; he received fines, suspended jail terms, and probation, and did not appeal.
- The Attorney Disciplinary Board charged Noel with violations of Iowa Rules of Professional Conduct 32:1.5(a), 32:8.4(b), and 32:8.4(c) for the family-team billing and mileage claims; the Grievance Commission found violations and recommended an indefinite suspension of at least one year.
- The Iowa Supreme Court reviewed de novo, upheld the commission’s findings (including use of issue preclusion and admission of criminal minutes), found Noel violated the three rules, and imposed an indefinite suspension with no reinstatement for at least one year.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Board) | Defendant's Argument (Noel) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Use of issue preclusion to bind Noel to criminal factual findings on family-team billing | Criminal convictions and guilty plea establish the issue; prior proceeding met rule 36.17(4) requirements | Guilty plea does not prove criminal intent; billing errors were negligent, not intentional | Court applied rule 36.17(4) and offensive preclusion doctrine; preclusion upheld for family-team billing issue |
| Admission of minutes of testimony from Noel’s criminal case into disciplinary record | Minutes are adoptive admissions by Noel (he asked court to accept them) so admissible under non-hearsay rule | Minutes are hearsay and not covered by exception; temporal filing discrepancy undermines adoption | Minutes admitted; Noel’s plea and acknowledgments constitute adoptive admission; timing issue did not defeat admission |
| Violation of rule 32:1.5(a) (unreasonable fees/expenses) for family-team fees and mileage | Billing for meetings not attended and duplicate/multiple mileage claims were unreasonable and contrary to SPD contract | Billing mistakes were sloppy, taught practices, or industry habit; not knowing or intentional overbilling | Court found violations: fees for unperformed services and excessive mileage were unreasonable; rule does not require scienter |
| Violations of rules 32:8.4(b) and 32:8.4(c) (criminal act reflecting on fitness; dishonesty/deceit) | Pattern of deceptive billing and guilty plea show conduct that undermines fitness and involved scienter/misrepresentation | Conduct was negligent, not intentional; lacks requisite scienter for 8.4(c); convictions don’t automatically show intent | Court found rational connection to fitness and sufficient scienter: Noel’s admissions, pattern, and failure to remedy show intentional or knowing misrepresentation; both rules violated |
Key Cases Cited
- Iowa Supreme Ct. Att'y Disciplinary Bd. v. Rhinehart, 827 N.W.2d 169 (2013) (standards for offensive issue preclusion in disciplinary proceedings)
- Iowa Supreme Ct. Att'y Disciplinary Bd. v. Mathahs, 918 N.W.2d 487 (2018) (sanctioning and mitigation analysis for SPD billing misconduct)
- Iowa Supreme Court Bd. of Prof'l Ethics & Conduct v. Tofflemire, 689 N.W.2d 83 (2004) (lengthy suspension for repeated deceptive SPD billing)
- Iowa Supreme Ct. Att'y Disciplinary Bd. v. Wheeler, 824 N.W.2d 505 (2012) (use of guilty plea to establish scienter and dishonesty for discipline)
- Iowa Supreme Ct. Att'y Disciplinary Bd. v. Suarez-Quilty, 912 N.W.2d 150 (2018) (requirement of scienter greater than negligence for rule 32:8.4(c) violations)