Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Iowa Supreme Court Attorney Disciplinary Board v. David A. Morse

Supreme Court of Iowa

Decided November 10, 2016No. 15–1502Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partWiggins, Justice

I agree with the majority’s conclusion that Morse violated the Iowa Rules of Professional Conduct. However, I cannot agree with the way the majority reached a sanction nor the result.

In the past, our court has determined a sanction when an attorney has misappropriated client’s funds by distinguishing between what I label “legal stealing” and “illegal stealing.” “Legal stealing” allows an attorney to receive a lesser sanction when the attorney misappropriates a client’s funds so long as the attorney has a colorable future claim to the funds misappropriated. See, e.g., Iowa Supreme Ct. Att’y…

2Cases cited31 opinions

  1. Grievance Administrator v. LopatinMichigan Supreme Court · 2000
  2. In Re FischerSupreme Court of Colorado · 2004
  3. In Re Petition for Disciplinary Action Against RooneySupreme Court of Minnesota · 2006
  4. In Re Disciplinary Proceeding Against HaleyWashington Supreme Court · 2006
  5. In re the Disciplinary Proceeding Against HaleyWashington Supreme Court · 2006

26 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API