in the Estate of Joan Frances Watson

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that an attorney under suspension violated rule 32:5.5(a) by counseling a client on a sales tax matter
• holding that counseling a client on a tax matter after suspension violated rule 32:5.5(a)
• concluding that the attorney’s failure to do any work in a client matter “hampered the efficient operation of the courts” and “was not the type of conduct within the well-understood norms and conventions of the practice of law”
• finding that an attorney violated rule 32:1.5(c) by failing to execute a written contingent fee agreement with a client
• concluding that attorney’s failure to timely probate an estate, along with other actions, “hampered the efficient operation of the courts ... and was not the type of conduct within the well-understood norms and conventions of the practice of law,” thus violating rule 32:8.4(d)
• imposing a two-year suspension for multiple rule violations of a “serious, egregious, and persistent nature”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).