Iowa Supreme Court Attorney Disciplinary Board v. Jeffrey K. McGinness

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that lack of client harm is a mitigating factor, “although the need to find successor counsel was certainly an inconvenience”
• noting that cooperating with the disciplinary board can be a mitigating factor
• noting that cooperating with the disciplinary board can be a mitigating factor
• noting that cooperating with the disciplinary board can be a mitigating factor
• finding lawyer violated disciplinary rules by making misrepresentation to opposing counsel and the district court, despite lawyer’s explanation that “he was ‘motivated by a misguided loyalty and [was] attempting] to protect a client’ ”
• six- month suspension for falsifying civil discovery and making repeated misrepresentations about it

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).