Iowa Supreme Court Attorney Disciplinary Board v. Tompkins

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that a public reprimand was appropriate where an attorney neglected two 13 client matters and failed to respond to notices from the board
• holding disregard of notice of default constitutes neglect and conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice
• holding attorney violated rule 32:1.3 when he failed to file an appellate brief on behalf of his client or move to withdraw
• holding an attorney’s failure to comply with the appellate deadlines and disregard of the default notice in a client’s appeal constituted a violation of rules 32:1.3 and 32:8.4(d)
• reprimanding an attorney who neglected two matters because “little prejudice was caused to either [client]”
• finding an attorney who failed to dismiss appeal after he determined it to be without merit warranted a public reprimand

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).