Iowa Supreme Court Board of Professional Ethics & Conduct v. D'Angelo

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding it was not necessary to increase the quite lengthy suspension currently in force
• discussing whether knowledge of facts in current proceeding would have caused the court to enlarge D’Angelo’s suspension
• imposing a concurrent sentence, reasoning if additional violations had been brought to the court's attention at the time of the previous sanction, the court \seriously doubt[s] that respondent's prior suspension . . . would have been enlarged\
• imposing a concurrent sentence, reasoning if additional violations had been brought to the court’s attention at the time of the previous sanction, the court “seriously doubt[s] that respondent’s prior suspension ... would have been enlarged”
• imposing a concurrent sentence, reasoning if additional violations had been brought to the court’s attention at the time of the previous sanction, the court “seriously doubt[s] that respondent’s prior suspension ... would have been enlarged”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).