Please visit my author page at amazon.com
Iowa Supreme Court Att'y Disciplinary Bd. v. Curtis W. Den Beste. IA Legal Ethics
The attorney in this case was terminated after stealing approximately $9000 from his employer. Pursuant to his employment, he was to deposit fees into the firm's account, and was later paid 50%. But he began accepting some fees in cash and pocketed them. He later informed the firm's bookkeeper that the amounts were uncollectable. He was found out when the bookkeeper called a client about the unpaid bill and was told that it had been paid in cash. He was fired and agreed to self-report.
After examining earlier precedents, the court setted upon an indefinite suspension, with no right to petition for reinstatement for at least four months. Many of the earlier cases had distinguished between theft from a client and theft from an employer or other third party. In this case, it was undisputed that no client had lost money. But even though there had been no criminal charges, the court noted that the attorney's conduct had amounted to felony theft.
The court held that it was time to "ratchet up" the discipline in theft cases. However, it also recognized that the attorney had made stipulations in reliance upon the earlier precedents controlling. The court included the following warning:
Thus, we rely on our precedent and impose a sanction in this case consistent with our prior cases. At the same time, we use this case as a vehicle to put the bar on notice that an attorney who steals from a law firm without a colorable claim may well incur stiffer disciplinary sanctions than have been imposed in our past cases.
Justice Wiggins dissented from the discipline imposed, and would have imposed more severe discipline. "Theft of funds involves dishonesty, and dishonest attorneys have no place in our profession." He cited a number of cases of non-attorneys being charged criminally with embezzlement, and said, "I have to ask myself, was Den Beste not charged with a crime because he was a lawyer? I wonder if he were convicted of a felony, would the court revoke his license."
No. 19-0360 (Iowa Sept. 13, 2019).
Please see the original opinion for the court's exact language.
Advertisement:
Richard P. Clem is an attorney and continuing legal education (CLE) provider in Minnesota. He has been in private practice in the Twin Cities for 25 years. He has a J.D., cum laude, from Hamline University School of Law in St. Paul and a B.A. in History from the University of Minnesota. His reported cases include: Asociacion Nacional de Pescadores a Pequena Escala o Artesanales de Colombia v. Dow Quimica de Colombia, 988 F.2d 559, rehearing denied, 5 F.3d 530 (5th Cir. 1993), cert. denied, 510 U.S. 1041 (1994); LaMott v. Apple Valley Health Care Center, 465 N.W.2d 585 (Minn. Ct. App. 1991); Abo el Ela v. State, 468 N.W.2d 580 (Minn. Ct. App. 1991).
For more information about attorney Clem, please visit
his website.
For more information about his low-cost CLE programs, please visit his CLE page.
Return to index of case summaries
Copyright 2019, Richard P. Clem.
Attorney Richard P. Clem is responsible for the content of this page.
Richard P. Clem, Attorney
PO Box 14957
Minneapolis, MN 55414
USA
Phone: +1-612-378-7751
e-mail: clem.law@usa.net
Minnesota Attorney Registration Number 0192648
Please visit my author page at amazon.com