(DOWNLOAD) "Supreme Ct. Bd. of Prof. Ethics v. Scheetz" by Supreme Court Of Iowa. ~ eBook PDF Kindle ePub Free
eBook details
- Title: Supreme Ct. Bd. of Prof. Ethics v. Scheetz
- Author : Supreme Court Of Iowa.
- Release Date : January 19, 1996
- Genre: Law,Books,Professional & Technical,
- Pages : * pages
- Size : 63 KB
Description
In this attorney disciplinary proceeding, the Iowa Supreme Court Grievance Commission recommended that James Scott Scheetz be reprimanded for his failure to handle in a timely manner three probate matters he accepted. We agree and publicly reprimand Scheetz for his neglect of legal matters entrusted to his care I. Background Facts and Proceedings. Scheetz graduated from law school and became licensed to practice law in Iowa in 1990. He was an associate in a private practice firm, where he remained for about two years In 1992 Scheetz terminated his employment because he thought his pay was too low. In an attempt to establish a solo practice, Scheetz opened his office in a building housing other independent practitioners. One receptionist answered calls for all attorneys in the building Scheetz did not hire any clerical staff. He performed most secretarial and bookkeeping duties himself in an attempt to minimize his overhead expenses. Ninety percent of his practice was devoted to criminal defense work and court appointments The remaining ten percent was general practice work. During this time frame Scheetz also taught an evidence course at the local community college. The facts underpinning this proceeding arose out of Scheetz' desire to expand his practice base by accepting probate work A. The Ricketts wills. James R. Ricketts, an Oregon resident, asked Scheetz to begin estate proceedings on two wills. Scheetz accepted the work but failed to probate either will. Ricketts was unable to get the wills back from Scheetz Ricketts complained to the Iowa Supreme Court Board of Professional Ethics and Conduct. On November 17, 1993, the board sent Scheetz a notice of complaint by restricted, certified mail regarding the Ricketts matter. The board requested a response from Scheetz. Scheetz received the notice on November 19. He failed to respond [549 NW2d Page 830]