Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
11 canonical passages across 8 cases, quoted by 54 opinions in total. These passages cluster together because the same opinions keep quoting them side by side: they state parts of one doctrine. The anchor passage is from Iowa Supreme Court Attorney Disciplinary Board v. Earley.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Iowa Supreme Court Attorney Disciplinary Board v. Earley Anchor | green | “there is no standard sanction for a particular type of misconduct, and though prior cases can be instructive, we ultimately determine an appropriate sanction based on the particular circumstances of each case.” | 15 |
| 2 | Iowa Supreme Court Attorney Disciplinary Board v. Kathryn S. Barnhill | green | “the primary goal of attorney discipline is to protect the public, not to punish the attorney.” | 6 |
| 3 | Iowa Supreme Court Attorney Disciplinary Board v. James C. Van Ginkel | green | “this burden is higher than the burden in most civil cases, but lower than in a criminal prosecution.” | 5 |
| 4 | IOWA SUP. CT. ATTY. DISC. BD. v. Gottschalk | green | “misrepresentation to the court constitutes a serious breach of professional ethics, warranting a more severe sanction than neglect.” | 4 |
| 5 | SUPREME CT. BD. PROF'L ETHICS v. Ackerman | green | “at its most basic level a court must rely, not alone on the honesty of lawyers, but also on the reliability of factual representations submitted to the court.” | 4 |
| 6 | Iowa Supreme Court Attorney Disciplinary Board v. James C. Van Ginkel | green | “the nature of the violations, the attorney's fitness to continue in the practice of law, the protection of society from those unfit to practice law, the need to uphold public confidence in the justice system, deterrence, maintenance of the reputation of the bar as a whole, and a…” | 4 |
| 7 | State v. Johnson | green | “the relation between an attorney and his client must necessarily be one of great confidence, and an attorney who knowingly abuses the trust and confidence placed in him by his client is unfit for the profession and unworthy of a place therein.” | 4 |
| 8 | Iowa Supreme Court Attorney Disciplinary Board v. Earley | green | “standard sanction for a particular type of misconduct, and though prior cases can be instructive, we ultimately determine an appropriate sanction based on the particular circumstances of each case.” | 3 |
| 9 | Iowa Supreme Court Board of Professional Ethics & Conduct v. Walters | green | “as long as the attorney has influence arising from a previous attorney-client relationship and the client is looking to the attorney to protect the client's interest.” | 3 |
| 10 | Iowa Supreme Court Attorney Disciplinary Board v. John Edward Netti, Jr. | green | “consistent with section 14 of the restatement (third) of the law governing lawyers,” | 3 |
| 11 | State v. Johnson | green | “an attorney who knowingly abuses the trust and confidence placed in him by his client is unfit for the profession and unworthy of a place therein.” | 3 |
A red or yellow flag on a member means the underlying case has negative treatment: for those, check the case page before relying on the passage.