Opinion ID: 3150900
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Events Giving Rise to the Board’s Complaint.

Text: A. James Steenhard Matter. Kingery was court appointed to represent James Steenhard in a criminal appeal. She filed a combined 4 certificate and ordered a transcript, but she never filed a proof brief or a designation of appendix. On July 30, 2013, the clerk of the Iowa Supreme Court entered a notice of default notifying Kingery she was obligated to file those documents within fifteen days. See Iowa R. App. P. 6.1202(1)(a). Kingery did not respond to the notice or cure the default. Rather than dismissing the appeal, on September 24—almost two months after the default notice—this court removed Kingery as counsel, directed the district court to appoint new counsel, and referred Kingery to the Board. B. Christine Kelly Matter. Christine Kelly hired Kingery in 2011 to represent her in enforcing provisions of Kelly’s marriage dissolution decree. Kingery filed an application for rule to show cause on Kelly’s behalf. The matter was delayed, however, when the court granted an indefinite continuance in July 2012. In early May 2013, Kingery met with Kelly to discuss and draft responses to discovery requests opposing counsel had served. On May 20, Kelly requested a copy of the discovery responses and reciprocal discovery requests prepared for service on the opposing party. Kingery did not respond to Kelly’s request until May 29, but she apologized for the delay and assured Kelly her case was still a priority. On June 26, Kelly requested an update on the status of the discovery process. Kingery did not respond, so Kelly sent another inquiry on July 8. That same day Kingery informed Kelly she had prepared and mailed the discovery requests. However, after that she did not communicate with Kelly despite repeated emails and phone calls from Kelly. For example, on August 8, Kelly emailed Kingery noting that the time for her adversary’s discovery responses had passed and asking for copies of any discovery responses Kingery had received. Kingery did 5 not respond. On August 16, Kelly sent Kingery an email requesting a case status update and expressly citing the rule setting forth Kingery’s obligation to keep Kelly informed about the status of the matter, but Kingery again did not respond. See Iowa R. Prof’l Conduct 32:1.4(a)(3). On September 3, Kelly sent Kingery a letter terminating the attorney–client relationship and requesting Kingery return all paperwork and case files. Kingery did not respond to the letter. Kelly sent an email requesting the case file on September 10. Again, Kingery did not respond. On September 20, Kelly sent Kingery an email proposing to meet at the Winneshiek County Courthouse to exchange payment and documents. After Kingery did not respond to this email, Kelly filed a complaint with the Board. In February 2014, Kelly filed a small claims action against Kingery seeking the return of her file plus $1500 in damages. Kingery filed an answer and counterclaim seeking $800 in allegedly unpaid attorney fees and costs associated with copying Kelly’s file. After hearing the case, the court awarded damages to each party and, offsetting the amounts, ultimately awarded Kingery $38.40. Kelly paid the amount and received her file. C. Court Appointed Criminal Defense Matters. Kingery was court appointed to represent a number of criminal defendants in Winneshiek County. On July 16, 2013, the district court granted continuances to three of Kingery’s clients—Lee Holkesvik, Karlie Marlow, and Scott Swehla—when they appeared for arraignment or other proceedings but Kingery did not. Another client, Justin Borseth, requested new counsel after Kingery failed to appear as scheduled for a hearing on July 30. The court granted Borseth’s request. 6 Kingery was also court appointed to represent Dante DeGrazia. In fall 2013, Kingery twice failed to appear for DeGrazia’s arraignment, although DeGrazia personally appeared both times. On the second of these occasions, DeGrazia reported he had been unable to contact Kingery. On its own motion, the court removed Kingery from the case and appointed replacement counsel. That same day, it removed Kingery as counsel for Abbey Lowe in a separate criminal case for the same reason—Kingery had failed to appear in court as scheduled and had not communicated with the court or her client. On October 31, another of Kingery’s clients, James Thorne, filed a request for new counsel with the district court. Thorne’s request for new counsel stated Kingery “does not answer or return my phone calls” and also alleged she had missed a scheduled appointment with Thorne that day. A magistrate granted Thorne’s request, removed Kingery from representing Thorne, and appointed replacement counsel. The magistrate found removal was “necessary to secure defendant’s rights.” Unfortunately, for two of Kingery’s clients—Scott Geary and Dylan Carlson—receiving newly appointed counsel was not the only consequence of Kingery’s missed appearances and proceedings. In late July 2013, Kingery requested and received a continuance of proceedings in Geary’s case until August 6. The order granting the continuance stated Geary was required to appear personally on August 6. Kingery and Geary both failed to appear on August 6. The court issued a warrant for Geary’s arrest, and he was arrested and jailed. The court later released Geary on bond, in part because Geary wrote a letter from his jail cell asking for a new lawyer and explaining both he and the jail staff had tried unsuccessfully to reach Kingery. 7 Similarly, Carlson sent a handwritten pleading from his jail cell to the district court after he was arrested for failing to appear. He asked the district court to consider contacting him personally to discuss payment options for court fees owed, and he explained he did not appear in court because Kingery did not respond to his phone calls inquiring about the scheduled time for hearing. Kingery does not dispute that both Geary and Carlson served time in jail because she did not apprise them of the need to appear personally in court. Local prosecutors and judges noted Kingery’s absence from the courthouse as it stretched over several months. By mid-December, Kingery had not retrieved any notices from the clerk’s office for over a month. The chief judge of the First Judicial District suspended Kingery from receiving any further court appointments and the Office of the State Public Defender terminated Kingery’s indigent defense contract. The Winneshiek County Attorney sent a letter to the Board regarding Kingery’s serial failures to appear for hearings and court proceedings, believing he was ethically obligated to report the information. A district court judge within the First Judicial District also notified the Board of Kingery’s neglect of clients’ matters. D. Brookview Farms Matter. Doug Corson, the president of Brookview Farms LLC, hired Kingery in February 2013 to draft a conveyance granting to Corson and his two children a life estate in land the LLC owned. In an email to Kingery, Corson explained he wanted the deed “to be an iron-clad document that cannot be legally contested.” Kingery did not complete the work for several months, mentioning health issues had affected her productivity. Corson accepted the delay at first, but by August he was growing impatient. 8 On September 5, Kingery apologized for her lack of contact and scheduled a meeting with Corson for the following day. At the meeting, Kingery presented the deed she had drafted and a bill for $347, and Corson paid her. Corson was concerned the deed did not accurately describe the real estate and did not adequately convey a life estate, but Kingery assured Corson it did. Based on Kingery’s assurances, Corson signed the deed but instructed Kingery not to record it until he ensured Kingery had drafted it correctly. Accordingly, Kingery did not record the deed, although she did cash Corson’s check. Corson determined the deed’s legal description of the property was incomplete and therefore incorrect. He asked Kingery to correct the errors and Kingery agreed to do so. However, Kingery stopped responding to Corson’s communications. On January 8, 2014, Corson sent an email demanding a meeting with Kingery. Kingery did not respond. On March 9, Corson sent an email terminating the attorney– client relationship. He also filed a complaint with the Board.