(Photo by Peter Dazeley/Getty Images)
The Iowa Attorney Disciplinary Board is arguing that a Des Moines lawyer should lose his license for 90 days and be required to undergo a mental health evaluation before the license is reinstated.
The case involves attorney Joel E. Fenton, who was first sanctioned in 2017 when he was given a private admonishment for allegedly neglecting clients’ cases.
In 2020, Fenton’s law license was suspended for 60 days due to his admitted failure to comply with court orders and deadlines in multiple cases. One of Fenton’s clients had an appeal dismissed by the court after Fenton failed to file the necessary paperwork in the case, according to board records.
In September 2022, Fenton entered into a deferral agreement with the board that was tied to Fenton’s admitted failure to appear in court, meet legal deadlines and communicate with clients in two workers’ compensation cases. As part of his deferral agreement, Fenton wasn’t sanctioned for his conduct, but agreed to comply with the rules of professional conduct in the future.
In August 2023, the board filed another complaint against Fenton, alleging he violated the terms of the agreement on numerous occasions, in part by repeatedly failing to appear in court for plea hearings and pretrial conferences and by failing to file the required paperwork in clients’ cases.
In December 2023, a hearing was held on the matter, with Fenton asserting that he intended to seek treatment for attention-deficit disorder and arguing that a public reprimand would be a sufficient penalty.
In attorney disciplinary cases, charges are brought by the attorney disciplinary board, with the Grievance Commission of the Supreme Court of Iowa presiding over hearings and making disciplinary recommendations to the court.
In April of this year, the Grievance Commission recommended that the Iowa Supreme Court suspend Fenton’s license for 90 days. The commission said its recommendation was based in part on the failure of prior sanctions – the private admonition, the 60-day license suspension, and the deferral agreement – in deterring additional misconduct.
The commission declined to go along with the board’s request for one additional sanction – that Fenton be required to submit to a mental health evaluation before his returning to practice. Recently, the board filed a formal response to the commission’s recommendation, reiterating its concerns regarding Fenton’s ability to practice law.
The board argues that Fenton’s unresolved issues have persisted for years and are “negatively impacting both his clients and the functioning of the court system as a whole.”
The board said it agrees with the commission’s assertion that mental health issues can be considered mitigating factors in disciplinary cases, but added that the “ongoing nature of Fenton’s mental health issues should lessen the weight of this mitigator as, in this instance, it is contrary to the essential public-protection function of attorney discipline.”
Fenton, the board alleges, has “continued to struggle to meet deadlines and appear in cases even during the pendency of his Grievance Commission case” and that he has “acknowledged missed deadlines or hearings in at least six matters in the months and weeks leading up to the December 2023 hearing.”
Stating that “the Grievance Commission found — and all parties agree — that Fenton’s violations stem from his substantial and continuing mental health issues,” the board argues a mental health evaluation is necessary to “better uphold the purpose of attorney discipline.”
The Iowa Supreme Court has yet to act on the matter. Calls to Fenton’s office were not returned on Thursday.