## Facts

- The Committee on Professional Ethics and Conduct filed a disciplinary complaint against Joseph J. Bitter, an Iowa attorney.
- Bitter advanced money to three clients while their matters were pending, describing the advances as interest-free assistance to clients in financial distress.
- No evidence showed the advances were made to solicit or secure client business.
- Bitter handled numerous probate estates that became delinquent for substantial periods.
- The clerk of court and a district judge repeatedly notified Bitter of delinquent estates and directed him to cure the defaults.
- Bitter did not respond satisfactorily to the notices or timely remedy the delinquencies.
- Bitter attributed the probate delinquencies primarily to being too busy.

## Issues

1. Whether advancing money to clients during pending matters, beyond permitted litigation costs and expenses, violates Iowa’s professional-conduct rules even when motivated by compassion and not by client solicitation.
2. Whether a large number of delinquent probate matters, substantial delay, and inadequate response to court and clerk notices constitutes neglect of entrusted legal matters.
3. What sanction is appropriate for combined misconduct involving improper client financial assistance and extended neglect.

## Decision

- The Iowa Supreme Court reviewed the disciplinary record de novo.
- The court held Bitter’s advances of funds to clients violated the rules restricting financial assistance to clients.
- The court held the pattern of delinquent probate matters, the length of delinquencies, and Bitter’s inadequate response to notices amounted to neglect of legal matters entrusted to him.
- The court imposed a suspension from the practice of law (four months).

## Legal Principles

- A lawyer may advance litigation costs and expenses of litigation, but may not provide other financial assistance to clients (such as living-expense loans), even if interest-free and motivated by goodwill.
- Ethical prohibitions on client financial assistance are applied prophylactically; lack of profit motive or absence of solicitation does not excuse the violation.
- “Neglect” includes a pattern of delinquent client matters, significant delay, and failure to respond adequately to court or clerk directives to correct the delinquencies.
- Excess workload is not a defense to prolonged inattention to client matters and resulting noncompliance with court administration requirements.
- Attorney discipline sanctions are imposed to protect the public, maintain professional standards, and deter similar misconduct.

## Conclusion

The Iowa Supreme Court disciplined Bitter for both improper financial assistance to clients and extended neglect of numerous probate estates, concluding that mitigation related to motive did not eliminate rule violations and that suspension was necessary given the scope and duration of neglect and the failure to respond to court notices.


Comm. on Pro. Ethics & Conduct of the Iowa State Bar Ass’n v. Bitter, 279 N.W.2d 521 (Iowa 1979)