## Facts

- Trimark Physicians Group recruited Dr. Gregory dePape, a Canadian family physician, to work in Fort Dodge, Iowa, and the parties executed a five-year employment contract in March 1999.
- The parties understood Dr. dePape needed lawful authorization to enter and work in the United States before he could begin employment.
- Trinity Health Systems and Trimark retained an immigration law firm, Blumenfeld, Kaplan & Sandweiss, P.C., to handle Dr. dePape’s immigration process and agreed to pay associated immigration costs.
- The law firm used a strategy that did not initially pursue an H-1B visa and advised Dr. dePape regarding his border entry presentation.
- U.S. immigration officials denied Dr. dePape entry at the U.S.-Canada border; he never started the Iowa job and claimed economic losses and emotional distress.
- Dr. dePape sued Trinity/Trimark for promissory estoppel, breach of contract, and negligence, and sued the law firm for legal malpractice; Trinity/Trimark filed a third-party claim against the law firm.
- The case was tried to the court in a bench trial.

## Issues

1. Whether Trinity/Trimark made a clear and definite promise to secure work authorization supporting promissory estoppel.
2. Whether the employment contract or related dealings imposed a contractual duty on Trinity/Trimark to obtain immigration approval, and whether any such duty was breached.
3. Whether Trinity/Trimark negligently handled the immigration process or were otherwise responsible for the failed entry.
4. Whether the law firm breached the standard of care in immigration representation and whether its conduct proximately caused Dr. dePape’s damages.
5. Whether emotional distress damages were recoverable on the legal malpractice claim under Iowa law.

## Decision

- Judgment for Trinity and Trimark on promissory estoppel, breach of contract, and negligence; the evidence did not establish enforceable promises, contractual breach, or negligent conduct by those defendants.
- Judgment for Dr. dePape on legal malpractice against the law firm based on deficient communication and advice in the immigration representation, including advice that led to denial of entry at the border.
- Damages awarded against the law firm included lost income and emotional distress.

## Legal Principles

- Promissory estoppel under Iowa law requires a clear and definite promise and reasonable reliance; paying for or facilitating legal services, without a specific guarantee of results, does not constitute a promise to secure immigration approval.
- Contract liability depends on the obligations actually undertaken; an agreement to fund and cooperate with immigration efforts is not, without more, a contractual commitment to ensure a visa or entry.
- An employer who reasonably retains and relies on specialized immigration counsel is not liable in negligence for counsel’s immigration errors absent proof the employer breached an independent duty of care.
- Legal malpractice requires an attorney-client relationship, breach of the professional standard of care (including failure to communicate and advise adequately), and proximate causation of damages.
- Emotional distress damages may be recoverable in malpractice when the attorney-client relationship and the services provided are of a type where serious emotional harm from mishandling is reasonably foreseeable.

## Conclusion

After a bench trial, the court found the recruiting health-care entities not liable because they did not promise to secure immigration approval, did not breach the employment agreement, and reasonably relied on immigration counsel, but held the immigration law firm liable for malpractice that caused the failed entry and awarded both economic losses and emotional distress damages.


DePape v. Trinity Health Sys., Inc., 242 F. Supp. 2d 585 (N.D. Iowa 2003)