## Facts

- William T. Morrison, an Iowa lawyer admitted in 1989, represented a woman in a marital dissolution from October 2004 through February 2005.
- During the representation, Morrison and the client engaged in sexual intercourse on several occasions from November 2004 through March 2005.
- Morrison and the client had no personal relationship before the representation; the sexual relationship developed during the attorney-client relationship.
- In June 2005, Morrison self-reported to the Iowa Supreme Court Attorney Disciplinary Board that the relationship occurred and conceded it was unethical.
- In March 2004, Morrison had received a private admonition for soliciting a dissolution client for a social relationship based on the client’s attractiveness.
- The Board and Morrison submitted the matter to the grievance commission on a stipulated record and jointly recommended a 60-day suspension.
- The grievance commission recommended a six-month suspension and counseling to address boundary issues.

## Issues

1. Whether an attorney violates the Iowa Code of Professional Responsibility by engaging in a sexual relationship with a current client during a dissolution representation.
2. What sanction is appropriate given the risk of impaired professional judgment, Morrison’s prior admonition for similar conduct, and mitigating evidence of self-reporting and cooperation.

## Decision

- The Supreme Court of Iowa reviewed the matter de novo, giving weight but not binding effect to the commission’s findings.
- The court found Morrison’s conduct violated the Iowa Code of Professional Responsibility, including DR 5-101(B) governing conflicts between personal interests and independent professional judgment.
- The court rejected the parties’ 60-day recommendation as insufficient given the prior admonition and the recurrence of boundary violations.
- The court declined to impose the commission’s six-month recommendation in light of mitigating factors, including self-reporting, cooperation, and evidence of counseling.
- The court suspended Morrison’s license to practice law for three months.

## Legal Principles

- A lawyer’s sexual relationship with a current client during an ongoing representation can create a conflict in which the lawyer’s personal interests may materially limit objective, independent professional judgment, violating DR 5-101(B).
- Attorney discipline serves to protect the public, deter misconduct, and maintain confidence in the legal profession, not to punish.
- Prior discipline for related boundary misconduct is an aggravating factor that supports a more substantial suspension when similar misconduct recurs.
- Mitigating factors such as voluntary self-reporting, cooperation, and remedial counseling may reduce the length of suspension but do not eliminate the need for public discipline.
- In attorney disciplinary proceedings, the Board must prove violations by a convincing preponderance of the evidence.

## Conclusion

The court concluded that Morrison’s sexual relationship with a current dissolution client compromised professional boundaries and created an unacceptable risk to independent judgment, warranting a three-month suspension calibrated to reflect both prior similar misconduct and meaningful mitigation.


Iowa Supreme Court Attorney Disciplinary Bd. v. Morrison, 727 N.W.2d 115 (Iowa 2007)