# Committee on Professional Ethics & Conduct of the Iowa State Bar Ass'n v. Durham

> Supreme Court of Iowa · May 30, 1979 · 279 N.W.2d 280

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9850267

## Case

- **Full name:** The COMMITTEE ON PROFESSIONAL ETHICS AND CONDUCT OF the IOWA STATE BAR ASSOCIATION, Appellee, v. Leona DURHAM, Appellant
- **Court:** Supreme Court of Iowa
- **Decided:** May 30, 1979
- **Citations:** 279 N.W.2d 280; 1979 Iowa Sup. LEXIS 1028
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurrence by Harris
- **Judges:** Rees, Harris, McCormick
- **Cited by:** 52 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9850267

## Opinion text

HARRIS, Justice
(concurring specially).
I concur in divisions I, II, IV, and the result.
In division III of the majority opinion the court responds to a contention raised by the National Lawyers Guild. Although I have no quarrel with the legal conclusion suggested in the majority opinion, I believe it is inappropriate for the majority to respond at all. We have said that we should not respond to contentions made in amicus curiae briefs but rather limit ourselves to the contentions raised by parties to the action. Sauerman v. Stan Moore Motors, Inc., 203 N.W.2d 191, 194 (Iowa 1972); Lorentzen v. Deere Mfg. Co., 245 Iowa 1317, 1322 , 66 N.W.2d 499, 502 (1954); State v. Martin, 210 Iowa 207, 210 , 230 N.W. 540, 542-543 (1930).
I agree that respondent should be publicly reprimanded and admonished for her unprofessional conduct, but would limit the grounds to those detailed in divisions I, II, and IV. I therefore concur in the result.
McCORMICK, J., joins in this special concurrence.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9850267. Public record. Not legal advice.