Hide Article Text (OCR)
AJDER MARCH 21, 1922F5,byralaityit OatndIllsndisin-heaEe[tliAttorney C. B. Kaufmann Accused of UnethicalActs, Faces DisbarmentNth,nil-isi-d o-ud UR a -Id 30lby24rrtlie*o£le-aA\\viir.he0Dhe•opedadneal-rerv-le-■y.ISt•II.to-[ContiQuefl tfom Paae One.ltrict judges wlio become disabled Kaufmann while on the bench was proposed and the president of the association was directed to appoint a committee of three to bring the matter before the Iowa assembly.The association members held that it was unfair to ask an attorney to give lip hlR private practice for a place on the bench and then kick him out into the world” because he was disabled.The third complaint was made by the firm of Scbluetter Sons, wholesale coffee merchants of Chicago, who retained Kaufmann In a suit against the Columbia Tea Coffee House. Inc.. over a note amounting to 51.000.57.The case was tried in district court and the Chicago firm was beaten. Up to this stage of the proceedings Scbluetter Sc Sons claim they paid Kaufmann a fee of 5442.The Chicago people decided to appeal the case and directed Kauf-raann to take the necessary steps to perfect an appeal to the supreme court. Kaufmann then requested a fee of $200 for preparing a transcript in the case. The money was sent to the attorney, and, according to the committee's report, Kaufmann neglected to order the transcript.Later in the proceedings the Chicago firm, ordered Kaufmann to turn over all files aud records in the case to George H. Peck, who. at the lime the rasa was first started, was employed In Kauf-maan's office at a small salary.Kaufmann declined to surrender the files until he had received a settlement for his legal services.An itemized statement was submitted showing that Schlueller Sons were indebted to Kaufmann in the sum of 55GS.43, less the $200 which they had forwarded for a transcript, leaving a balance or $368.45. They had already pajd him $442 when the case was first started.The entire bill rendered by Kauf-mann for his legal services wus in excess of the amount involved in the 6uit and was an unjust fee, according to the committee's report.In Ibis itemized statement, Jvauf-itiaon had charged the firm $300 lor perfecting an appeal to the supreme court, a legal task that is not worth more Ilian a $3 fee, according to the committee.4Unfit*ta Practise Law.”In commenting upon this case, and especially the §200 sent him lor the purpose of having a transcript made, the committee says of Kaufmann:•Your committee finds that m diverting this sum of $200 sent himin misrepresentating facts to his client is condemned by the committee in its report.Charges Against Kaufman.Airing of the complaints against Attorney Kaufmann followed an investigation carried on by the committee on censorship headed by R, B. Cook. A. G. Bush and C. H. Murphy which extended over a period of several months and covers three specific cases. The committee announced that a fourth complaint was now under investigation.The first complaint made against Kaufmann, aDd a complaint which indirectly reflects upon E. C. Willis, junior member of the firm, was made by Clara Courtney, who engaged the firm on Nov. 10, 1919, to prosecute a claim for damages. The case was tried later in district court and resulted in a verdict for Miss Courtney, fixing the amounL of. her recovery at $790-39.The records show, according to the committee, that E. C. Willis collected this judgment, giving the clerk of court his receipt. Miss Courtney called upon the firm several tim'es for her money, but was told each time, the committee said, that no money had been paid Into court but that the defendant In the case had filed a demurrer.Thirteen months later, or on Dec. 20, 1920, Miss Courtney, acting on the advice of a relative in Chicago, who is an attorney, appealed to Judge William Theophilus in district court. The court ordered the clerk to produce the records in the case, disclosing the fact that Willis had received the money, according to the entry on the judgment docket.Sued for Money.Miss Courtney consulted J. C. Hall, an attorney in the Lane building. A controversy then arose over the question of fees, which Kauf-maun Willis claimed they were entitled to receive. Suit was finally started by Attorney Hall and Miss Courtney succeeded in obtaining her money.The investigation made by the committee does not disclose the fact whether Willis was a member of the firm at the time this case was first started or was merely an employe of Kaufmann.This case was called to the attention of the committee by Judge Theophilus, who ordered an investigation and directed that the committee file a report with the Bar associationThe motion was carried unanimously. every member of the Bar present rising to his feet. There were between 31) and 75 members m the court room.WUlia Silent.for the express purpose of paying During lt;he discussion which fol-lor a transcript, Mr Kaufmann if ,owe(I tho reading af lhe report, not guilty ot embezzlement of oi- ,Snm Erwin, prc5i[ient, ot ihe associa-tainfng money under false pretense. tion ca||ed on c c wlll,St thlt;! is. in tbe opinion ot your commit- onIv member of the accused firmif s til ilylee. ut least guilty of conduct which stamps him as unfit to practise law.Slow to Act.At first members of the Bar association were slow to net. George W. Scott declared that it was common talk on lhe streets ami in the country that the Bar association condones anything nod everything a member of the association does and the members haven't the moral courage to act.C. II. Murphy, a member of the committee, scored the attorneys for tbeir refusal to act and to act promptly.II. B. Betty, of Betty £ Betty, declared it was a time for the members of the association to show their courage, and to continue the mvcsusution.Andrcw L. Chezem advocated the starting of disbarment proceedings. He said It was not what the public said or thought because the public was not'capable of judging an attorney^ conduct In Lhe sense that a fellow member of the bar Is. and for that reason tho Bar associate n should act along the ethical linos al-t ready laid down.I Louis Block, of Bollinger tBlock, then offered a motion ap-fl proving and endorsing the report of the committee ami directing that rue mutter be submitted lo the district court.Second Complaint.aoric-iely-hcti-terr.‘ft?r.heedrnrpresent, and askod him if he had any statement or explanation to offer. Willis said he had nothing to say at this time.Western Case Reviewed.Preliminary to the Kaufmann report, the committee submitted a report covering the R Victor Western case. The complaints against the pseudo attorney, who is now* In the county jail on a series of forgery charges, were made public at the time of the man's arrest over h month ago. The report was approved by the association. Owing to tho fact that Western was never admitted to practice law anywhere tho Bar association can take no action against the man and the entire matter must be handled in the criminal court.To Check Up On Attorneys.As an aftermath of the Western case, members of the association proposed the adoption ot some method ot checking up on new attorneys to make sure that they have the proper credentials. Judge Bollinger called attention to the fact that the legislature is at fault in not requiring attorneys lo file their certificates with the recorders the same as physidians .A suggestion was offered and approved that hereafter an attorney coming into Davenport und establishing an office shall file his credentials wit h the clerk of court wlioThe second complaint was made in turn will submit the matter to f by John H. Irey, of West Liberty, j the court. Tho court, if satisfied.Itn.rtn-n-’S-mv.fiscoillNofc.icla. Irey. who had retained Kmif-manti in legal matters before this lime and was indebted to him in lhe sum of several hundred dollars, according to Kautmano’s version, came to him on Jan. 2, 1920, and requested that ha draw articles of incorporation for a company which Iroy was forming.Kaufmann agreed to take care or the matter and Informed Ircy that the fee would be $500 which would cover the cost of a charter ami his fee for filing with the secretary of. state. Irey drew a check for tho amount payable to Knufmnnn. after Kaufmann had informed him that lie would send his personul check to Dos Moines to cover the filing fee.Several months went by and Irey became weary of waiting. Onwill enter an order entitling the attorney to the right to practice in the city.—— • *--Watch for salo on bobbed curls. Josephine Beauty Shop, 226 Perry. —Adv.May 17, ho retained another lawyer who discovered, following an investigation, that Kaufmann had not filed tho articles with the secretary of state as lie had agreed to do. Ircy then called Kaufmann anlt;5l the latter informed him thut tho papers wore boios hold up by soma politicians in Des Moines and that it might become necessary for him to go to the capitol and look after tho matter personally.Kaufnjnnn later sent tho papers to Des Moines but failed to send tho necessary feo. Ircy was forced to pay out several hundred dollars In addition to tho $500 whichn, ho had given ICHufmann before hecould got the articles vcconlbd nnil a charier iasuod.This* alleged action on the part ofw ■ • .In Every D'avenpoWatch for th
Newspaper Details
Davenport Democrat and Leader
Davenport, Iowa, US
Tue, Mar 21, 1922
Page 1
Full Page
Clipped by
Allen C.
IN, USA 03 Jun 2019
Other Publications Near Davenport, Iowa
Davenport Leader
Davenport Tribune
Davenport Weekly Leader
Davenport Daily Leader
Sunday Democrat and Times
