Missouri Firm noir Attorney's workplace affair with associate ends in tragedy

By Catherine Martin The Daily Record Newswire ST. LOUIS, MO - When the Supreme Courts of Kansas and Missouri suspended Robert Mintz from practicing law earlier this year, both cited, among other grounds, conduct involving dishonesty. That's not the half of it. Nor is suspension the worst of what followed Mintz's workplace affair with a young associate trying to recover from alcoholism. The romance led to a bender that included a stopover at an Alcoholics Anonymous meeting and ended with a body, a cover-up and trouble. The case raises questions about what aspects of an attorney's personal conduct, outside his representation of clients, warrant disciplinary action, and whether a clean record can balance out a succession of lapses in judgment. Ben Trachtenberg, a professor at the University of Missouri School of Law, said the dishonesty rule Kansas and Missouri courts used in Mintz's case is more often used in incidents related to an attorney's legal practice, but it can be used for actions outside of the practice if "some kind of egregious conduct occurred." In Mintz's case, both supreme courts found, it did. A bad mix According to disciplinary files and a wrongful death suit that appears to have settled late last month, Mintz, formerly a shareholder at Wallace, Saunders, Austin, Brown & Enochs in suburban Kansas City, started an intimate relationship with a young associate, Jennifer Arnett, in 2007, while they were both married to other people. Arnett turned 27 that year, Mintz 44. They both later divorced their spouses. Mintz did not return a phone message left at a number listed under his name. A receptionist at Wallace Saunders said Mintz no longer worked at the firm and had not left a forwarding number. Arnett, who suffered from depression and chronic alcohol abuse, left the firm in 2011, but Mintz continued his relationship with her. Mintz even attended her graduation from inpatient alcohol abuse treatment on Jan. 20, 2012, according to the Missouri discipline file. A week later, he and Arnett went to dinner together and consumed a bottle of wine. The next day, a Saturday, they drank again at a sports bar, but stopped drinking after attending an Alcoholics Anonymous meeting together that day. On Sunday, they met for lunch at a Mexican restaurant on Kansas City's Country Club Plaza and drank again, sipping champagne and sampling flavored tequilas. The two moved to Piropos, a bar near Arnett's neighborhood, each driving separately. There, they each drank vodka martinis, three or four shots of alcohol and a big glass of port, according to the court file. Mintz then drove Arnett home and, "as a romantic gesture," carried her into her apartment, setting her down "in a sitting position" on a landing inside her front door, at the bottom of a flight of stairs, according to information in the discipline file. The next morning, Jan. 30, Mintz drove to Arnett's apartment to check on her after she didn't answer his phone calls. He "worried that she got up and started drinking," the discipline file said. When he arrived around 8:40 a.m., the door was unlocked and he found her lying on the floor of the landing. After attempting to wake her up, Mintz noticed her body was cold and realized she was dead, the file said. A later report from the medical examiner attributed her death to a cervical spine fracture from a fall down the stairs, and cited ethanol intoxication as a contributing factor. Reacting to the situation, Mintz deleted his text messages with Arnett, walked to Piropos and drove her car home. He placed her phone and keys in the car, and then drove away without calling the authorities or the woman's family. While driving home, Mintz called Pat McGrath, one of his former law partners. McGrath told Mintz to go back and call the authorities, according to the discipline file. McGrath did not respond to a call or email seeking comment for this article. Mintz first went home to change his pants - when he held Arnett her "bodily fluids soiled his clothing," the discipline file said - and then returned to Arnett's apartment. He called 911 at 11:20 a.m. Mintz initially told the police that he hadn't seen Arnett since 5:30 p.m. the day before and reported that they had not drunk any alcohol together. He also did not tell them he had been at the scene earlier and moved her body, according to information in the discipline file. He later admitted to disciplinary authorities that the statements were false, claiming he was concerned about how Arnett's family would react to the news. But after speaking to his attorney, Tom Bath, Mintz corrected the record on Feb. 1. Mintz was not charged with a crime. Bath, a criminal defense attorney, said he would not comment on the case. A 'completely human' form of deception Mintz found some sympathy from a panel of the Kansas Board for Discipline of Attorneys. It recommended dismissing Mintz's case, finding that his actions were "a completely human reaction to an emotionally charged situation" and that it was "an isolated incident of dishonest conduct which he realized was wrong and corrected within a short period of time," according to the record of the Kansas Supreme Court proceedings. The panel also said the conduct had nothing to do with a representation of a client. But Kimberly Knoll, deputy disciplinary administrator in Kansas, took a harder line with the case. "Disbarment is appropriate when a lawyer's conduct involves intentional deception and the deception is done for the benefit of the lawyer," Knoll told the Kansas Supreme Court at a December 2013 hearing. "And disbarment is appropriate in this case." Mintz personally addressed the court, repeatedly apologizing for his actions. "I have a number of personal regrets I'm going to have to live with â?¦ for the rest of my life," he said. Mintz said he was "totally shaken" when he saw Arnett's body and in a complete panic. He said he did not intend to deceive authorities and that he did not know the situation would be considered a crime scene. He said he didn't tell detectives all the details because he wanted to shield Arnett's family. "I said from the beginning I knew it was wrong. I apologized to the detectives right away. I apologize to this court and I apologize to the bar that I am a member of," he said. "It was wrong. That is a responsibility that I own up to and I have no excuse." The Kansas Supreme Court suspended Mintz's law license indefinitely in February. In June, the Missouri Supreme Court gave a reciprocal suspension of his Missouri license, though only for 32 months. Punish this but not that If Mintz had been in trouble in the past, Trachtenberg said, those suspensions could have been disbarments. "I think [a clean record] definitely matters. The more trouble you've been in before, the harsher the punishment is going to be," he said. The facts would seem rife with moral lapses - a partner's affair with a associate, marital infidelity, taking a recovering alcoholic on a drinking spree, taking the wheel after such a heavy night of drinking - but those don't necessarily factor into disciplinary determinations. As to the affair, "that level of snooping into people's personal lives, I think is not an appropriate use of" the dishonesty rule, Trachtenberg said. Though Arnett had become divorced by the time of the January incident, Mintz was still married. His wife filed for divorce a few months later. Nor did Mintz's drinking take up much of the disciplinary consideration. The Kansas Supreme Court inquired whether Mintz had ever received treatment for alcoholism. Knoll, the disciplinary official, offered that Mintz was asked at the discipline hearing if he thought he was an alcoholic, and he said "no." 'Bright young woman's' wrongful death In her obituary, Arnett, referred to as "Jennie," is described as someone who "loved and was loved by many." She was 31 at the time of her death. Many left condolences on the obituary, posted on her alma mater North Kansas City High School's website, calling Arnett a "bright young woman" and a "wonderful friend." The obituary lists a number of family members who survived her, including parents and siblings, but no children. In August, Arnett's mother, Karen Anselmi, sued Mintz in Clay County Circuit Court for her daughter's wrongful death. She accused Mintz of failing to protect Arnett from physical injury, ignoring her psychological condition, neglecting to get her help and deceiving law enforcement. In late October, Anselmi's attorney, John Kurtz, filed an application for approval of a wrongful death settlement. Kurtz declined to comment on the case, but he said a hearing is scheduled for Nov. 12. Mintz does not have an attorney representing him in the suit. The case is Anselmi v. Mintz. Published: Thu, Nov 13, 2014