Glenn L Smith Attorney

Attorneys, Accident & Property Damage Attorneys, Automobile Accident Attorneys

Be the first to review!

Add Hours

(515) 288-0145Call

Add Website

Map & DirectionsDirections699 Walnut StDes Moines, IA 50309 Write a ReviewWrite Review

More Info

Neighborhood

Downtown Des Moines

AKA

Smith, Jennifer L

Smith Glenn L

Categories

Attorneys, Accident & Property Damage Attorneys, Automobile Accident Attorneys, Bankruptcy Law Attorneys, Business Law Attorneys, Business Litigation Attorneys, Child Custody Attorneys, Construction Law Attorneys, Corporation & Partnership Law Attorneys, Criminal Law Attorneys, Discrimination & Civil Rights Law Attorneys, Divorce Attorneys, Employee Benefits & Worker Compensation Attorneys, Employment Discrimination Attorneys, Estate Planning, Probate, & Living Trusts, Family Law Attorneys, General Practice Attorneys, Labor & Employment Law Attorneys, Landlord & Tenant Attorneys, Malpractice Law Attorneys, Medical Malpractice Attorneys, Patent, Trademark & Copyright Law Attorneys, Personal Injury Law Attorneys, Professional Liability & Negligence Law Attorneys, Sexual Harassment Attorneys, Tax Attorneys, Traffic Law Attorneys, Trust Companies, Wills, Trusts & Estate Planning Attorneys, Workers Compensation Assistance, Wrongful Death Attorneys

Gallery

Be the first to add a photo!

Reviews

Hi there!
Be the first to review!

Click to Rate

Details

Phone: (515) 288-0145

Address: 699 Walnut St, Des Moines, IA 50309

People Also Viewed

View similar Attorneys

Suggest an Edit

Glenn L Smith Attorney

Divorce
Child Support
Megan K. Marty and the Finley Law team successfully represented a client seeking to recover over fifteen years of unpaid child support payments from the client's former spouse's estate in Minnesota Probate Court. The Court agreed that the claim was not barred by the applicable statute of limitations, and gave preference to the debt under Minnesota law. The Court further found that the claim was entitled to interest accruing at a rate of ten percent annually.
Guardianship
Kevin Driscoll obtained the dismissal of a petition filed against the firm’s client, an attorney who represented a protected party in a Guardianship and Conservatorship. The district court determined that the petition, which was filed during the pendency of the Guardianship and Conservatorship, lacked sufficient factual allegations to state a claim upon which relief could be granted and that the court lacked jurisdiction. The Court also ruled in favor of the firm’s request for an award of attorney fees for its client, based on the frivolous nature of the petition.
Child Abuse
Connie Diekema and Erik Bergeland successfully defended a hospital against claims that it was liable for a doctor's alleged refusal to properly participate in a DHS investigation of child abuse. Plaintiffs' claimed that this failure to properly participate in the investigation led to further abuse. The Defendants moved for summary judgment on the grounds that the defendant physician participated in good faith in the investigation and therefore was immune from any liability for his participation in the investigation. After the district court denied the motions for summary judgment, the Iowa Supreme Court granted the Defendants' request for interlocutory appeal. On Appeal, the Iowa Supreme Court reversed the denial of summary judgment and found that there was no evidence that the physician's interaction with DHS was not in good faith. Therefore, the Defendants were entitled to immunity, and the Iowa Supreme Court remanded the case to the district court for entry of judgment in favor of the Defendants.

Criminal Defense
Connie Diekema and Peter Lapointe prevailed on an appeal of the district court's dismissal of a lawsuit filed against the firm’s client. The client, a criminal defense attorney, was sued by his former client for damages arising out of alleged ineffective assistance of counsel in the underlying criminal proceedings. At the district court, the case was dismissed on the basis that it was filed in the improper venue and that the plaintiff was precluded from bringing his lawsuit unless and until he obtained postconviction relief from his criminal convictions pursuant to Iowa Code section 815.10(6) and the common law “relief from conviction” rule. The Iowa Court of Appeals affirmed, holding that the lawsuit was properly dismissed and the plaintiff could not sue his attorney unless and until he obtains postconviction relief.
Wrongful Death
Connie Diekema successfully defended a general surgeon at trial. The Plaintiff’s estate alleged that the surgeon caused the wrongful death of the Plaintiff when he cut or injured the colon during a laparoscopic cholecystectomy and did not timely diagnose and repair the injury. The jury found that the surgeon complied with applicable professional standards and awarded no damages.
Traffic Violations
Todd Gaffney obtained a defense verdict on behalf of a railroad client in a crossing accident case. The Plaintiff alleged that he suffered serious injuries as a result of the accident. At trial, the Plaintiff argued that the train’s horn was not operating properly. The Plaintiff also had argued that the train was speeding for the foggy weather conditions, but this claim was dismissed on summary judgment. The railroad argued the horn was operating properly, and that the railroad was not negligent in any manner. Following an 8 day trial, the jury found in favor of the Firm’s client, finding the railroad was not negligent in any respect and finding the Plaintiff was negligent. The jury did not award the Plaintiff any damages.
Fraud
Connie Diekema and Joe Moser, serving as local counsel, assisted in the successful defense of the firm’s clients on appeal before the Eight Circuit Court of Appeals. The Plaintiff in the underlying suit was injured in a motocross accident and filed suit against the maker and seller of a neck brace he was allegedly wearing, claiming the brace caused, exacerbated, or failed to protect him from the injuries he suffered in the motocross accident. The Plaintiff advanced theories of products liability, breach of warranty, negligence, gross negligence, and consumer fraud. The District Court for the Southern District of Iowa granted motions to dismiss filed by the firm, finding the Plaintiff failed to assert sufficient factual allegations and failed to state a claim upon which relief could be granted, and the Plaintiff appealed. The Eight Circuit affirmed, finding the only factual allegation in the Plaintiff’s complaint failed to state a claim for relief.
Murder
Joe Moser successfully obtained a dismissal with prejudice for the firm’s clients, a mental health care facility and its providers. The Plaintiff, who was convicted of first degree murder in 2015, brought a medical malpractice action against his former mental health care providers. He alleged they breached the standard of care in prescribing certain medications, which he claimed caused or contributed to his commission of murder, and failed to sufficiently follow up with him after he stopped attending appointments with them. Joe filed multiple motions, arguing the claims were untimely; that the Plaintiff failed to meet certain procedural requirements, including the requirement to timely provide a certificate of merit (an affidavit from an expert who has reviewed the case for the plaintiff and finds it has sufficient merit to proceed); that Plaintiff lacked good cause to extend any of his deadlines; and that dismissal was appropriate. The district court agreed that Plaintiff failed to serve a certificate of merit and that he lacked good cause to extend his deadlines. The district court dismissed all claims against the firm’s clients.

Business and Corporate Law

Mergers and Acquisitions
David advises clients, including small business owners and professionals, in a broad range of business and tax areas including corporate and business mergers and acquisitions, tax and employee benefits counsel and estate succession planning. This includes the preparation of wills, trusts and related documents. He also assists owners, professionals and executives in the formation and structure of their businesses including contract and compliance matters, and formation of corporations, limited liability companies and partnerships. He has presented topics at a variety of regional, state and local continuing education programs as well as industry and professional trade association meetings.
Business Disputes
Megan Kennedy Marty, a shareholder of Finley Law Firm, P.C., counsels clients in the areas of business law, taxation, real estate, mergers and acquisitions, health law, estate and succession planning, estate and trust administration, and employment law.
Limited Liability Companies
Intellectual Property

Workers Compensation
Kermit Anderson successfully defended Hy-Vee in a four-day jury trial. The plaintiff, a former Hy-Vee employee, had alleged that his employment was terminated in violation of public policy because he was pursuing workers' compensation benefits. Hy-Vee denied the plaintiff's claim and maintained that his employment was terminated for valid work-related reasons. The jury found that the plaintiff had not proved his claim and returned its verdict in favor of Hy-Vee.
Wrongful Termination
Abigail Wallace and Stacie Codr obtained summary judgment in favor of the firm’s clients in an employment dispute. The Plaintiff, a former employee, filed a three-count claim for wrongful discharge in violation of public policy. Abigail and Stacie argued that Plaintiff’s claims were not grounded in public policy and, therefore, no claim of wrongful discharge could be maintained. Agreeing with the Finley Law Firm’s arguments, the district court granted summary judgment in favor of the firm’s clients and dismissed all of the Plaintiff’s claims.
Employment Discrimination
Stacie Codr and Abigail Wallace successfully defended one of Iowa’s largest employers and an individually named Defendant at trial. A former employee brought an age discrimination claim against the firm's clients related to her termination. The jury found in favor Defendants finding they had not discriminated against the former employee on the basis of her age and awarded her zero damages.
Employment Contract
Joe Moser and Griffin Scott obtained summary judgment in favor of the firm’s client, an employer, in a wage dispute. The Plaintiff, a former employee, filed a wage claim alleging he was owed payment for accrued Paid Time Off under an employment contract. The Plaintiff filed the claim more than two years after his termination and final paycheck. Joe and Griffin successfully argued the two-year statute of limitations for wage claims barred the Plaintiff’s claim. The Plaintiff argued the statute of limitations began to run at a later date and therefore his claim was timely and should be permitted to proceed. Agreeing with the Finley Law Firm’s arguments, the Court granted summary judgment in favor of the firm’s client and dismissed the Plaintiff’s claim.
Employment Litigation
Stacie Codr and Abigail Wallace obtained summary judgment in favor of the firm’s clients in an employment dispute. The Plaintiff, a former employee, filed a two-count claim for discrimination against the firm's clients related to his termination. Stacie and Abigail argued that Plaintiff lacked any evidence of discrimination and that the firm's clients had a legitimate, nondiscriminatory basis for Plaintiff's termination. Agreeing with the Finley Law Firm’s arguments, the district court granted summary judgment in favor of the firm’s clients and dismissed all of the Plaintiff’s claims.
Sexual Harassment
Stacie Codr and Joe Moser obtained summary judgment for the firm’s clients, a large employer and two supervisory employees, in case involving allegations of sexual harassment, gender discrimination, hostile work environment, and constructive discharge. The firm argued that the Plaintiff’s allegations were legally insufficient to establish cognizable claims and that the employee was not constructively discharged. The Court agreed, stating “the incidents Plaintiff complains of are not of the frequency or the severity to support Plaintiff’s constrictive discharge claim or to satisfy the demanding legal standard for a hostile work environment.” The Court entered summary judgment for the firm’s clients and dismissed the case.

Premises Liability
Joe Moser and Pete Lapointe obtained summary judgment in favor of the firm’s client, a hospital. The plaintiff brought medical negligence and premises liability claims against the hospital after he suffered burns as a result of spilling coffee on himself in the hospital’s post-surgery recovery area. Plaintiff alleged that the hospital and its employees knew or should have known that he was not conscious enough to hold a cup of coffee while he was recovering from a procedure that involved moderate sedation. Joe and Pete moved for summary judgment on both claims. With respect to the premises liability claim, Joe and Pete argued that the Plaintiff could not establish a claim for premises liability given that he was not injured as a result of a hazardous condition of the premises or conduct posing risks to entrants upon the premises. As to the negligence claim, Joe and Pete argued that the case involved issues of medical judgment requiring expert testimony and that Plaintiff could not establish his claim because he failed to designate any expert witnesses. The Court agreed, granting summary judgment on both claims and dismissing the case in full.
Construction Litigation
Kevin maintains a trial practice in the defense of licensed professionals, including attorneys, accountants, architects, and engineers, as well as companies in the construction and commercial related industries. He has over 35 years of experience resolving construction disputes and insurance claims, including 25 years as the leader of the Firm’s construction law practice.
Landlord-Tenant Disputes
A native of Mason City, Iowa, Peter graduated with distinction from the University of Iowa in 2018 with a degree in Political Science. Peter then went on to attend the University of Iowa College of Law, where he graduated with distinction in 2021. While in law school, Peter participated in the Jessup International Moot Court Competition as part of a four-member team, competing against law schools from around the world, and won an award for one of the best briefs submitted in the competition. Peter also worked as a student intern at University of Iowa Student Legal Services, where he gained experience representing clients in landlord-tenant, criminal, and family law matters. Peter practices in the firm’s civil litigation division, gaining experience in a variety of practice areas.
Property Damage
The Finley Law Firm successfully defended one of the firm’s clients in a bench trial in Polk County, Iowa. The matter involved a claim of property damage resulting from use of a wood stain product. The plaintiffs also sought attorney fees, in addition to the damages. The Court ruled in favor of the firm’s client, determining the plaintiffs failed to prove their claim by a preponderance of the evidence. As a result, the Court awarded no damages and entered judgment for the firm’s client.

Personal Injury
Wilson v. Ritel Copter and Bristol Aerospace: Successfully prosecuted five-week jury trial involving personal injury aviation product liability claim resulting in a $4,100,000 verdict for the firm's client.
Medical Malpractice
J.R. Kappelman and Erik Bergeland secured dismissal of a hospital in a medical malpractice action as a result of the Plaintiffs' failure to comply with Iowa law. The case involved allegations that a hospital was negligent in its care of a patient who developed a pressure ulcer while recovering from complex spinal surgery. On behalf of the hospital, J.R. and Erik filed a motion to dismiss arguing that the plaintiff's certificate of merit failed to contain information and language required by Iowa law and a recent Iowa Supreme Court decision, Miller v. Cath. Health Initiatives-Iowa, Corp., 7 N.W.2d 367 (Iowa 2024). The district court agreed, rejecting all of plaintiff's arguments against dismissal, and granting the motion to dismiss the case with prejudice.
Auto Accidents
Disability Discrimination
Kermit Anderson obtained summary judgment in the trial court on behalf of a client defending claims of disability discrimination in the termination of plaintiff’s employment and in allegedly failing to accommodate his disabilities. Plaintiff appealed. On March 8, 2017, the Court of Appeals, in a thorough twenty-five page opinion affirmed the trial court’s ruling. The appellate court concluded that there had been no genuine issue of fact produced to show that the defendant’s articulated reason for terminating the plaintiff’s employment was a pretext for discrimination. The court further held that one of the plaintiff’s failure to accommodate claims was legally barred for having been untimely filed with the Iowa Civil Rights Commission and the other was barred because he first requested accommodation after learning his employment would be terminated. Plaintiff sought further review with the Iowa Supreme Court which was denied in an Order filed May 2, 2017.

Trusts and Estates

Estate Planning
An Iowa native, Megan graduated summa cum laude from Iowa State University in 2004 with a B.S. in accounting and then went on to graduate with a Master of Accountancy, tax emphasis, from The University of Iowa Henry B. Tippie College of Business in 2005. Megan earned her law degree from The University of Iowa College of Law, with distinction, in 2008. Prior to joining Finley, Megan practiced with Crowley Fleck PLLP, a regional firm with its headquarters in Billings, Montana, and Fabyanske, Westra, Hart & Thomson, P.A., of Minneapolis, Minnesota. She is licensed to practice in Iowa, Minnesota, and Montana. Megan has served as a board member/officer of several civic and charitable organizations, including the Yellowstone Art Museum, Gamma Phi Beta corporation board (Rho Chapter), and a trust and estate legislation advisory board. She was recently included in the 2025 edition of
Wills
Trusts
® for Business Organizations (including LLCs and Partnerships) and Trusts & Estates. Megan is married and a mother of three children.
Power of Attorney
Eric Hoch and Connie Diekema prevailed on a motion for summary judgment on a legal malpractice claim brought against the firm’s client, an attorney. The legal services provided by the attorney included the creation of a power of attorney and a will for the testator. The attorney-in-fact provided for by the power of attorney brought a claim against the attorney, arguing that she was both the client of the attorney, as well as a direct and intended beneficiary of the attorney-client relationship between the testator and the attorney. Eric and Connie successfully argued that the attorney-in-fact was neither the client of the attorney nor a direct and intended beneficiary of the attorney-client relationship between the testator and the attorney. Because the attorney-in-fact lacked standing to sue the attorney, the third-party petition against the attorney was dismissed.
Probate

Foreclosure
After a three-day bench trial in a complex mortgage foreclosure action involving expert testimony of forensic document examiners, Eric Hoch obtained a decree of foreclosure for the firm’s client. Eric obtained the foreclosure and judgment on several theories including: (1) proof of a validly executed mortgage despite disputed authenticity of the mortgage signatures; (2) ratification of the mortgage; (3) the mortgagee was a holder in due course for value received and took assignment of the mortgage free and clear of defects asserted by the mortgagors; and (4) and existence of an equitable mortgage. Eric defeated, and the trial court dismissed, all of mortgagors’ affirmative defenses and counterclaims including: (1) statute of limitations; (2) equitable estoppel and/or unclean hands; (3) deceit, negligent and/or fraudulent misrepresentation; (4) fraud and fraud in the inducement; (5) coercion; (6) failure to mitigate damages; and (7) lack of consideration. Eric obtained a judgment in favor of the firm’s mortgagee client in all regards including principal and interest, attorney’s fees, and costs of collection, which, in total, exceed $500,000.
Tax Law
Debt Collection
Kevin Driscoll and Eric Hoch obtained summary judgment in favor of a law firm and debt collection agency against a lawsuit filed by a debtor alleging violations of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act. In a thirty-five page opinion, Northern District of Iowa Senior Judge Donald E. O'Brien found that the law firm and debt collection agency were permitted to rely on a process server's return-of-service as presumptively valid, and that their debt collection efforts did not constitute a violation of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act. The District Court also found in favor of the debt collection agency despite its failure to provide notification to the Iowa Attorney General within thirty days after commencing business in the state.

View All Services

Provided by