It is sometimes hard to believe how uncivil and unreasonable attorneys can act toward one another. At least one judge has had enough of such behavior, and he let the attorneys and their clients know his thoughts of their conduct very loudly and clearly.
U.S. District Judge Sam Sparks of Austin, Texas issued an order a few years ago in which the attorneys had a history of filings and antagonistic motions full of personal insults requiring multiple discovery hearings. It was so bad that the judge said that he feels like he is supervising kindergarten, because the lawyers involved in a civil suit in his court are acting like they never learned how to get along with others.
Judge Sparks was so outraged by the attorneys' conduct that he threatened to order the parties in that case to find new lawyers "if the lawyers in this case do not change, immediately, their manner of practice and start conducting themselves as competent to practice in the federal court."
While there are exceptions, we are fortunate here in South Carolina that the vast majority of attorneys are civil to one another and do abide by the rules, both in word and in sprit. I cannot stand the thought of having to deal with someone acting the way that the attorneys in Judge Sparks' case were acting, and personally, I am glad that he dealt with them as harshly as he did.
The full text of Judge Sparks' Order is set forth below:
ORDER
Be it remembered on the 21st day of July 2004 and the Court took time to make its daily review of the above-captioned case, and thereafter, enters the following:
When the undersigned accepted the appointment from the President of the United States of the position now held, he was ready to face the daily practice of law in federal courts with presumably competent lawyers. No one warned the undersigned that in many instances his responsibility would be the same as a person who supervised kindergarten.
Frankly, the undersigned would guess the lawyers in this case did not attend kindergarten as they never learned how to get along well with others. Notwithstanding the history of filings and antagonistic motions full of personal insults and requiting multiple discovery hearings, earning the disgust of this Court, the lawyers continue ad infinitum.
On July 20, 2004, the Court's schedule was interrupted by an emergency motion so the parties' deposition, which began on July 20, would and could proceed until 6:30 in the evening. No intelligent discussion of the issue was accomplished prior to the filing and service of the motion, even though the lawyers were in the same room. Over a telephone conference, the lawyers, of course, had inconsistent statements as to the support of their positions. On July 20, 2004, the Court entered an order allowing the plaintiffs/counter-defendants until July 23, 2004 two days from today to answer a counterclaim. Yet, on July 21, 2004, Bodyworx.com, Inc.'s lawyers filed a motion for reconsideration of that Court order arguing the pleadings should have been filed by July 19, 2004.
The Court simply wants to scream to these lawyers, "Get a life" or "Do you have any other cases?" or "When is the last time you registered for anger management classes?" Neither the world's problems nor this case will be determined by an answer to a counterclaim, which is four days late, even with the approval of the presiding judge.
If the lawyers in this case do not change, immediately, their manner of practice and start conducting themselves as competent to practice in the federal court, the Court will contemplate and may enter an order requiring the parties to obtain new counsel.
In the event it is not clear from the above discussion, the Motion for Reconsideration is denied.
Signed this the 21st day of July 2004.
Sam Sparks
United States District Judge
Source: "'Antagonistic Motions' Spark Retort From Judge" by Brenda Sapino Jeffreys, pubilshed at Law.com.
Comments