Benchslaps, Fashion

Judge To Attorney: Put On Some Damn Socks!

An attorney recently tried out his Sonny Crockett look in the courtroom. The judge was not as much of a Vice fan....

By  
on

Hit it:

Why the Miami Vice theme song? First of all, that shouldn’t be a question because it’s always the right time for Miami Vice. Second, because this story implicates the coolest guy from the 1980s: Detective Sonny Crockett.[1] How cool was Sonny Crockett? People actually watched Nash Bridges desperately pretending it was the same show except Tubbs got replaced by Cheech Marin playing José Jiménez or some other broad stereotype.

Crockett’s influence upon the 80s Zeitgeist extended to men’s fashion. Not just white suits over T-shirts, but dress shoes with no socks.

An attorney recently tried out his Sonny Crockett look in the courtroom. The judge was not as much of a Vice fan….

At this point it’s worth noting that this story comes to us from Blackford County, Indiana, which is 165 square miles of rural ‘Murica. The only thing Miami about Blackford is that it once hosted the reservation of the Miami tribe.[2] But if you were wondering why a lawyer in 2014 is running around dressing in vintage 1980s fashion, remember that the 1980s probably just trickled down to these folks in the last year or so.

Sponsored

Todd Glickfield, from the nearby metropolis of Marion, Indiana, was litigating in Blackford County when Judge Dean A. Young noticed that counsel wasn’t wearing any socks:

During a break in the proceedings the Court advised Attorney Glickfield privately that he was not appropriately dressed as required by Local Rule, and that the court would insist upon him wearing socks should he choose to present cases in the Blackford Circuit Court in the future. Atty. Glickfield advised the court that “I hate socks” and that he’s had “this conversation with other judges in other courts,” and that unless the judge of the Blackford Circuit Court could show him applicable “orders or other legal authority” he would continue his habit of appearing sockless in court.

That’s pretty bold. The judge didn’t, say, arbitrarily try to rob a client of the right to a speedy trial or something else requiring the lawyer to put up a fight. Glickfield just doesn’t like wearing socks. Over something this trivial, just give in and do what you’re asked instead of petulantly demanding that the bench cite chapter and verse. To quote Marsellus Wallace, that’s pride f**king with you. Lawyer attire for men isn’t really so difficult. When you’re in court or meeting with a client or adversary, wear a standard, conservative suit with a dress shirt and tie… and let’s just assume shoes and socks. When you’re not in court or meeting with a client, wear a dress shirt and slacks. If you’re deviating from this formula — either by thumbing your nose at the conservative uniform of the courtroom or dressing up like a dandy around the office — you’re just an insecure peacock.

And it’s more than whether or not Judge Young condones Glickfield’s self-entitled jackassery. Glickfield has obligations to his client. Even if he’s right — and he probably is — that there’s no real rule for the judge’s “No Socks, No Justice” worldview, it’s not worth prejudicing his client in the eyes of the judge just because Glickfield “doesn’t like socks.”

That said, this is such an extraordinary waste of judicial resources. Unless Glickfield wears capris to court, who’s even going to notice whether he’s wearing socks or not? And if he’s wearing capris to court, one would hope that’s the bigger issue. The way the judge defended this stupid benchslap was…

Sponsored

2. That Blackford County Local Rule of Court LR05-AR00-2(A) states in relevant part “attorney shall be punctual and dressed in appropriate business attire when appearing in court.”

****

5. That the Blackford Circuit Court considers socks to constitute a part of “appropriate business attire” for male members of the bar presenting cases before the court.

Judges possess a lot of latitude in their fiefdoms, but unilaterally filling in the blanks of a amorphous but established rule is arbitrary and unnecessary. The sanctity of the courtroom and public perception of legal proceedings was not scandalized by this guy not wearing socks. Before Judge Young set the precedent for judges to define vague concepts like “appropriate business attire,” he should recall the story of Judge Holly Hollenbeck, who tossed a woman from his courtroom based on a “no hats” rule. The woman was a cancer patient who lost her hair in treatment. Or Judge William Sosnay, who protested a prosecutor’s wearing an ascot. Ascots may look stupid, and the prosecutor should have worn a normal neck tie, but the judge’s hissy fit only wasted everyone’s time.

Moreover, this authority raises serious gender issues. As I said, lawyerly wear for men is pretty straightforward, but for women it’s a minefield that whole sites are devoted to navigating. One judge might label that suit “unfeminine” while the alternative gets labeled “too revealing.” Some judges might balk at women wearing pants. Judge Kopf’s controversially blunt blog post about women’s attire offered valuable insight into the reason why judges shouldn’t be granted unilateral power over what is and isn’t appropriate attire when it comes to women. Judge Kopf said that “Men are both pigs and prudes” and that the women in the courthouse aren’t much better when it comes to unfairly judging women in court. Not that this should be tolerated, but implicit in Judge Kopf’s post is the fact that he doesn’t make hard and fast rules in his courtroom and he leaves it to the lawyers to figure out the right balance.

And if Crockett and Tubbs taught us anything, it’s that you can’t do everything by some rule book.

So to Todd Glickfield and Judge Young: you’re both wrong. But thanks for turning this insignificant pissing match into fodder for the whole legal world to enjoy.

The full order is available on the next page…

About Us [Glickfield Law Office]
On being a dirty old man and how young women lawyers dress [Hercules and the Umpire]

Earlier: This Partner Wants You To Dress Up So You Can Be A Tool Just Like Him
Judge Beats Up Public Defender
Judge of the Day: Holly Hollenbeck
Judge of the Day: William Sosnay
Federal Judge Suggests That Women Lawyers Not Dress Like ‘Ignorant Sluts’


[1] I’ll accept a counter-argument for Stringfellow Hawke as the coolest guy from the 1980s. He flew a Mach 3 helicopter for f**k’s sake.
[2] True story. And now, sadly, when someone searches “Miami” and “Blackford County,” the history of those proud people will be joined on Google with an article about a lawyer and a judge sniping at each other over socks. I’m so sorry.

1 2Next »

Topics

, , , , , ,