Legal Ethics, Pro Se Litigants

Spice Up Your Depositions With Stun Guns & Pepper Spray... Like This Guy

Lawyer threatens opposing counsel at deposition. Court is not pleased.

By  
on

Pro se litigants do the darnedest things, and apparently prosanity can afflict anyone — including licensed attorneys. Representing himself, California attorney Douglas J. Crawford brought a suit against J.P. Morgan Chase and what happened next will shock you. That’s not a Buzzfeed headline. I mean, what happened next is a f**king stun gun got jammed in someone’s face.

When a trial judge describes the lawyer’s antics as “the most outrageous behavior that I have ever heard of in my life by an attorney” they’ve set the bar pretty high and Crawford delivers. When Chase attorneys sat down to depose Crawford’s brother Matthew, things got a little real:

Matthew and Crawford appeared on April 21. Immediately after Matthew was sworn, Crawford pointed a can of pepper spray at counsel’s face from a distance of approximately three feet. Crawford said, “Mr. Traver [Chase’s counsel], if things get out of hand, I brought what is legally pepper spray, and I will pepper spray you if you get out of hand.” Crawford then produced a stun gun, pointed it at Traver’s head, and said, “If that doesn’t quell you, this is a flashlight that turns into a stun gun.” Crawford discharged the stun gun close to Traver’s face. Traver terminated the deposition.

Well OK then. Kind of explains why Chase objected to an earlier request to conduct depositions at Crawford’s home because they “feared for their safety” citing a petition Crawford wrote in another matter where he casually referenced the Oklahoma City and Boston bombings.

When Chase raised the stun gun episode with the judge, Crawford decided to double down on the belligerence because really where else are you going to go from “stun gun threat”?

“Present Plaintiff and future train passenger, Douglas J. Crawford, submits this humble ‘opposition’ paperwork in response to Defendant J.P. Morgan Chase Bank, N.A., aka ‘Heavenly Father’ (sometimes herein referred to as ‘Def. Chase’ or where appropriate, ‘Heavenly Father’), ex parte discovery motion for termination and monetary sanctions based on allegations of misconduct that occurred an illegal video-taped deposition held after the close of discovery pursuant to a Proposed Order of the Court. Plaintiff submits to ‘former’ D.A. [the trial judge], currently masquerading as a Superior Court Judge, that the requested ‘sanction’ by our Heavenly Father does not go far enough and requests this Court to sentence Plaintiff to death pursuant to Cal. Penal Code Section 190.2 and the imposition of sanctions against Plaintiff of not less [than] $265 million dollars for the ‘alleged’ assault that occurred on April 21, 2014 by Plaintiff against our Heavenly Father’s only begotten son, Walter Johannes Robert Traver. Plaintiff has submitted a ‘Proposed’ Order stating as much for [the trial judge’s] rubber stamping.” (Fns. omitted.)

Then there’s some stuff about his brother and the judge’s daughter and Robert E. Lee and it’s all very confusing. The appellate court chalks up this behavior to the stress of being a lawyer.

Sponsored

Hey, Sherlock Holmes is a prickly character too, and Crawford earned 15 minutes of fame back in the 90s for solving a missing person case on a whim so he might just have that iconoclastic hard-boiled thing going. That said, Crawford may have some other issues. For example, while running for judge in 2014, more than a few shady facts came to light:

His opponent for Superior Court seat 9, Douglas James Crawford, faces suspension of his law license for advising opposing counsel of threats made by his client to instigate an IRS audit if settlement talks in a lawsuit were not commenced. He denies wrongdoing and has filed an appeal. He has also drawn criticism for racial remarks regarding an African-American judge and for offering free legal advice to white supremacist groups. In addition, an East County Magazine investigation reveals that Crawford has previously been sanctioned by the California 4th District Court of Appeal for “intentionally misleading” a court and bank regarding his mother’s death. Moreover, the court found that Crawford claimed to represent his mother’s estate after allowing his license to practice law to become inactive.

Nothing is certain in wacky pro se cases but white supremacist groups and taxes!

But, in fairness to Crawford, Chase’s conceded actions were pretty galling:

On September 2, 2008, Crawford accompanied his mother, Ninion Crawford (Ninion), to a branch of JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. (Chase) to withdraw money from Ninion’s account. While there, Ninion instructed Chase to place a note on her bank accounts not to withdraw or transfer more than $5,000 without first contacting Crawford. A Chase employee agreed to comply.

In April 2011, Shruti Kohli was employed by Chase as an investment advisor. Kohli advised Ninion to invest in a 29-year annuity. Ninion was 79 years old at the time (Crawford states that this age is in error and that his actually mother died at 76). Kohli prepared a slip to withdraw $200,000 from Ninion’s account. The money was transferred without first contacting Crawford.

Sponsored

Yikes. Chase rescinded the annuity (or, per Crawford, the company that issued the annuity did), so Crawford is suing over $2000 in claimed lost interest. But you can imagine how an event like that could get someone pretty raw.

Maybe not “pepper spray and stun gun” raw, but maybe this will work out for him. As a commenter discussing this case put it the other day:

I can see the ads now: “My lawyer wasn’t bullied by the banks!”

Indeed.

(Check out the appellate court’s ruling on the next page.)

Unemployed Lawyer Solved Disappearance of Writer [Los Angeles Times]
JUDGE WITH EXTENSIVE RECORD ON BENCH CHALLENGED BY CANDIDATE FACING SUSPENSION BY STATE BAR [East County Magazine]

1 2Next »

Topics

, , ,