Benchslaps, Legal Ethics

Disastrous Dick-Joke Deposition Earns Stern Benchslap

When lawyers behave this badly, a harsh benchslap is not far behind.

By  
on

smack slap benchslap benchslapsWell, this episode was bound to earn some sort of response, but this is a masterpiece of subdued, prudent judicial rage from a judge. These lawyers should take heed because the judge has just showed you the end of his rope and gleefully invited you to hang yourselves on it.

If you don’t remember the “Dick Joke Deposition,” how does one begin to explain the whole adventure in petty, awful legal posturing? Probably with this:

Quote 1

But that wasn’t all. Page after page of sniping Connecticut lawyers oppressed some poor court reporter into taking down long, detailed commentary on the record about whether or not one female attorney looked under the table at one point to quip that her male colleague had nothing between his legs. Or maybe that he had “peanuts.” And maybe the witness threatened a third lawyer. Perhaps there was a dense history of sexism leading up to this. Whichever story you believe, everyone’s behavior on the record reached peak “lawyers behaving badly.”

Apparently Judge David M. Sheridan agreed. In a forceful benchslap, he took up both sides’ repeated entreaty to let “the record speak for itself,” and he did not like what it had to say:

Various counsel at various times in this litigation have intoned with solemnity that “the transcript speaks for itself.” It does. And the transcripts and e-mails attached to other motions also speak for themselves. The interactions between the lawyers that are exposed in those documents are disgraceful and are the antithesis of the professionalism and civility which this court has traditionally associated with the respected law firms by whom those lawyers are employed. It has escalated and intensified over the course of these proceedings. It simply can no longer be tolerated. This behavior demeans the participants, demeans the witnesses and demeans the very system of justice itself.

But Judge Sheridan isn’t punishing anyone right now, and he also declined the invitation to supervise all future depositions, which he explicitly characterizes as “[b]abysitting.” Instead, he’s just going to take away their privilege to complain about the other side:

Sponsored

The parties will proceed with depositions, without the presence of a judge, in the manner that depositions are traditionally conducted. After the date of this order, at the conclusion of every deposition conducted in this case, the party that has noticed the deposition will forward a hard-copy transcript of the deposition….

The court will review the transcripts when received. Without the need for motions, e-mails, phone calls, letters or any other input, assistance or comment from any counsel, the court will (based on the record in the transcript) arrive at its own judgment as to whether the conduct of any attorney merits the intervention of the court to enforce standards for attorney conduct.

He’s as tired of all the cheap grandstanding on what the record says for itself as we are.

And one final warning:

Henceforth, in any pleading filed with this court, in any e-mail that comes before this court, in any transcript that comes before this court, if any attorney makes any reference to the manner in which opposing counsel has chosen to prosecute or defend this case, or makes any remark about opposing counsel that is in the least bit personally disparaging, that lawyer will be swiftly and severely sanctioned.

In keeping with the theme of this matter… check out the stones on Judge Sheridan, huh?

Sponsored

(Duck your head onto the next page to read the whole order…)

Earlier: Deposition Derailed By Dick Joke Dispute

1 2Next »

Topics

, , , , , , , , , , , , ,