Benchslaps

Attorney Benchslapped, Suspended For Years' Worth Of 'Derogatory, Undignified And Inexcusable' Comments

The lawyer's conduct showed a 'flagrant disrespect for the judiciary.'

By  
on

Oh boy, this one is a doozy. A veteran New York lawyer, Gino Giorgini, has been suspended from the practice of law for three months by a state appeals court for “derogatory, undignified and inexcusable” conduct over a several-year period. According to the opinion, Giorgini’s written comments about both trial and appellate judges demonstrated a “flagrant disrespect for the judiciary.”

Now, you may be asking yourself, what exactly did Giorgini write to get such a strong reaction from the appellate court? Well, there are several great examples, pulled from submissions to judges over the course of multiple years, such as:

“THIS IS LA LA LAND ON STEROIDS…. I CAN NOT COMPREHEND THE #%*%#$^%* THAT IS THIS DECISION…. This is so bizzaro land that it is hard to type. What is even more pathetic is the case I cited (citation omitted) has been ignored.”

“WHERE DID THE COURT GET THIS? THIS IS STATED NO WHERE IN [Plaintiff’s Expert’s] REPORT. LA LA LAND, I COULD NOT MAKE THIS UP IF I TRIED….”

”This is outrageous!!!!!!! How dare this court disrespect my elderly client for the benefit of some political contributors. I guess my reply/sur-reply was not read. I pointed this out in my first paragraphs Let me see … perjury… no problem … fraud … no problem …. what a joke.”

“Defendants took the effort to point out in detail how almost each and every one of [plaintiff’s] receipts’ were fake and manufactured in the days before the papers were filed…. The Court does not care about this? Fake evidence is ok? Lying is ok? Is this a Suffolk County rule? Does the office of Judicial Conduct and the Department of Justice know about this rule?”

Yeah, you can’t get away with saying that to judges.

Sponsored

And as the New York Law Journal reports, Giorgini continues to blame the judges involved for the hot water he finds himself in now:

Reached on Wednesday, Giorgini declined to comment by phone. He instead offered to meet with the Law Journal in person to discuss his case in more detail, and claimed that his case had been wrongly affected by the corrupt actions of public officials.

As it turns out, the panel thought Giorgini’s lack of an apologetic tone was a big problem:

“Far from expressing genuine remorse for his disrespectful conduct, respondent [Giorgini] has consistently sought to justify his improper conduct by blaming the Justices before whom he was trying cases,” Justices David Friedman, Rosalyn Richter, Richard Andrias, Barbara Kapnick and Troy Webber also wrote in their unsigned opinion.

The opinion put it succinctly when it noted Giorgini’s comments go “beyond the bounds of zealous advocacy.”

Sponsored

headshotKathryn Rubino is a Senior Editor at Above the Law, and host of The Jabot podcast. AtL tipsters are the best, so please connect with her. Feel free to email her with any tips, questions, or comments and follow her on Twitter (@Kathryn1).

Topics

,