Chief Judge R. David Proctor of the Northern District of Alabama recently issued a timeout to some attorneys appearing before him, ordering both sides to the lunch table.
Welcome to the most awkward “It’s Just Lunch” date ever.
Motion to determine lunch spot pic.twitter.com/jb6ahTOZes
— Matt Margolis (@ItsMattsLaw) December 9, 2024
[QUIZ] Unlock More Time In Your Day With A Smarter Workflow
See how much time your firm could be saving. Use our free law firm time savings calculator to uncover efficiency gains and take control of your day.
Thankfully for the parties, the order contemplates that this event gets handled before Alabama’s New Year’s playoff game… wait, what’s that? ReliaQuest Bowl?
The Chief Judge has a history of refusing to suffer pettiness in his courtroom. In 2023, he savagely roasted a lawyer trying to strike a response brief for being 15 minutes late. That story received enough coverage that one might think that attorneys practicing before Proctor would think twice before giving even the appearance of pettiness. But apparently the message didn’t reach the parties in McCullers v. Koch Foods.
Plaintiff’s counsel had conditioned consent to an extension upon the defense pledging not to move to dismiss.
How Filevine Bakes AI Into Every Layer Of Your Case Management
It’s like having a junior associate who’s never off the clock.
There is generally no good reason that an extension such as this should be opposed, let alone denied. The Golden Rule—do unto others as you would have them do unto you—is not just a good rule of thumb for everyday life. It is a critical component of legal professionalism. Sadly, in recent years compliance with the rule is becoming rarer and rarer in the litigation arena. It is time to reverse that trend, even if it is only in this case.
But lunch dates are fraught with complications. Earlier this year, we reported on a motion to compel lunch brought by a party trying to force the other side to engage in a meet and confer. This seemed like a pretty good idea from afar, but several people wrote in afterward to say that there are underlying issues in that case that made the idea of lunch utterly unreasonable. Though it would seem like the best way to avoid that would be to bite the bullet and go ahead with the meet and confer if you don’t want to take a more literal bite.
Will plaintiff’s counsel try to get the 2 for $20 deal at Applebee’s? If not, will defense counsel start ordering at a nicer restaurant to pop a couple bottles of Dom Perignon? So many questions.
On the other hand, if either side pulls any shenanigans, I’d imagine Chief Judge Proctor would have a very entertaining response.
(The full order is on the next page.)
Earlier: Federal Judge Utterly Done With Lawyer’s Pettiness
‘Motion To Compel Lunch’ Makes Case For Ordering Attorney To The Lunch Table
Joe Patrice is a senior editor at Above the Law and co-host of Thinking Like A Lawyer. Feel free to email any tips, questions, or comments. Follow him on Twitter or Bluesky if you’re interested in law, politics, and a healthy dose of college sports news. Joe also serves as a Managing Director at RPN Executive Search.