How Disciplinary Authorities Treat Attorneys Convicted Of Domestic Violence

3 Comments / Discipline, Moral turpitide / By

October is Domestic Violence Awareness Month.  This past year featured several high profile cases of domestic violence. Who can forget the grainy footage of former Baltimore Ravens running back Ray Rice cold-cocking his wife in a casino elevator? Or charges that football star Adrian Peterson had physically abused his own child—which is even more bizarre […]

How Disciplinary Authorities Treat Attorneys Convicted Of Domestic Violence Read More »

Circuit Courts Warn: The New “F-Bomb” In Litigation Is “Frivolous”

Leave a Comment / Duty to Tribunal / By

It pays to be nice. That is the message from two recent Circuit Courts of Appeal decisions that criticized parties for lack of civility because counsel characterized their opponent’s arguments as “frivolous.” In the first case, Bennett v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 731 F.3d 584, 585 (6th Cir. 2013), the Sixth Circuit reversed a judgment

Circuit Courts Warn: The New “F-Bomb” In Litigation Is “Frivolous” Read More »

When It Comes To Teaching About Money, Law Schools Fail Miserably

Leave a Comment / ABA Model Rules of Professional Conduct, Safekeeping Property / By

Law schools are failing miserably to teach up and coming lawyers the most fundamental aspects of the business of law.  The absence of such training is particularly troublesome in today’s legal climate, where new law school grads far out number available entry level jobs. This economic reality can drive many newly-minted Esquires to make some

When It Comes To Teaching About Money, Law Schools Fail Miserably Read More »

“Your Honor, You Are Stupid, You Suck, Please Decide for Me”

Leave a Comment / ABA Model Rules of Professional Conduct, Civility/Professionalism, Competence / By

With last week’s post on patent attorney Andrew Schroeder, who ran amok in his filings with the USPTO (click), fresh on my mind, I had to chuckle at the blog posted recently in Wordrake (click here), entitled: “Your Honor, You Are Stupid, You Suck, Please Decide For Me.” The post cites several examples of what

“Your Honor, You Are Stupid, You Suck, Please Decide for Me” Read More »

“What We’ve Got Here Is Failure To Communicate”  – Preventing The Most Common Cause For Attorney Discipline And Malpractice

2 Comments / Communications, Failure to Communicate, Malpractice, Patent Ethics / By

It is one of the most iconic lines in the history of American cinema.  Spoken by “The Captain”–the sadistic prison warden portrayed in the 1967 film Cool Hand Luke—the “failure to communicate” passage near the top of the American Film Institute’s list of top 100 movie quotations, nestled between “I love the smell of napalm

“What We’ve Got Here Is Failure To Communicate”  – Preventing The Most Common Cause For Attorney Discipline And Malpractice Read More »

Lawyer’s Courtroom Antics Draw One-Year Suspension; Bar Rejects “Stress of Litigation” Defense

Leave a Comment / Discipline, Litigation Ethics / By

A Washington State lawyer was suspended for one year following multiple instances of courtroom misbehavior and making a false report to the police.  See In re Kathryn B. Abele, Wash. Sup. Ct. (Aug. 27, 2015) (en banc). The string of misconduct began during a 13-day trial involving a contentious child custody dispute. During the trial,

Lawyer’s Courtroom Antics Draw One-Year Suspension; Bar Rejects “Stress of Litigation” Defense Read More »

USPTO Suspends Attorney For Six Months For Derogatory Patent Filings

5 Comments / Civility/Professionalism, Patent Ethics, Suspension, USPTO OED / By

This week at “Back to School Night,” I read with great interest some words of wisdom posted on the wall as part of a set of class “Rules.” The children agreed to three general principles of self-governance: Be nice to others. Don’t use bad words. Be respectful. Lawyers also have their own rules of self-governance, codified

USPTO Suspends Attorney For Six Months For Derogatory Patent Filings Read More »

Live Webcast Of Mass. High Court Hearing on Patent Subject Matter Conflicts

Leave a Comment / Conflicts of Interest, Patent Ethics / By

The September 8, 2015, oral argument before the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court in Maling v. Finnegan Henderson will be broadcast live by webcast. For those interested in watching the oral argument, which is scheduled to be held sometime between 9:00 AM and 1:00 PM, click on the link at Mass. Supreme Judicial Court. As previously reported

Live Webcast Of Mass. High Court Hearing on Patent Subject Matter Conflicts Read More »

Scroll to Top