I finally got around to reading this case out of Sangamon County involving a trial court’s finding of indirect criminal contempt against a lawyer. It’s instructive specifically regarding lawyer conduct before a tribunal and I’m a self-labeled “contempt junkie” so that part of the case’s discussion is also useful if you have the same problem.
Briefly, a pro se client seemed to be unsuccessful in getting a motion to modify certain post-divorce financial obligations scheduled before the court although he did get a motion filed. Most courts have some local rule that says you need to set a motion/pleading for hearing in 90ish days from filing or it’s a nullity (you’d need to re-file…it’s treated as if it was never filed). Here, apparently the date of the original filing of the motion was important. Next, pro se client retains lawyer who files motion to set pro se’s previous motion for hearing and lawyer says the pro se motion was still timely BECAUSE it had been noticed up in the past but opposing lawyer had improperly appeared and that the motion set in court was stricken on that day w/o notice to pro se litigant.
And what does “new” lawyer for previously pro se litigant use as evidence of the above scheduling “issue”? An exhibit to his pleading which is a page from the judge’s court scheduling calendar.
Well, so then the case heads down the contempt road. Judge asks lawyer how/where he got the calendar page and lawyer says the clerk gave it to him and clerk denies this and there’s a whole contempt hearing sort of he said/she said between lawyer and judge’s clerk.
Lawyer is eventually held in indirect criminal contempt of court and fined $100 and required to apologize to the court. On appeal they modify to indirect civil contempt and remove the $100 fine. Short opinion and an interesting discussion of types of contempt.
I wonder how comfortable the lawyer is appearing in that judge’s/clerk’s courtroom these days.
RSS
Twitter
Facebook
YouTube
