This would be a great time for McDermott to raise salaries in Chicago . . .

It figures that tubby guy's first thoughts were to Happy Meals.

I'm willing to bet she WAS a few fries short. Honorable indeed.

Imagine what Judge Isicoff would've done with an emoticon in a filing.

totally agree, cj. to get this disastrous embarassment behind the firm, a raise to $185 for its NY office would clear the air. come one, MWE, we're trying to help you help us.

I am confused. The guidelines only prohibit disparaging personal remarks about opposing counsel and witnesses, not the judge.

Besides, they are only guidelines . . .

I don't agree with what he said, but she certainly had her head in the sand. Sometimes, judges are so completely out of touch.

McDermott, McDonalds...it's all the same

I'm wondering if he would have made this sort of comment to a male judge.

The phrasing was poor. That said, Isicoff seems to be overreacting.

Judicial diva???

10:39 - No. Because a male judge wouldn't have said something so stupid.

I wonder how much his associates love to work for him.

Judge Isicoff was right. However, she should have just sua sponte revoked Smith's pro hac status and suspended him from practice before the Court.

The comment was outrageous, and Smith should have fuckin know fuckin better.

If i'm paying that douche to represent me and he creates this mess for me as a result of pure petulance and idiocy, I am unlikely to ever retain him, or his firm, again.

he would have never said that to a male judge.

If anyone said this to my judge they would very quickly find themselves in contempt. This is federal court, not CourtTV. And before the inevitable snarky response urging the judge to chill out, ask yourself: would you EVER contemplate saying something even remotely this stupid and insulting to a federal judge you were arguing in front of (even if they're Art. I)? If so, please (PLEASE) come to our courtroom. I need some entertainment, and you are obviously in need of a benchslap.

I wonder how much he billed for that day in court.

someone once called Loyola 2L "a few tiers short of a Tier 1" in an impromptu debate in the Loyola cafeteria

I think the list of cc's is interesting. Why the need to copy almost every other bankruptcy judge in SD Fla on the order to show cause?

And when you are done in NYClerk's court, please feel free to drive down to PA so I enjoy some "benchslapping" too!

I also agree that he would have never said that to a male judge. But I have seen an attorney (granted, a total douchebag) speak rudely in a condescending tone to an elderly judge in state court. Who totally took that abuse!!! He turned to me and goes, "I don't care if he's rude to me, I just don't want you two to be rude to each other. Lawyers should get along." I thought he was insane and should have held the douchebag in contempt.

Lawyers so SO PETTY

I also agree that he would have never said that to a male judge. But I have seen an attorney (granted, a total douchebag) speak rudely in a condescending tone to an elderly judge in state court. Who totally took that abuse!!! He turned to me and goes, "I don't care if he's rude to me, I just don't want you two to be rude to each other. Lawyers should get along." I thought he was insane and should have held the douchebag in contempt.

Yeah, then drive by my place, and suck my balls.

Come down to Guam, we'll show you what's what!

ohh, my balls too, please.

He should have been slapped down at "how can you possibly assume." I'm imagining a Judge Easterbrook response ...

Don't forget my balls, while you're at it!

He should have been slapped down at "how can you possibly assume." I'm imagining a Judge Easterbrook response ...

Don't forget my balls, while you're at it!

I'm really surprised that anyone would say the judge was overreacting. Even if what she was saying was 100% wrong, lawyers have to show respect for the court, and being rude to a judge is a massive, obvious violation of that.

Am i missing something? He was referring to her argument as being a few fries short of a happy meal, not her intelligence. it was basically another way of saying, your honor, respectfully, i think your conclusion is not supported by sufficient evidence. he clearly did not say something like, you can't understand this because you are a few fries short of a happy meal.

I don't see it as a personal insult on her ability, but a poor choice in an analogy to demonstrate a gap n the record to justify her ruling--he was merely pointing out perhaps she did not have all of the facts to have a complete picture of what was going to happen.

Chicago sucks.

Lat--We want a photo of this delicious diva posted ASAP.

I'd like to worship her for putting this jerk in his place

If this tepid comment can generate this kind of response, wait until I reach 64 years and 11 months. There are more than a few judges who will rue the reacquisition of my First Amendment rights. I wish much glee to the next generation of bloggers.

http://www.law.miami.edu/news/432.html

10:54, I bet he plans to bill the client for the show cause hearing...

12:03: Thanks for the link! The judge is a hottie!

From somwhere on that wild wacky Internet:

Laurel M. Isicoff, JD ’82, is ready for the challenge. On February 13, the veteran lawyer was sworn in as the first woman bankruptcy judge in the Southern District of Florida. The appointment fulfills a lifelong professional dream. “The pinnacle of success for an attorney is becoming a judge,” she said.

Judge Isicoff joins the court after more than two decades as a bankruptcy lawyer. She spent the last 14 years as a partner at Kozyak Tropin & Throckmorton, where she specialized in commercial bankruptcy, foreclosure and distressed property workouts.

http://www.law.miami.edu/news/432.html

(picture included)

There's simply no excuse for such a disrespectful comment to a judge - regardless of whether he was referring to her or her analysis. Good for her for having the cojones to issue the OSC! I'd get in line behind the other clerks who posted to get in on the benchslapping of this fool.

There's simply no excuse for such a disrespectful comment to a judge - regardless of whether he was referring to her or her analysis. Good for her for having the cojones to issue the OSC! I'd get in line behind the other clerks who posted to get in on the benchslapping of this fool.

11:52 a.m. said:

Am i missing something? He was referring to her argument as being a few fries short of a happy meal, not her intelligence. it was basically another way of saying, your honor, respectfully, i think your conclusion is not supported by sufficient evidence. he clearly did not say something like, you can't understand this because you are a few fries short of a happy meal.

I agree -- he's saying there's not just one condition (one fry), but a whole string of them (a few fries).

She should have verbally undressed him in Court - she would have gotten more pleasure out of it and embarassed him in front of everyone else.

Actual quote from Judge Isicoff, referring to the progress made by her alma mater, University of Miami School of Law: “The leaps at UM have been quantum.”

Uh, subatomically small? Was that intended as a left-handed compliment, judge? Or as a gratuitious plug for Scott Bakula?

Or are you just a moron?

If he is not embarrassed by his looks (bald and fat faced), he will not be embarrassed by her comments.

I interviewed with Bill a few months ago. (didn't get the job though) He is actually a great person and extremely hilarious (He quoted from Napoleon Dynamite several times during the interview). I think the Judge is going a little too far with this.

what the heck does that even mean?

Jorge,

In physics, a quantum (plural: quanta) is an indivisible entity of energy. For instance, a photon, being a unit of light, is a "light quantum."

Only in combinations like "quantum mechanics", "quantum optics", etc., it distinguishes a more specialized field of study.

The word comes from the Latin "quantus," for "how much."

So, Judge Isicoff's comment was not, as you suggest, somehow evidence of a lack of intelligence.

As for yours... well, you know, glass houses; etc.

It's a pretty good line though. What's the over/under on how long until McDonald's sues him?

I loved the cc list, now, even though Smith may be able to continue appearing in court down there, he knows that everyone else has that comment sitting on their desk. Not only will Isicoff punish him, but so will every other judge in the district. One of my judges did something similar once. It's a way better method of dragging out the punishment.

I loved the cc list, now, even though Smith may be able to continue appearing in court down there, he knows that everyone else has that comment sitting on their desk. Not only will Isicoff punish him, but so will every other judge in the district. One of my judges did something similar once. It's a way better method of dragging out the punishment.

Isicoff cc'd the rest of the judges b/c she is seeking to have his right to appear in SDFla Bk court rescinded in general--i.e. not just before her. She needs to let the other chambers know what's going on and, assuming that his PHV is revoked, letting the other judges know why/how.

He should just tell her that he meant to be more respectful, but he took a friend out for lunch for the friend's birthday and had some wine. :-)

I hear that works in state courts in Denver.

2:31, LMAO.

For those of you who don't get the joke, follow the "Click Here" link below. Or cut and paste this into your browser:

http://www.abovethelaw.com/2007/03/this_is_way_better_than_the_do.php

HAHAHA.

Sorry Border Patrol, but anyone who took physics can tell you that a "quantum leap" refers to the energy level shift of an electron, which is one of the smallest possible movements in nature.

Nice irrelevant Latin etymology though. Thanks for playing.

This is pretty typical behavior for a Chicago bankruptcy lawyer.

11:52, agreed -- I didn't take it as an insult, but rather as a poorly-worded analogy to point out she didn't have all the facts. Albeit really, really poorly worded.

11:52 & 2:02,

Even assuming the lawyer did not intend what he said as an insult, anyone who has risen to become the head of the bankruptcy group at a major law firm should have enough sense to know that this acerbic comment certainly could be (and apparently was) taken as an insult.

Given the comment, I suspect most judges would have done just what Judge Isicoff did (or worse), so the diva comments are simply misplaced, IMO.

Margo,

You are wrong. Judge Isicoff did not refer to the "quantum leap" you describe.

Instead, she described the "leaps at UM" as "quantum." In other words, she used the neutral unit of measure "quantum" to modify her description of UM's recent advances. She did not directly refer to the discipline-specific event you described.

While a "quantum leap" is, as you noted, a particular natural phenomenon ocurring on a sub-atomic scale, I dispute that Judge Isicoff usage of the word "quantum" necessarily requires the leap you happily took.

I hope that in your practice of law you do not employ a similarly careless and simplistic method of interpreting statutes and/or contracts as you have used to deconstruct of Judge Isicoff's rather straightforward sentence.

I meant 2:57, not 2:02.

3:08/3:15, I don't think you're disagreeing with me. As I noted, it was poorly worded -- meaning, yeah, a more thoughtful laywer would have avoided it. I wouldn't call her response diva-licious, although I personally probably would not have reacted the same way (but who knows, maybe if I become a judge I'll change my tune someday).

I agree 2:57, and didn't mean to imply that we disagreed. I should also have qualified that the diva comments were not yours as well.

"Oh Marge": so you think she meant that the leaps at UM were discrete events? That they were packets of energy? "Quantum," as far as I'm aware, isn't even an adjective aside from its one noted use in the phrase "quantum leap" (and associated phrases from the same field, such as quantum dynamics and quantum interference). Face it: she goofed, much as I would if I expressed frustration that it was taking a lightyear to explain all of this to you. A lawyerly dissection of that usage might similarly yield a tenuous defense, but (like yours) wouldn't make it any less clear that the usage reflected a misunderstanding, albeit a fairly common one.

Dictionary, anyone?

----------------------------------------------

Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1) - Cite This Source

quan·tum /ˈkwɒntəm/

–noun 1. quantity or amount: the least quantum of evidence.

2. a particular amount.

3. a share or portion.

4. a large quantity; bulk.

5. Physics. a. the smallest quantity of radiant energy, equal to Planck's constant times the frequency of the associated radiation.
b. the fundamental unit of a quantized physical magnitude, as angular momentum.

–adjective 6. sudden and significant: a quantum increase in productivity.

-----------------------------------------------
[Origin: 1610–20; n. use of neut. of L quantus how much]
Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1)
Based on the Random House Unabridged Dictionary, © Random House, Inc. 2006.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/quantum

Looks like a proper usage to me, kids.

"Quantum," as far as I'm aware, isn't even an adjective aside from its one noted use in the phrase "quantum leap" (and associated phrases from the same field, such as quantum dynamics and quantum interference).

----------------------------------

I love it when one uses the phrase, "as far as I am aware." It is always a subconscious hedge against the inner idiot one is certain dwells not too deeply beneath one's shaky pride.

Jorge/Margo/loafer = pwnd.

Jorge/Margo/loafer = pwnd.

Hm, so I guess this is where the denizens of AutoAdmit ended up.

Describing a quantum leap as "small" is like saying that Mount Everest is "short". Yes, compared to the distance from here to the Moon, Mount Everest is short.

I practice before Judge Isicoff and the remarks made by Smith are completely out of line and her reaction is generous given his ridiculous remark.

I don't think many people would say that to the managing partner of a law firm, much less a federal judge. That guy is ridiculous

Wikipedia anyone?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_leap

In the vernacular, the term quantum leap has come to mean an abrupt change or "step change", especially an advance or augmentation. The term dates back to early-to-mid-20th century. The vernacular usage usually implies a large and abrupt change, while the physical term typically refers to a small change in quantum mechanics, often even the smallest possible. The usages agree, however, in that both describe a change that happens all at once, rather than gradually over time. A 'quantum leap in technology' is thus a revolutionary advance, rather than an evolutionary one.

Right on Judge Isicoff!

There are very well defined lines of advocacy. Expressly insulting the sanity of a judge in open court is clearly sanctionable misconduct in almost every jurisdiction. And in Federal Court, the judges have the authority to disbar you. Not to mention if you burn your relationship with the trial court you had better have some very grounds for assuming the court of appeals will reverse (and not simply remand).

I predict, however, that in this particular case--and after much groveling--counsel will be let off with a $2,500 sanction.

Judge Isicoff is one scary member of the judiciary. What do I mean? When a judge is insulted like that and dresses the offender down on the spot that is usually the end of it.

But the fact that the court SAID NOTHING at the time given the egregious nature of counsel’s insult whole have given me pause....

The scary judges adhere to the maximum “revenge is a dish best served cold”.

"The leaps at UM have been quantum."

Quantum confusion aside, it sounds a bit awkward. Perhaps it sounds better in context.

you guys are actually arguing whether or not her reaction was reasonable? She's the judge and can do what she wants because its her courtroom. Partners are big time in the office, but they have to leave their egos at the door when they leave the office and enter a courtroom. No one, no matter how rich, can insult a judge in her own courtroom and expect to walk out with his license intact.

He's lucky the client is still employing him.

Who says the client IS still employing him?

I predict that if the stakes are high enough the client will fire his ass, retain new counsel, then throw him under the bus....

Wow, what a bunch of naive fucks on this list (balanced, fortunately, by folks who get it).

The judge is not being a "diva", nor did she over-react. She's sanctioning an attorney for making an arrogant, stupid comment in open court. You just don't say that stuff to a judge. You don't. End of story. It doesn't matter whether he meant to insult the judge - he was being a dumbass.

Here's what's likely going to happen. I've seen it happen before in my court. He will show up on the show cause order with an attorney specializing in disciplinary defense representing him. He'll be dressed down in open court, he'll grovel on bended knee, and the judge will impose a monetary sanction and probably revoke his pro hac status in that case.

Oops.

Dear 7:56:

I agree with your prediction, except for revoking his pro hac status in that case.

I do see an order imposing monetary sanctions, and directing the clerk of the court to transmit a copy of the order to the attorney's bar disciplinary body.

Smith is a douche, pure and simple. The guy's pompous, hyper-inflated ego is matched only by his girth. Funny, though, is that I've seen him do dumber things than this (and things that are arguably more against his client's interests) so it is enjoyable to see him get called out.

By the way, re: Mr. Smith: University of Cincinnati College of Law, J.D., 1977.

No wonder.

Chicago eats my asshair.

Girth? Is that what we have been reduced to?

Besides, he seems in reasonable shape for a man of his age.

Charney would make Smith his bitch.

ever seen the guy in person? dude's got serious manbreasts.

He would never have said this to a male judge, because by using a colloquial child-like metaphor he was implying that the Judge is intellectually childish and just thrashing around in the sandbox...and for that he deserves to have his ass kicked! He should have been verbally taken out by the judge then and there, and kicked out with status revoked. But, by pursuing her chosen path, the Judge has allowed the whole world to find out, and now imagine what it's like at McDermott today...that is revenge indeed.

If the judge as a few fries short of a Happy Meal, Mr. Smith is about to be a few sandwiches short of a picnic.

I'm walking my ass across the street to Bankruptcy court to watch this proceeding. I need to remember to bring some popcorn to this one... should be interesting to hear him argue his way out of insulting a Fed. judge.

I don't know this judge but I'm willing to bet she's an idiot. And the line itself is priceless. Nevertheless, Rule #1 of courtroom demeanor has to be, "Don't insult the judge." If nothing else, it isn't in the client's interest, which is sort of the point of the exercise.

Interesting that the judge never pointed to a specific Code of Condyct section that the attorney may have violated. He's an idiot judge, get over it.

Interesting that the judge never pointed to a specific Code of Conduct section that the attorney may have violated. He's an idiot judge, get over it.

I am thinking of using this passage in a federal court brief criticizing a ruling:

You swine. You vulgar little maggot. You worthless bag of filth. As we
say in Texas, you couldn't pour water out of a boot with instructions
printed on the heel. You are a canker, an open wound. I would rather
kiss a lawyer than be seen with you. You took your last vacation in
the Islets of Langerhans.

You're a putrescent mass, a walking vomit. You are a spineless little
worm deserving nothing but the profoundest contempt. You are a jerk, a
cad, and a weasel. I take that back; you are a festering pustule on a
weasel's rump. Your life is a monument to stupidity. You are a stench,
a revulsion, a big suck on a sour lemon.

I will never get over the embarrassment of belonging to the same
species as you. You are a monster, an ogre, a malformity. I barf at
the very thought of you. You have all the appeal of a paper cut.
Lepers avoid you. You are vile, worthless, less than nothing. You are
a weed, a fungus, the dregs of this earth. You are a technicolor yawn.
And did I mention that you smell?

You are a squeaking rat, a mistake of nature and a heavy-metal bagpipe
player. You were not born. You were hatched into an unwilling world
that rejects the likes of you. You didn't crawl out of a normal egg,
either, but rather a mutant maggot egg rejected by an evil scientist
as being below his low standards. Your alleged parents abandoned you
at birth and then died of shame in recognition of what they had done
to an unsuspecting world. They were a bit late.

Try to edit your responses of unnecessary material before attempting
to impress us with your insight. The evidence that you are a
nincompoop will still be available to readers, but they will be able
to access it ever so much more rapidly. If cluelessness were crude
oil, your scalp would be crawling with caribou.

You are a thick-headed trog. I have seen skeet with more sense than
you have. You are a few bricks short of a full load, a few cards short
of a full deck, a few bytes short of a full core dump, and a few
chromosomes short of a full human. Worse than that, you top-post. God
created houseflies, cockroaches, maggots, mosquitos, fleas, ticks,
slugs, leeches, and intestinal parasites, then he lowered his
standards and made you. I take it back; God didn't make you. You are
Satan's spawn. You are Evil beyond comprehension, half-living in the
slough of despair. You are the entropy which will claim us all. You
are a green-nostriled, crossed eyed, hairy-livered inbred
trout-defiler. You make Ebola look good.

You are weary, stale, flat and unprofitable. You are grimy, squalid,
nasty and profane. You are foul and disgusting. You're a fool, an
ignoramus. Monkeys look down on you. Even sheep won't have sex with
you. You are unreservedly pathetic, starved for attention, and lost in
a land that reality forgot. You are not ANSI compliant and your markup
doesn't validate. You have a couple of address lines shorted together.
You should be promoted to Engineering Manager.

Do you really expect your delusional and incoherent ramblings to be
read? Everyone plonked you long ago. Do you fantasize that your
tantrums and conniption fits could possibly be worth the $0.000000001
worth of electricity used to send them? Your life is one big
W.O.M.B.A.T. and your future doesn't look promising either. We need to
trace your bloodline and terminate all siblings and cousins in order
to cleanse humanity of your polluted genes. The good news is that no
normal human would ever mate with you, so we won't have to go into the
sewers in search of your git.

You are a waste of flesh. You have no rhythm. You are ridiculous and
obnoxious. You are the moral equivalent of a leech. You are a living
emptiness, a meaningless void. You are sour and senile. You are a
loathsome disease, a drooling inbred cross-eyed toesucker. You make
Quakers shout and strike Pentecostals silent. You have a version 1.0
mind in a version 6.12 world. Your mother had to tie a pork chop
around your neck just to get your dog to play with you. You think
that HTTP://WWW.GUYMACON.COM/FUN/INSULT/INDEX.HTM is the name of a
rock band. You believe that P.D.Q. Bach is the greatest composer who
ever lived. You prefer L. Ron Hubbard to Larry Niven and Jerry
Pournelle. Hee-Haw is too deep for you. You would watch test patterns
all day if the other inmates would let you.

On a good day you're a half-wit. You remind me of drool. You are
deficient in all that lends character. You have the personality of
wallpaper. You are dank and filthy. You are asinine and benighted.
Spammers look down on you. Phone sex operators hang up on you.
Telemarketers refuse to be seen in public with you. You are the source
of all unpleasantness. You spread misery and sorrow wherever you go.
May you choke on your own foolish opinions. You are a Pusillanimous
galactophage and you wear your sister's training bra. Don't bother
opening the door when you leave - you should be able to slime your
way out underneath. I hope that when you get home your mother runs
out from under the porch and bites you.

You smarmy lagerlout git. You bloody woofter sod. Bugger off, pillock.
You grotty wanking oik artless base-court apple-john. You clouted
boggish foot-licking half-twit. You dankish clack-dish plonker. You
gormless crook-pated tosser. You bloody churlish boil-brained clotpole
ponce. You craven dewberry pisshead cockup pratting naff. You cockered
bum-bailey poofter. You gob-kissing gleeking flap-mouthed coxcomb. You
dread-bolted fobbing beef-witted clapper-clawed flirt-gill. May your
spouse be blessed with many bastards.

You are so clueless that if you dressed in a clue skin, doused yourself
in clue musk, and did the clue dance in the middle of a field of horny
clues at the height of clue mating season, you still would not have a
clue. If you were a movie you would be a double feature;
_Battlefield_Earth_ and _Moron_Movies_II_. You would be out of focus.

You are a fiend and a sniveling coward, and you have bad breath. You
are the unholy spawn of a bandy-legged hobo and a syphilitic camel.
You wear strangely mismatched clothing with oddly placed stains. You
are degenerate, noxious and depraved. I feel debased just knowing that
you exist. I despise everything about you, and I wish you would go
away. You are jetsam who dreams of becoming flotsam. You won't make
it. I beg for sweet death to come and remove me from a world which
became unbearable when you crawled out of a harpy's lair.

It is hard to believe how incredibly stupid you are. Stupid as a stone
that the other stones make fun of. So stupid that you have traveled
far beyond stupid as we know it and into a new dimension of stupid.
Meta-stupid. Stupid cubed. Trans-stupid stupid. Stupid collapsed to
a singularity where even the stupons have collapsed into stuponium.
Stupid so dense that no intelligence can escape. Singularity stupid.
Blazing hot summer day on Mercury stupid. You emit more stupid in one
minute than our entire galaxy emits in a year. Quasar stupid. It cannot
be possible that anything in our universe can really be this stupid.
This is a primordial fragment from the original big stupid bang. A pure
extract of stupid with absolute stupid purity. Stupid beyond the laws
of nature. I must apologize. I can't go on. This is my epiphany of
stupid. After this experience, you may not hear from me for a while.
I don't think that I can summon the strength left to mock your moronic
opinions and malformed comments about boring trivia or your other
drivel. Duh.

The only thing worse than your logic is your manners. I have snipped
away most of your of what you wrote, because, well ... it didn't
really say anything. Your attempt at constructing a creative flame was
pitiful. I mean, really, stringing together a bunch of insults among a
load of babbling was hardly effective... Maybe later in life, after
you have learned to read, write, spell, and count, you will have more
success. True, these are rudimentary skills that many of us "normal"
people take for granted that everyone has an easy time of mastering.
But we sometimes forget that there are "challenged" persons in this
world who find these things to be difficult. If I had known that this
was true in your case then I would have never have exposed myself to
what you wrote. It just wouldn't have been "right." Sort of like
parking in a handicap space. I wish you the best of luck in the
emotional, and social struggles that seem to be placing such a
demand on you.

P.S.: You are hypocritical, greedy, violent, malevolent, vengeful,
cowardly, deadly, mendacious, meretricious, loathsome, despicable,
belligerent, opportunistic, barratrous, contemptible, criminal,
fascistic, bigoted, racist, sexist, avaricious, tasteless, idiotic,
brain-damaged, imbecilic, insane, arrogant, deceitful, demented, lame,
self-righteous, byzantine, conspiratorial, satanic, fraudulent,
libelous, bilious, splenetic, spastic, ignorant, clueless, EDLINoid,
illegitimate, harmful, destructive, dumb, evasive, double-talking,
devious, revisionist, narrow, manipulative, paternalistic,
fundamentalist, dogmatic, idolatrous, unethical, cultic, diseased,
suppressive, controlling, restrictive, malignant, deceptive, dim,
crazy, weird, dyspeptic, stifling, uncaring, plantigrade, grim,
unsympathetic, jargon-spouting, censorious, secretive, aggressive,
mind-numbing, arassive, poisonous, flagrant, self-destructive,
abusive, socially-retarded, puerile, and Generally Not Good.

I can't seem to get my trackback ping to register, but here's my take on all this:

The "David E. Kelley Contempt Falacy": TV versus real-world contempt of court

http://beldar.blogs.com/beldarblog/2007/05/the_difference_.html

As for the judge not making a bigger deal of this during the hearing itself: That's actually consistent with a long, long line of state and federal precedent on contempt of court which creates a strong presumption that contempt matters should be handled in a separate hearing -- in part to avoid confusion of issues, but also in large part to ensure that sufficient time has passed for tempers to cool. In other words, by handling this through a separate hearing, she's showing her own knowledge of the relevant law and procedures, and also making it more likely that any penalty would stick if appealed.

My experience with Judge Isicoff goes back nearly twenty years, when I represented a major player in the Koger Properties Chapter 11 case in Jacksonville. She was then an associate working on the representation of the Creditors' Committee. She is a high quality lawyer and person. Her reaction is measured and professional, and the lawyer now has a chance to apologize for his disrespect in a professional manner, if that is in his repetoire.

I know more than a few judges that would hold this lawyer in contempt of court. No pun intended.

Oh what a pile of the poop of the dog
do frat boys dump when they learn to blog....

Dear 12:03:

Is this some kind of blogspeak, or you writing haiku?

This has nothing to do with whether the judge was male or female. It has to do with the fact that some judges believe they are gods and infallible and when they are biased there's so much a party can do to protect it interests, because many of you bloggers have never been in front of Judge Isicoff.

The ruling was appropriate. This is the practice of law. BK is a Federal proceeding. We are professionals.

One of the first comments I read here was that the judge was being petty (or words to that effect--I've been through a lot of comments since then!) I think the judge showed great professionalism in refusing entirely to react to the issue during the hearing. "Proceed" was an extremely decorous response.

"Proceed" , in context, was a VERY scary response.

"Proceed", in context, means, I-will-think-through-how-to-deal-with-you-later.

That kind of detachment and professional focus from the ench does not bode well for Mr. Smith.

This guy is a total jerk! By showing disrespect for the judge, he is showing disrespect for the legal process. He ought to be barred from the SD Fla for life. The great thing about this post is that it gives a basis to oppose any PHV application he files anywhere in the country.

actually, the way his comment is worded would seem to allow for him to defend himself by saying, no, judge, no insult to you, I meant in terms of what was going to happen, ie, the transaction would fail.....

I frequently have to hold my breath in court to keep from laughing out loud.

It makes me laugh that he says, "With respect" when there is clearly no respect given.

What we like to say is "With all due respect" - meaning if the respect is not due, then... well, you know what I mean.

I frequently have to hold my breath in court to keep from laughing out loud.

It makes me laugh that he says, "With respect" when there is clearly no respect given.

What we like to say is "With all due respect" - meaning if the respect is not due, then... well, you know what I mean.

"with all due respect" = I think you are an asshole

Sucks to be him. Within a month, there won't be a Bankruptcy Judge in the country that hasn't heard the story.

Every bankruptcy judge in the country has already heard it.

i have been in front of judge isicoff. to those that have commented that she may have a god complex, nothing could be further from the the truth. prior to joining the bench, she was one the top lawyers in south florida and more importantly, humble as hell. her only "agenda" is doing her job well.

i'd love to attend this show cause hearing. how the hell does this dummy explain his idiocy...

I am ashamed of any attorney who is so inept that he would use such an analogy before, and directed at, a judge. I do not care what he meant to say, what he said is inexcusable.

McDermott's going to have to send some other partner to handle matters in South Florida for a while. And rightfully so.

I think too many people are watching too much Court TV. This country is sadly lacking in respect in all areas of life. And it is really a sad reflection on our profession to have attorneys behave as did Mr. McDermitt. He's one of those "bad apples in the barrel" that cause the rest of us to be burdened with the negative view of attorneys in general.
It's also interesting to note that a great many of the comments submitted are anonymous. Afraid to speak up and identify? Grow up!

No attorney I know would *dare* to speak to a judge that way. You may disagree vehemently but you do not insult the Court. Pick up the line between disagreement and contempt and skip rope with it if you think that it is necessary to defend your client, but don't insult the Court and commit professional suicide. It brings shame upon you, your profession and does a disservice to your client.

No attorney I know would *dare* to speak to a judge that way. You may disagree vehemently but you do not insult the Court. Pick up the line between disagreement and contempt and skip rope with it if you think that it is necessary to defend your client, but don't insult the Court and commit professional suicide. It brings shame upon you, your profession and does a disservice to your client.

McDermott used to be a good firm. Hard to imagine that the head of a practice area would use such a silly analogy when representing a client in court. Tsk, tsk. Has me shaking my head. Glad I never worked there.

Listen to those who have practice opposite her or in front of her -- she's clearly a solid individual and highly qualified judge. My pal was in her law school class and says even then is was clear to everyone she was going to excel. (and she is indeed hot.)

And the comment would be stupid if it came from an associate or junior partner. It is monumentally stupid coming from a senior partner.

Imagine being the client, thinking "I'm paying $750 an hour for this tool to fly from Chicago to Miami for this?"

For those who think Judge Isicoff has a God complex, I would let you know that while she was president of the local bankruptcy bar association the association was recognized by the Florida Supreme Court for its outstanding pro bono (as in free for the uninformed) work it did in the community. She is far from having a god complex. I too practice in front of her and have known her for several years. The comment was uncalled for. He should have just said her understanding of the transaction was incomplete (which it probably wasn't) and tried to explain. Instead he made a jackass of himself, and one thing she does not and will not tolerate is unprofessionalism. At leat one person cares about the actions and perception of th actions of lawyers in this country.

For those who think Judge Isicoff has a God complex, I would let you know that while she was president of the local bankruptcy bar association the association was recognized by the Florida Supreme Court for its outstanding pro bono (as in free for the uninformed) work it did in the community. She is far from having a god complex. I too practice in front of her and have known her for several years. The comment was uncalled for. He should have just said her understanding of the transaction was incomplete (which it probably wasn't) and tried to explain. Instead he made a jackass of himself, and one thing she does not and will not tolerate is unprofessionalism. At least one person cares about the actions and perception of th actions of lawyers in this country.

Oh, please,is this guy new? Really, no matter what is going on in his head he should have remembered that he is an officer of the law and presumeably an adult. No wonder lawyers get such a bad reputation with idiots like him on the loose. Like her or not, like her ruling or not, she is the judge and that position commands respect.

Oh, please,is this guy new? Really, no matter what is going on in his head he should have remembered that he is an officer of the law and presumeably an adult. No wonder lawyers get such a bad reputation with idiots like him on the loose. Like her or not, like her ruling or not, she is the judge and that position commands respect.

The interesting thing about this exchange (at least the portion of it that we have available) to me is that preceding the "Happy Meals" remark. You can tell counsel is heading down the wrong road because HE is asking the judge questions!.......it was a short step from arguing with the decisionmaker to counting her french fries.....I suspect the judge's show cause order was based on counsel's conduct throughout the hearing, not just this remark.

June 1 @ 4:01 has it right. My understanding from some local press this has gotten is that his comments came after the judge had already ruled. Uh? Stupid! Why do the partners tell the associates to keep their mouth shuts after a ruling, regardless of the outcome? This is why! No doubt Smith had given such advice to associates in the past. He should have listened to his own advice. Short of seeking some necessary immediate clarification of a ruling, it is disrespectful to question a ruling. The professional response was to file an immediate motion for reconsideration, or appeal.

No. I don't think he'd have dreamt of treating a male lawyer that way. And for that - well, whatever influence I have will be directed to avoiding having to deal with him and his partners. Stanbrooks - the Brussels end of that firm - is the only one I know, though. And it does seem a bit unfair if it was the Florida office who were sexist arseholes...

The foul language in many of the posted comments certainly did not come from broad shouldered litigators. Must have come from some long haired whiney law students.

The foul language in many of the posted comments certainly did not come from broad shouldered litigators. Must have come from some long haired whiney law students.

The foul language in many of the posted comments certainly did not come from broad shouldered litigators. Must have come from some long haired whiney law students.

The foul language in many of the posted comments certainly did not come from broad shouldered litigators. Must have come from some long haired whiney law students.

I am new to this forum. I must say I was impressed by the eclectic and "colorful" nature of some of the posts. One would have to frequent an elementary school playground to come up with such insightful and witty commentary. I am not surprised at the insistence on anonymity.

That being said, the one person who posted on the 24th of May at 11:25 PM was both exhaustively comprehensive and delightfully acerbic.

I am not a legal professional, but as I naive lay person I would assume that one would have to be decorous and respectful in a legal proceeding, even more so if one were a guest in that jurisdiction. I know that is how I expect my children to behave; I do not think it is unreasonable to expect the same from litigants.

It is painfully obvious to any but the most deliberately obtuse that this person's egregious conduct fell far short of professional, and I do not think describing him as boorish and condescending would be too strong.

Judge Isicoff is my sister. She is quite possibly the most able, honorable, selfless, professional and simply decent human I have ever known. Her response in this matter seems to me to be reasoned, measured and well, judicious; given my imperfect understanding of these protocols and procedures, her actions appear entirely consistent with best practices and established precedent.

To those folks wishing to personally insult Judge Isicoff or disparage her intellect and ability, please come to Oviedo Florida where I would be delighted to have the opportunity to take a poke at your nose.

Sincerely,
Joseph Myerson

This is going from serious to childish and back to that playground. (poke at your nose).
Decorum, please, we should be lawyers.
That said, the fellow has a contempt petition coming for being snide with the judge instead of professional and trying to advocate his position without being insulting. If we cannot behave like professional in court, what hope do we have for behaving like professionals out of court?

This is my first visit here. I had a few laughs at the posts, so I might visit again, not that you're lucky if I do. I don't regard myself that highly.

Amazing amount of anonymity here. Must be due to the likely effect of eponymity on job-security for some of the posters.

Anyway, I'm a litigator. I wouldn't be that stupid or artless in an attempt to be "folksy," or whatever animated Mr. Smith. Even if it is a good line.

As a general rule, a litigator never takes a personal "poke" (to re-position a term used by our lay friend above) at opposing counsel or a judge, unless you're planning to ask for sanctions or suffer them.

When I first heard this story, my only comment was...."William Smith has been watching too much Boston Legal. Does he think he is William Shatner? I hope his defense is Mad Cow!"