{"id":4559,"date":"2003-08-21T18:28:29","date_gmt":"2003-08-21T22:28:29","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/blogs.law.harvard.edu\/formerlyknownas\/2003\/08\/21\/does-the-insurance-defense-se"},"modified":"2011-08-05T15:00:43","modified_gmt":"2011-08-05T19:00:43","slug":"does-the-insurance-defense-section-have-a-judicial-slander-subcommi-2","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/archive.blogs.harvard.edu\/ethicalesq\/2003\/08\/21\/does-the-insurance-defense-section-have-a-judicial-slander-subcommi-2\/","title":{"rendered":"Does the Insurance Defense Section Have a Judicial Slander Subcommittee?"},"content":{"rendered":"<p><a name='a207'><\/a><\/p>\n<p><DIV><FONT face=\"Geneva,Arial,Sans-Serif\">Twice in a month, insurance defense lawyers have been upbraided and in the news for inserting nasty little footnotes in their briefs&nbsp;&#8212; footnotes accusing the trial judge of misconduct, rather than mere misunderstanding or misapplication of the law.&nbsp; We covered the first incident in our <\/FONT><A href=\"http:\/\/blogs.law.harvard.edu\/ethicalesq\/2003\/07\/27#a148 \"><FONT face=\"Geneva,Arial,Sans-Serif\">posting<\/FONT><\/A><FONT face=\"Geneva,Arial,Sans-Serif\"> on July 27,&nbsp;<\/FONT><FONT face=\"Geneva,Arial,Sans-Serif\">concerning an Indiana attorney.&nbsp; Now, <\/FONT><A href=\"http:\/\/appellateblog.blogspot.com\/#106134867318142263\"><FONT face=\"Geneva,Arial,Sans-Serif\">How Appealing<\/FONT><\/A><FONT face=\"Geneva,Arial,Sans-Serif\">&nbsp;has uncovered a similar situation (August 19, 2003), in a <\/FONT><A href=\"http:\/\/pacer.ca10.uscourts.gov\/pdf\/02-5095.pdf\"><FONT face=\"Geneva,Arial,Sans-Serif\">decision<\/FONT><\/A><FONT face=\"Geneva,Arial,Sans-Serif\"> <\/FONT><FONT face=\"Arial\"><FONT face=\"Geneva,Arial,Sans-Serif\">by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 10th Circuit:<\/FONT><FONT face=\"Arial\"><\/DIV><br \/>\n<BLOCKQUOTE><br \/>\n<DIV>&#8220;One final point. Baseless attacks on the integrity of the district court are inappropriate even in offhand conversation. Here, Travelers&#8217; brief could easily be read as accusing the district court of misconduct, rather than simple legal error. Travelers&#8217; counsel must exercise greater care in the future. The record contains nary a hint of impropriety by the trial judge.&#8221;<\/DIV><\/BLOCKQUOTE><br \/>\n<DIV>What&#8217;s up?&nbsp; I&#8217;m thinking some smart-aleck appellate lawyer wrote a snappy, irreverent&nbsp;footnote a few years ago, and it has been floating around the insurance defense bar ever since, passed on from one frustrated, smirking&nbsp;scribe to another.&nbsp;&nbsp;Maybe it&#8217;s even become ill-conceived, hyperbolic, anti-bench&nbsp;boilerplate.<\/DIV><br \/>\n<DIV>&nbsp;<\/DIV><br \/>\n<DIV>I&#8217;m hoping that insurance-oriented blawggers (<EM>e.g.<\/EM>, Doug Simpson at <A href=\"http:\/\/www.dougsimpson.com\/blog\/\">Unintended Consequences<\/A> , Dave Stratton at <A href=\"http:\/\/strattonblawg.typepad.com\/\">Insurance Defense Blog<\/A>, or George Wallace at <A href=\"http:\/\/declarationsandexclusions.typepad.com\/weblog\">Declarations and Exclusions<\/A>) will find the source of the footnote.&nbsp;&nbsp; Even if we never know the original miscreant, let&#8217;s hope the offending words and notions have been deleted from word processing documents across the insurance defense bar.&nbsp;&nbsp;<\/DIV><br \/>\n<DIV>&nbsp;<\/DIV><br \/>\n<DIV>Attacking a judge&#8217;s integrity in a footnote is&nbsp;both tacky and bad&nbsp;strategy. Luckily, you can&#8217;t get disbarred for what you&#8217;re thinking.<\/DIV><br \/>\n<DIV>&nbsp;<\/DIV><br \/>\n<DIV><FONT color=\"green\"><STRONG><EM>Update <\/EM>(8\/22\/03):&nbsp; <\/STRONG><\/FONT><FONT color=\"black\">Talk about quick service!&nbsp; George Wallace at <A href=\"http:\/\/declarationsandexclusions.typepad.com\/weblog\/2003\/08\/asked_and_answe.html\">Declarations &amp; Exclusions<\/A>&nbsp;has already responded to my question with&nbsp;dilgent and&nbsp;wise counsel.&nbsp;&nbsp; Here&#8217;s an excerpt from his reply, which I hope you&#8217;ll read in full:<\/FONT><\/DIV><br \/>\n<BLOCKQUOTE><br \/>\n<DIV>I think David is too willing to detect conspiracy in this case. So far as I know or have been able to determine, there is no pre-fab footnote being shared among insurance counsel to be trotted out when one of us feels the urge to suggest that a lower court judge was not merely wrong, but crooked. And there is a simple reason for my belief that the thing Does Not Exist: Why circulate an all-occasion anti-judicial <I>j&#x2019;accuse<\/I> when <B>very few insurance attorneys would be foolish enough to use it<\/B>? It is to be hoped that very few attorneys, period, regardless of their field of specialty, would succumb to that temptation.<\/DIV><\/BLOCKQUOTE><br \/>\n<DIV dir=\"ltr\">Conspiracy theorist?&nbsp; Who, me?<\/DIV><br \/>\n<DIV dir=\"ltr\">&nbsp;<\/DIV><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Twice in a month, insurance defense lawyers have been upbraided and in the news for inserting nasty little footnotes in their briefs&nbsp;&#8212; footnotes accusing the trial judge of misconduct, rather than mere misunderstanding or misapplication of the law.&nbsp; We covered the first incident in our posting on July 27,&nbsp;concerning an Indiana attorney.&nbsp; Now, How Appealing&nbsp;has [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":94,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":"","jetpack_publicize_message":"","jetpack_publicize_feature_enabled":true,"jetpack_social_post_already_shared":false,"jetpack_social_options":{"image_generator_settings":{"template":"highway","default_image_id":0,"font":"","enabled":false},"version":2},"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false},"categories":[2926],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-4559","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-pre-06-2006"],"jetpack_publicize_connections":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/p6kP1R-1bx","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/archive.blogs.harvard.edu\/ethicalesq\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4559","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/archive.blogs.harvard.edu\/ethicalesq\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/archive.blogs.harvard.edu\/ethicalesq\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/archive.blogs.harvard.edu\/ethicalesq\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/94"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/archive.blogs.harvard.edu\/ethicalesq\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=4559"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/archive.blogs.harvard.edu\/ethicalesq\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4559\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":14169,"href":"https:\/\/archive.blogs.harvard.edu\/ethicalesq\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4559\/revisions\/14169"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/archive.blogs.harvard.edu\/ethicalesq\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=4559"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/archive.blogs.harvard.edu\/ethicalesq\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=4559"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/archive.blogs.harvard.edu\/ethicalesq\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=4559"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}