Lawyer Who Wouldn’t Stop Talking Suspended From Federal Practice

Legal Ethics

Lawyer Who Wouldn’t Stop Talking Suspended From Federal Practice

Posted Apr 30, 2008, 08:41 am CDT

By Debra Cassens Weiss

A Tennessee lawyer who kept talking after a federal judge ordered him to keep quiet has been suspended from practice in the Eastern District of Tennessee for at least three years.

Chief U.S. District Judge Curtis Collier said Knoxville lawyer Herbert Moncier “harbors a disrespect for the institutional role of the judge," the Knoxville News Sentinel reports. "This disrespect is so ingrained and deep-seated that [Moncier] seems unable to realize its full extent, and he expresses it in ways that are clearly detrimental to himself," Collier wrote.

Collier acted under a rule adopted in the Eastern District of Tennessee allowing judges to initiate disbarment proceedings. The Tennessee Board of Professional Responsibility is also considering a complaint against Moncier in connection with the November 2006 incident.

Moncier was also convicted of contempt, fined $5,000 and sentenced to probation for the incident. During the hearing, Moncier was being questioned about a possible conflict of interest. He was accused of repeatedly interrupting or speaking above the judge, of claiming the prosecution was conspiring to prevent him from trying cases, and of threatening to remain mute. When the judge asked him to keep quiet, Moncier asked to speak to his client, prompting the judge to order him jailed.

Collier said Moncier’s conduct was exacerbated by refusing to acknowledge and apologize for his wrongdoing and frivolous filings with the court. Earlier filings displayed “shoddiness, sloppiness, misspellings, and unprofessional tone,” Collier said, but later filings improved. Moncier also had been warned by a prior judge that his courtroom conduct bordered on contemptuous, Collier said.

Collier’s order (PDF posted by the Knoxville News Sentinel) would allow Moncier to apply for reinstatement after three years if he meets a series of conditions, including writing letters of apology. At most, Moncier would be suspended for five years and on probationary status for another two years.

Moncier has filed an emergency appeal with the Cincinnati-based 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, the Associated Press reports.

Corrected on 05-02-2008 to state that the Tennessee Board of Professional Responsibility is also considering a complaint against Moncier.

Comments

Report Abuse

Posted by Joe - 5 months, 1 week, 5 days, 21 hours, 52 minutes ago

What did Herbert Moncier say? This is an incomplete story. This judge sounds obnoxious by his quote and by instituting disbarment proceedings.
Posted by Motty - 5 months, 1 week, 5 days, 21 hours, 50 minutes ago

Have to say that sounds a bit excessive. 3 years for being a jerk? I think a six month suspension would be ample to make the point felt - lawyers get shorter suspensions for lieing to the bar or stealing from clients. This is just another example of excessive punishment by federal judges who are upset because not all lawyers treat them like G-d. I understand, you need order in your courtroom. I would have given the $5000 fine and left it at that.
Posted by Rick - 5 months, 1 week, 5 days, 20 hours, 57 minutes ago

This story is indeed incomplete. Moncier’s refusal to follow the direction of a U.S. Magistrate and be quiet was only one of the examples of incidents in front of many judges over the span ot many years detailed in the 80-page decision. The suspension proceedings were conducted before a different judge—Judge Collier. The article also incorrectly states that the “Board of Professional Responsiblity is also considering a complaint against [Judge] Collier.” The complaint is against attorney Moncier.
Posted by Luther Martin - 5 months, 1 week, 5 days, 20 hours, 54 minutes ago

I wonder if the judge asked him to sit in the corner like a potted plant - as per the earlier story? Definitely need to see both sides of these stories to have any insight or opinions.
Posted by Tom - 5 months, 1 week, 5 days, 20 hours, 4 minutes ago

A common thread in the articles today is an apparent widespread lack of civility, ethics, and even common manners. It is completely possible to be a zealous and successful advocate for your client and at the same time act respectfully to the court, opposing counsel and other parties. It’s done all the time by lawyers we all know and respect, and who are clearly successful in the practice of law.

Unfortunately, there is a large and growing number of people in this profession who just plain don’t belong here. Perhaps increased monetary penalties and other sanctions will either cure their habits, encourage them to leave the profession, or open the eyes of their clients - who presumably will then hire someone else.

Frankly, I’ve spent thirty-three years dealing with the occasional a---h--- and I’m getting pretty tired of it.
Posted by R - 5 months, 1 week, 5 days, 16 hours, 47 minutes ago

How about reading the order before commenting on what the judge “sounds like” or whether the penalty is “excessive.”

And keep in mind that this is disbarment just from that specific federal court.
Posted by freddy - 5 months, 1 week, 5 days, 15 hours, 49 minutes ago

Motty and Joe prefer to pop off with a kneejerk comment without reading the judge’s order explaining the problems Moncier caused. They would prefer to let selfish jerks like Moncier take over courtrooms speaking for however long, unless of course they had matters before the court that needed to be heard.
Posted by TG - 5 months, 1 week, 5 days, 12 hours, 56 minutes ago

Its still form over substance. The point of any legal proceding should be the administration of justice. The legal profession and judges in particular put far more emphasis on dress and decorum than they ought. To deprive one of their livlihood and don’t forget the client in all this, now deprived of representation, because of misspellings, interruptions, etc. There are reasonable means of dealing with these issues. In the world of business, such matters are addressed on a daily basis, without resorting to such drastic measures. But, judges don’t see themselves as one whose job it is to preside over a dispute, they believe they are little demigods or feudal lords reigning from upon high. Why not disbar someone for not wearing a tie, or failure to properly powder their wig? No, THAT would be silly and ignore the purposes of a trial!
Posted by Abe - 5 months, 1 week, 5 days, 6 hours, 41 minutes ago

What ever happened to the good old days of distinguished gentlemen?

... segregation, women in the kitchen, labor massacres, and… oh, well, at least the gentlemen part.
Posted by jp - 5 months, 1 week, 4 days, 14 hours, 2 minutes ago

The article hints at the reason for Judge Collier’s seemingly extreme reaction: Moncier has a long history of demonstrating disrespect for the court, for other attorneys, and seemingly for the legal process itself. I once practiced in Knoxville, and Moncier was opposing council on one of my cases. He subpoena’d my client to appear for a deposition at a site about an hour’s drive away. A day or two before the scheduled appearance, we called the deposition site to confirm the time and place, only to find that no room had been reserved, no court reporter had been engaged, in fact no deposition was to take place. We filed a motion for sanctions, to no effect. This happened nearly 10 years ago - sounds like Moncier hasn’t changed much in that time.

Commenting has expired on this post.

ABA Journal - Law News Now

Legal Ethics