Judges Get Huffy When Motives Questioned
An effective lawyer challenges court opinions without impugning the character or motives of the judges who wrote them. But should lawyers who don’t follow this rule be penalized?
More often, courts are answering the question in the affirmative, according to Adam Liptak in a New York Times (sub. req.) column.
In one instance, the Utah Supreme Court refused to hear an appeal because the lawyer who filed it accused the intermediate appeals court of intentional mistakes, including fabrication of evidence.
One attorney was even accused of violating an ethics rule when he called an appellate opinion “intellectually dishonest.” He succeeded in getting the charge dismissed.