An Illinois attorney lambasted last month by a federal appeals panel for submitting a "bizarre" and "incoherent" court filing was ordered Monday to pay legal fees as a sanction for wasting the resources of the court and the defense lawyers who defeated alleged discrimination claims.

The lawyer, Jordan T. Hoffman, apologized to the court in late November, asserting that he made a "grave error in judgment" in agreeing to represent a longtime friend in the case in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit. That friend, Hoffman said, wrote and filed the brief under Hoffman's name.

"I realize again that these were all grave errors of judgment and I can only apologize to the court and promise that I will never allow this [to] occur again," Hoffman told the Seventh Circuit panel. "I have suffered through the most embarrassing and stressful moments of my legal career and perhaps my life during the oral argument and after the publication of the court's opinion." He continued: "My reputation has been tarnished at the highest level as a result of my actions that caused such a scathing opinion in this matter."

That opinion—written by Judge Diane Sykes, joined by Judges Michael Scudder and Amy St. Eve—indeed skewered Hoffman, a solo practitioner in Aurora, Illinois, for bringing what the court called an "utterly frivolous" appeal. "This appeal represents a shameful waste of judicial resources," Sykes wrote.

The court described Hoffman's brief as a "monstrosity"—laden with unsupported factual assertions. The brief, according to the appeals court, was "chock-full of impenetrable arguments and unsupported assertions, and it is organized in ways that escape our understanding." The court concluded Hoffman violated a federal appellate procedure rule that mandates parties submit briefs that make "a succinct, clear and accurate statement of the arguments."

"Bad writing does not normally warrant sanctions, but we draw the line at gibberish," Sykes said.

Such strong admonitions from courts are rare, but they've flourished, for better or worse, in recent days.

In a New York federal appeal last week, a panel admonished an attorney and ordered him removed from the courtroom for what one judge called "disrespectful" and "discourteous" behavior toward the court. A California federal judge on Monday demanded the resignation of a lawyer who'd written a series of profanity-laced emails to opposing counsel in an insurance-related dispute. "I will not do that," the lawyer responded.

Hoffman, a member of the Illinois bar since 1987, was not reached for comment Tuesday. In his court apology last month, Hoffman said he had "embarrassed the venerable profession of law and the bar to which I have enjoyed the privilege of being a member." He told the court that up until now his "competence has not been called into question nor have I been accused of engaging in non-meritorious claims or litigation."

Diane Sykes Judge Diane Sykes of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit. Credit: Diego M. Radzinschi / ALM

At oral argument, the Seventh Circuit panel pressed Hoffman about his brief. He told the court that he is a solo practitioner and that he tries to "get the help of … clients and whoever can provide help."

The appeals court called Hoffman's acceptance of responsibility "appropriate." But the panel was not letting him off the hook.

"Still, judicial resources were needlessly consumed, and the defendants were put to the burden and expense of sorting through and defending against a patently frivolous appeal," Sykes said Monday. "Sanctions are therefore warranted."

Hoffman was ordered to pay fees and "double costs" to the law firms Jackson Lewis and Pennsylvania-based Harmon & Davies for their work in the appeal on behalf of management firm Kenco Logistics Services LLC and the candy maker Mars Inc. Tom Davies, a lawyer for Mars, said Tuesday, "We are pleased with the outcome of the case."

The appeals court set a Jan. 3 deadline for the defense lawyers to file a statement of fees and costs.