It’s often a scary proposition for a lawyer.

A judge actually sees a crime being committed before her in testimony, or discovers it reading the court record in the case. If you’re representing the “wrongdoer”—the object of the judge’s ire—the last thing in the world you would want is for the judge herself to seriously consider referring your client to a prosecutor, state or federal. You naturally fear—rightly or wrongly, but usually rightly—that if it’s a judge making a criminal referral to the chief prosecutor (as is usually how it’s done), it will receive outsized attention. After all, the judge has juice—clearly, far more than when the complainant is simply the litigator or litigant adverse to your (possibly) wrongdoing client. Indeed, prosecutors recognize that a litigant or his litigator referring someone for potential prosecutions is generally doing so for a tactical advantage in the litigation. That, however, is not the judge’s motivation.

This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.

To view this content, please continue to their sites.

Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Why am I seeing this?

LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.

For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]