Let These Incidents Serve as a Cautionary Tale About Practicing Law While Drinking
The practice of law has always been one of the most widely respected and vital professions in our country. Yet it has also been well-documented that a significant percentage of lawyers struggle with alcoholism and/or substance abuse, depression, and other mental health concerns.
June 29, 2018 at 01:29 PM
5 minute read
The practice of law has always been one of the most widely respected and vital professions in our country, yet it has also been well-documented that a significant percentage of lawyers struggle with alcoholism and/or substance abuse, depression, and other mental health concerns.
In 2016, the American Bar Association and the Hazelden Institute co-sponsored a study of this issue, the results of which were published in the Journal of Addiction Medicine. This survey of roughly 15,000 attorneys revealed that between 21 and 36 percent drink at levels consistent with an alcohol use disorder—a figure that's about three to five times higher than the average population. The study also showed similarly alarming rates of depression and anxiety, along with a reason why many afflicted lawyers don't seek help: the pervasive fear of damage to one's reputation, which may lead to loss of a job, clients, or one's license. As a result, lawyers struggling with these issues tend to hide them from public view or simply deny their existence.
Some lawyers are better at this than others. For example, in March Kentucky lawyer David Gray was suspended from practice by the Kentucky Supreme Court. It found that on the last day of a civil trial in December 2017, Gray had delivered an hour-long closing argument in which his “demeanor and performance” so concerned the trial judge that—after the jury returned a verdict against Gray's client—the trial judge asked Gray to submit to a Breathalyzer test. Gray agreed, and blew a 0.337; at that point, emergency medical personnel were summoned and the lawyer was taken by ambulance to a local hospital. Gray subsequently entered a medical detox facility and afterwards a 60-day alcohol rehab program.
Gray is not the only one to have a judge order a blood-alcohol test at trial. In 2006, Las Vegas criminal defense lawyer Joseph Caramagno showed up to court smelling of alcohol and slurring his words. When the judge asked for an explanation, Caramagno gave several different attempts at once, including sustaining a head injury in a car crash on the way to court. He even turned to his “ex-girlfriend Christine” for corroboration, only to have the woman state that her name was Josephine, and that she wasn't an ex-girlfriend but had been with him 20 minutes earlier at a nearby bar. The judge ordered a Breathalyzer test on the spot, which indicated Caramagno's blood alcohol level to be 0.075 (just below Nevada's legal limit). The judge declared a mistrial on the kidnapping case Caramagno was there to argue, telling the lawyer, “I don't think you can tell a straight story because you are intoxicated.”
And if you're wondering how ironic it would have been if it had been a DWI case, well, that's happened too. In 2013, New Mexico DWI attorney John Higgins attracted the judge's suspicions that he was drunk—in part, because he showed up to the wrong courtroom in the first place. Albuquerque Judge Julie Wies ordered a Breathalyzer test, which showed the lawyer's blood alcohol to be 0.11 percent (above New Mexico's legal limit of 0.08). Higgins was taken to a local hospital, but not before being found in contempt for disrupting the court proceedings.
How much worse can it get then showing up in court while impaired? Try showing up intoxicated for your own disciplinary hearing. In February, lawyer Justin Holstin appeared before a hearing panel of the Kansas Board for Discipline of Attorneys, where his behavior led to concerns that he was intoxicated. The panel recessed the hearing and asked Holstin to submit to testing at a local facility. The lawyer agreed, and that same morning his blood alcohol content was determined to be 0.200. Not long after he argued at a rescheduled disciplinary hearing, Holstin surrendered his law license and was disbarred.
And don't think that lawyers are the only ones to have shown up drunk to court—judges have done it, too. In 2012, the Iowa Supreme Court suspended Judge Emily Dean following an incident at the courthouse in which she was too intoxicated to physically take the bench (Dean had purportedly been drinking while her court reporter drove her to the courthouse that day). In 2016, Miami-Dade County Judge Jacqueline Schwartz resigned (after being suspended) following two instances of public intoxication, including one at a local restaurant, where she had berated a waiter for refusing to serve her more alcohol. The other incident occurred at the courthouse, where the chief judge ordered Schwartz to go home after court personnel and litigants observed that the judge was unsteady on her feet, slurring her words, and unable to concentrate. Schwartz's bailiff drove her home, and the judge could not remember her own address.
While examples like this may be extreme illustrations of the risks of alcohol abuse, the fact remains that the legal profession has always been a magnet for “Type A” personalities who often prioritize success over personal well-being, and who don't always exhibit healthy coping skills to deal with the stress that accompanies this work. The profession itself is doing more to increase awareness of the problem of alcohol and substance abuse, as well as to devote meaningful resources to help impaired lawyers. The Texas Lawyers' Assistance Program or TLAP (www.tlaphelps.org) provides confidential help for law students, lawyers and judges who are dealing with alcohol or substance abuse problems or mental health issues. If you need help and don't want to be another cautionary tale, help is out there waiting for you.
John G. Browning is a shareholder at Passman & Jones in Dallas, where he handles a variety of civil litigation in state and federal courts.
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
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllMore Young Lawyers Are Entering Big Law With Mental Health Issues. Are Firms Ready to Accommodate Them?
Trending Stories
- 1Trump's Solicitor General Expected to 'Flip' Prelogar's Positions at Supreme Court
- 2Pharmacy Lawyers See Promise in NY Regulator's Curbs on PBM Industry
- 3Outgoing USPTO Director Kathi Vidal: ‘We All Want the Country to Be in a Better Place’
- 4Supreme Court Will Review Constitutionality Of FCC's Universal Service Fund
- 5'It Refreshes Me': King & Spalding Privacy Leader Doubles as Equestrian Champ
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250