Fifth Circuit Reverses Part of Lawyer's Sanction Because It Would Force His Return to Law School
“To do this, he would presumably need to take the LSAT, apply, and be admitted to a law school,” the Fifth Circuit wrote in a per curiam decision. “He would then likely need to suspend his law practice—12 hours of classes would almost make Luttrell a fulltime student.”
October 01, 2018 at 03:35 PM
2 minute read
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit recently affirmed a $750 sanction leveled against a Cleburne attorney for disobeying an order by U.S. District Judge John McBryde, but reversed part of the punishment because it would have forced the lawyer to re-enroll in law school.
According to the decision, Robert E. Luttrell III was sanctioned by McBryde last year in a 40-page order that imposed discipline on the lawyer for failure to comply with a court order, including Luttrell's failure to keep a court-appointed client apprised of a criminal appeal. McBryde also removed Luttrell from a panel comprised of attorneys who volunteer to represent indigent defendants in criminal trials.
On appeal, the Fifth Circuit concluded that McBryde did not abuse his discretion in fining Luttrell or removing him from the attorney panel, but said the judge went too far in requiring Luttrell to “complete 12 hours of ethics courses at an accredited law school in eight months.”
“To do this, he would presumably need to take the LSAT, apply and be admitted to a law school,” the Fifth Circuit wrote in a per curiam decision. “He would then likely need to suspend his law practice—12 hours of classes would almost make Luttrell a full-time student.”
“And finally, even if he did all this, we are aware of no law school that even offers 12 hours of ethics courses in a single semester,” the Fifth Circuit's decision notes.
“Because of these difficulties, this particular sanction is not the least restrictive means of deterring Luttrell's conduct and is overly burdensome,” the court concluded in the decision. “Accordingly, we find that the district court abused its discretion in imposing the ethics requirement, and we revise the sanction as follows: Luttrell must complete 3 hours of CLE courses in ethics by May 31, 2019, and he must report his compliance to the district court.”
Luttrell, who represented himself before the Fifth Circuit, did not return a call for comment.
This content has been archived.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 AllUber Not Responsible for Turning Over Information on 'Dangerous Riders' to Competitor, Judge Finds
5 minute read5th Circuit Judge Jones Slams Proposal for Greater Amicus Brief Funding Disclosure
Trending Stories
- 1How GC-of-Year Sam Khichi Has Helped CVS Barrel Through Challenges
- 2A Website is Not a ‘Place.’ What Took So Long To Get This Right?
- 3From ‘Deep Sadness’ to Little Concern, Gaetz’s Nomination Draws Sharp Reaction From Lawyers
- 4Legal Speak at General Counsel Conference East 2024: Julie Cantor, Associate General Counsel at Studs, Inc.
- 5Legal Speak at General Counsel Conference East 2024: Chris Correnti, President & CEO & General Counsel AGC America, Inc.
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