It has been held that verbally abusing a judge and filing an unfounded ethics complaint was conduct so outrageous that it need not be analyzed for possible advocacy merit. The use of partial quotations made by a judge out of context to imply prejudice on the part of a judge and with the intent to have him disqualified, among other things, resulted in disbarment in at least one jurisdiction. The purpose of the contempt power which most judges are invested with is directed towards acts which tend or threaten to obstruct justice, or toward a failure to carry out an order of the court, or towards acts which tend to bring the court into disrepute. Thus, the purpose of the contempt power is to protect the court's reputation and ability to administer justice. Any act which demonstrates disrespect for the court can be contemptuous.
Some acts are contemptuous on their face.
Unfortunately, the undersigned is not invested with contempt power. However, it is difficult to think of a contemptuous act that does not call into question the fitness of a lawyer to practice. Contemptuous acts are prohibited by the American Bar Association, Model Code of Professional Responsibility, which prohibits conduct which is prejudicial to the administration of justice. Acts which constitute contempt are those which lessen the authority or dignity of a court or forum and which bring the court or forum into disrepute. See, The Judicial Response to Lawyer Misconduct, Supra, VI.5.