Opinion ID: 1365800
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 11

Heading: False Statements regarding a Judge

Text: The Board asserts that the respondent violated Rule 8.2(a), which states: A lawyer shall not make a statement that the lawyer knows to be false or with reckless disregard as to its truth or falsity concerning the qualifications or integrity of a judge, adjudicatory officer or public legal officer, or of a candidate for election or appointment to judicial or legal office. In November 1995, the respondent began to take additional discovery in the civil lawsuit against Mr. Ballard. The respondent sought to take another deposition of Mr. Harless, but Mr. Harless refused to participate. The respondent took the deposition of the lead detective from the criminal investigation, as well as depositions from four other police officers. The respondent's questions sought to elicit testimony by the officers of impropriety in the investigation, but none of the officers admitted to any impropriety. On December 22, 1995, counsel for the Edwards' filed a motion for summary judgment. On January 2, 1996, the respondent replied by filing a Motion for Extension of Time to Answer Motion for Partial Summary Judgment. In the motion, the respondent alleged that Mr. Ballard had been denied any opportunity to have discovery in this case to date, and therefore is prejudiced by a decision on summary judgment at this time. The respondent also claimed that newly discovered evidence has become available in the form of proof of perjury of James C. Harless in the [criminal] trial.... The respondent did not explain in the motion that much discovery had been accomplished during 1988 and 1989, and that the respondent himself had taken five depositions. The newly discovered evidence was also not specified, and the respondent could not identify this evidence even before the Hearing Panel Subcommittee. Also on January 2, 1996, the respondent filed a Motion to Recuse the circuit judge, who presided over both the criminal and civil portions of the Ballard case. In the recusal motion, the respondent asserted that the circuit judge had acted with partiality against Mr. Ballard, and had cooperated with the prosecution to convict Mr. Ballard on false, misleading and perjured testimony and evidence. The motion also accused the judge of assisting the prosecutor in manufacturing false evidence, and violating Mr. Ballard's constitutional rights. The respondent also wrote letters to the United States Attorney alleging improprieties by numerous individuals involved with the Ballard case. He alleged that Mr. Edwards and the police were involved in cocaine distribution, and that official records had been altered to protect the career of the attorney representing the Edwards. It appears that the respondent never communicated with the prosecutor or Mr. Ballard's criminal trial counsel regarding Mr. Ballard's trial. The respondent also never examined the transcript of the criminal trial. The respondent now claims that he based his accusations on statements by his client, Mr. Ballard. In essence, the respondent did not believe the circuit judge did such things as manufacture evidencehis client believed it, and the recusal motion was merely made on the basis of this belief. The Board found that the respondent's accusations were false, and were made with a reckless disregard for the truth or falsity of the matters alleged. The respondent's allegations were also made without a reasonable inquiry into the matters. The Board concluded that Rule 17 of the Trial Court Rules [5] and Rule 11 of the Rules of Civil Procedure [6] place an affirmative duty upon lawyers to make a reasonable inquiry into the facts before filing a motion to recuse a judge. If nothing else, the Board indicated that the extreme nature of the allegations the respondent was making should have alerted him to the need to investigate and not merely rely upon the word of his client. By making statements about a judge with reckless disregard for their truth or falsity, the Board concluded that the respondent had violated Rule 8.2(a). ii.