Opinion ID: 1444402
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Count Ten: Improper Comments About Counsel

Text: Attorney Nancy Staggs, who was representing a criminal defendant before petitioner, did not appear at a scheduled hearing. After an unrecorded telephone conference with Staggs's office, petitioner stated in open court: She shouldn't be handling criminal cases. [H] Here's another example of a civil attorney who shouldn't be handling criminal cases. Petitioner then commented that Staggs probably had something more important to do today, like go to a PTA meeting. He continued: She has a whole bunch of kids. She's been having kids ever since I've known her. Before the special masters, petitioner denied making these comments, suggested that the court reporter made [them] up to assist petitioner's political opponents, and stated that he had instead made complimentary remarks about Staggs. However, he also admitted sending Staggs a letter of apology. In his petition to this court, petitioner accepts the [Commission's unanimous] finding that his statements concerning Ms. Staggs were inappropriate and could be deemed prejudicial misconduct. (See Kennick, supra, 50 Cal.3d at p. 325, 267 Cal. Rptr. 293, 787 P.2d 591 [basing finding of prejudicial misconduct on unprofessional, demeaning and sexist remarks].)