Document: 338 U.S. 318 70 S.Ct. 123 94 L.Ed. KINGSLAND, Commissioner of Patents,v.DORSEY. No. 53. Argued Oct. 18—19, 1949. Decided Nov. 21, Rehearing Denied Jan. 9, 1950. See 939, 341. Mr. Robert L. Stern, Washington, D.C., for petitioner. William E. Leahy, respondent. PER CURIAM. 1 Acting under the provisions § 487 Revised Statutes, 35 U.S.C. 11, U.S.C.A. Patents found after hearings that petitioner, an attorney, had been guilty gross misconduct, and entered order barring him from practice before United States Patent Office. Pursuant to authority granted by same provisions, District Court reviewed Commissioner's order. Concluding fairly conducted due notice charges there was substantial evidence support findings action Commissioner, affirmed 69 F.Supp. 788. The Appeals reversed, 84 U.S.App.D.C. 264, 173 F.2d 405, 410. A majority court thought inadequate proceedings Commission unfair. It also held too narrowly restricted its scope review in holding sufficient findings. apparently drew a distinction between phrases 'substantial evidence' probative evidence.' Measuring latter phrase, it were not supported Judge Edgerton, dissenting, 'the result just.' He agreed with would have but went on say he 'proof conclusive.' 2 statute which acted represents congressional policy important field. relates character conduct 'persons, agents, or attorneys' who participate obtain patents. We agree following statement made Office Committee Enrollment Disbarment considered this case: 'By reason nature application patent, relationship attorneys requires highest degree candor good faith. In relation applicants, * must rely upon their integrity deal them spirit trust confidence *.' courts, Congress primarily responsible protecting public evil consequences might if practitioners should betray high trust. Having serious doubts as whether properly here nullifying order, we certiorari. 3 After examination record are satisfied amply measure be charge unfairness is, think, wholly without support. 4 Since narration discussion sufficiently appear Court's opinion, reiteration can serve no purpose either parties law. 5 judgment is affirmed. so ordered. 6 Judgment reversed. 7 Justice DOUGLAS took part consideration decision case. 8 JACKSON, whom FRANKFURTER joins, dissenting. 9 I privilege practicing one may withdrawn professional misconduct. defense his true lawyer demand conclusiveness proof invoke all protections assured accused criminal process. But while society expect judges will show favor because has lived respectably eighty years devoted fifty-nine profession blemish, condemned out capricious self-righteousness denied essentials fair hearing. 10 below Dorsey judged indignantly reversed disbarment. v. Kingsland, 405. All questions fact seem resolved against departmental triers, shall those issues, even some entitled prevail. Accepting at full face value, think disbarment set aside. 11 Back 1926 Haftford-Empire Co. conceived executed scheme prepare publish, over signature disinterested labor leader, article published then used company's pending patent application. Such dissertation, entitled, 'Introduction Automatic Glass Working Machinery; How Received Organized Labor,' prepared. purported authored Clarke, president glass workers' union. trade journal presented recognition 'reluctant witness' success device consideration. Several later, involved litigation testing validity Hartford-Empire steps suppress real authorship Clarke essay. gift $8,000 told investigators employed Hartford-Empire's adversary written testify called witness. Ultimately, actions sum total acts attributable constituted fraud federal courts. Hazel-Atlas Co., 322 238, 64 997, 88 1250, reversing Cir., 137 764. 46 541. 12 counsel and, shortly our Hazel-Atlas, supra, suspend exclude further commenced 11. Identical separate instituted three other members bar transactions. disbarred. Only case here. 13 charged misconduct that, particularized proceeding, '* participated preparation (the Clarke) and/or presentation thereof during prosecution said knowing P. deceiving influencing *' 14 view facts least favorable indicates inspected criticized few details early draft knowledge prepared employee, submitted being what be. This long short Dorsey. Hartford-Empire, however, included much shown consenting part. two respects only urged wrongdoing: first, deceived author, second (not advanced here), represented work witness.' 15 While decisive narrow issue deception pressed Dorsey, noted showing how really includes claim any false misleading respect whatsoever. stated truthfully, bring attention manner permitted practice. One required issued proved affidavits whose truthfulness encouraged, assured, sanctions perjury; content accept unsworn publications purposes. worst advantage loose use evidence, disclosing ghost-written ostensible author. 16 Let us suppose exacted more lawyerly standards such information laid affidavit form. let say, prevailed make deposition. Would deceit drafted every word affidavit, though Clarke's testimony? almost universal ascertains witness puts presentable form suitable words, adopts document testimony, correction necessary convey story. Nothing usual discloses composition attorney; contrary, generally recites 'deposes says Is different standard applied intended accepted end? 17 far law concerned, effectively father statements adoption conception sincerely subscribing another does constitute legal grounds disbarment, impeachment penalty. And case, contained statement, denial whoever scribe, believed knowingly adopted own it. 18 like anyone condemning custom putting up decoy authors impress guileless, cruelly pointed flourishes official circles Washington. Nor do contend Dorsey's special adaptation prevailing comports candor. Ghost-writing debased intellectual currency circulation type counterfeiting invites defense. Perhaps renders service treating phantom ghost-writers frauds disguised deception. man ever disciplined reprimanded it? hereafter? 19 added, something afterthought, brief characterized supposed adjectives argument or, most, conclusion rather than representation warranty. arsenal advocate holds bundles witnesses—such ones 'reluctant,' 'unbiased,' disinterested,' 'honest' reserved own; others, 'partisan,' 'eager,' 'interested,' 'hostile,' 'perjured,' adversary. greatest difficulty believing mischoice among these fit decide facts, subject wrong standard, 'reluctant' justified. union reluctant point advantages automatic machinery tends throw membership employment. At hope come time when urge inference makeweight proceedings. 20 If, first example condemnation offense tenuous, vague novel, courts require clearly proved. give several reasons why met 21 First, committee, convened hear approached duty premise established guilt Dorsey's, unless clear name. records introduced neither party nor either, sole direct him. committee's recommendation based failed imposed task proving innocence. error kind. 22 remembered reached effect many events persons principal. considerable most prejudicial circumstances incriminate error, deprived trial. 23 suffered prejudice again receipt concerning later payment reliance find guilty. inducement sign ceased. Government frankly concedes approval found, finding, 'There nothing connects money Clarke.' (69 800) bound concurrent 24 Nevertheless, received thrown scales decision. Referring committee report disbarred says: 25 'Nearly six elapsed filed events, relevant respondents it, occurred. These subsequent cast light backwardly activities filing article, giving added illumination regard purposes, understandings, intentions time.' (Italics supplied.) 26 Thus corruption trying factor deciding finding guilty, admittedly Without misapplication explains excuses harsh Even lean backward avoid suspicion partiality men profession, they fear protect loss right this.

Category: 5