Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Order Revoking Pro Hac Vice Admission For Writing Notes To Deponent

    Uploaded by

    TenThousandDepositions.com
    7 views11 pages
    The United States District Court for the First Circuit affirmed the revocation of a lawyer's pro hac vice admission for allegedly writing notes to a deponent in the middle of a deposition, and then lying about it. The court reporter's observations and testimony about this conduct was a key factor in the court rulings.

    Original Title

    Order Revoking Pro Hac Vice Admission for Writing Notes to Deponent

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    The United States District Court for the First Circuit affirmed the revocation of a lawyer's pro hac vice admission for allegedly writing notes to a deponent in the middle of a deposition, and then lying about it. The court reporter's observations and testimony about this conduct was a key factor in the court rulings.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    7 views11 pages

    Order Revoking Pro Hac Vice Admission For Writing Notes To Deponent

    Uploaded by

    TenThousandDepositions.com
    The United States District Court for the First Circuit affirmed the revocation of a lawyer's pro hac vice admission for allegedly writing notes to a deponent in the middle of a deposition, and then lying about it. The court reporter's observations and testimony about this conduct was a key factor in the court rulings.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    of 11
    © ven ‘As of Deceonber 13,2014 11:00 AM EST Ryan v. Astra Tech, Ine. United Snes Cour of Appeal forthe Fist Cet ‘Novembr14 2014, Decided Wo. 13.2251 Reporte DUIS. Ap. LENS 21608 JEFEREY F. RYAN, Appellant, CHEVONNE SIUPA, Phin, ASTRA TECH, INC: JOE JOHNSON; STEVE CYR, Defendants, Appel Prior Hitry: [1] APPEAL. PROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT. OF MASSACHUSETTS. Hen. Leo T, Sorokin, US. Magistte die. Sx Aust Tick Inc. 2002 US. Din LEIS 155882 (2, ‘Mass. Oa. notepad, dirt cour, deposion, vgs, ha, defense counsel ate, monetary sanction local rl, revesion, revoke, cut report, misconduct, opportunity to behead, aoeys, sanctions, discipline doe proces, evident hein, sponded ips dsiplnry proceeding, proceoings ad oder o show cause, dover, age, cours, amended complain, noice of seal Case Summary Overview HOLDINGS: 1}-The dsr cou fly compe wih D, Mass. 85444) bere revoking the atomey’ admission fo pace ‘fre the court Because the atomey received tie in the order 10 show cause informing the atomey ta the drt cout was onsiéring evoking his re ha vie sminsion, nd the aoe ‘ad sfcentopporany o be head [2-The tory ein ‘hat the distri court ltd his igh to posed due proces under the Eth dmeminon fed because the dict cout afforded the atormey ech ofthe procera protections o wich chimed be was ee (5]-There wa ler and convincing evidence to suppor the dst cours findings ofthe eames misconduct Beas the moi serious instances ofthe atomey’ misconduct were compelingly supped by te our reports Outcome Orders tena. LexisNexis® Headnotes (Cit eclre> Appa > Nae Ape (ht Podre> Appeals Note of Appea LOI The US. Cou of Appeals fete Fst Cut has an oft sated policy of aflrding ial cnsructon 10 te nace requremet in Fd Rn P3 (CotPacee> A> Ns of Ape Ci Pete > Ape Nae of Ast HIND See Be Av, overments>Cavts> Any to Atte Lap Bies> Santee > Gene Oven Govermens> Court Ahr Aude Leg Eis> Seesons> Genel Oven NG Feéeal cours have the inherent power to disipine ores ho sper bef everents> Cou > Aut ois Chit Pscte > Apps > Sandads of Review > Abe of Chit Pmt > Appeals > Sundin of Review > Cll mcs Review (Ch Peale Snetins> Gent Overview Lap Bbis> Seon > Cel Oven Gover > Coute> Aba Ades Ci Posse > Appts > Sanda of Review > Abe of Cit Prete > Agpeas> Stands of Review > Cll Brocts Review Page oF 2OIUS. App LEXIS 21608, 1 it Posire> Sections» Genel Ove (ep ecran erin Leg his > Saetons > Dixiplaay Pocetees > Gere renin LINE Ao ape cout eviews the imposton of &santon sunt tthe dit court's inherent power fran abuse of srt. Imporany the apple cor accepts al fangs of ficeunless ely eroneous Leal thes > Smo > Diipinay Pracolngs > Gene! HIND See D, Mis R83 654A). Gi Ped > > Meads af Dzavey > Deetinns > rl LaBl Ehis > Sintons > Dicey Reese: > Gea Dees Oventew coi Pree > Dizovey& Dilonte> Diese > Mindi Leal ic» Stns > isin Proceatigs> Henge Darng Dicovey ep Bis > Suoons > Dicpnay Poets > Gee Chit Ped >.> Mas of Dios > Dens > Ol Overview Deze Lea this Sncons> Display Poesia > Herings Chit Pocstre > Dioner & Dichase > Dicey > aoe INTO I an indepen counsel decides tht fra ipnry proceedings are appropriate tbe court may sue an order fr he {NS Til cours ave ample autor pursuant 0 Fed Ci P. respon to show cause why he ate shoul ot be 304121 impose sanctions on a person who impedes, él, or dsiplined. D. Mass. R.B3.6(5NC). If the respndenterey fuss the fir examination of the deponeat The rle elf res any ie f ft o wishes to be hea in mitition th spel tno specie procedre, but a procedure a diet cout the ci udp sl se te mater Fr prompt ering bee tre flows is standard: coursel suspends the depostin o big the 3) judges of th our D. Mas. 83 6(3XD) The complaining ‘issue 1 the cour, and the court hears segments fr bah je miay nos on hs pane. Mass. R83 6X) D. Mas cause. takes tesimony ad evidence as resoably proffered, R.A36(5) does not unambiguously lniete whether is andi sie » decision imposing money sanctions. ner ule S0G021 is procedures unssible, Monetary stctins ofthis spe are more fir when accompanied by notice and an opportunity to be hear Ci Pere > Appt > Review of Loner Cut Dans > Praevaon fr Review GiPrceie> Appeals > Reviews of Lower Coun Deon > Present fr Rew {6 Couns der waived cans nt mage or his averted 0 ina.cusaryfshion, unaecompaned by developed argument Leg Eis> Secon > Gel Oven Le ier> Stns > Genel Oneview HIN7 See D. Mass R836). Le ilr> Sets Genel Oven Le Eis > Suton > Gael Overview INS Misconduct ‘acules se or omissions tht vole the thc requrmens andres concerning the practice of Iw of ‘he Commonveai of Masschses.D. Mas, R548) aca a drone roster dspinng an storey. Over Chi Pse > > Std of Review > Pin Err > Gea > Sond of Revew > Pi Er» Gen LHINLL To ovrome plain ever reve, an apelin ms how (an eror occured (2) which was cero obvios and which tony (3) feted th ppl substantial is, bt lo (8) sexo} imuied the fess, integrity, or pbbe epution of the judicial proceedings. ‘lv Pocotie >_> Peon o omens > Exige! > Cota Ci Pocette> > Peano gman > Esp! > Calas Esopel LHINI2 Cours regulary rely on fet fintngs fom an ace roceeing when te principe of isu precision ply, Chit Prete > . > Dugulifton & Rel > Gods for Digalifeicn & Recsal> Apes of Paalty Chit Peete >. > Dagilifon & Ret > Gods for Digan & Roca Pool Bis. Page Sof 2016 US. App LEXIS 2162, $1 cil Proce > > Digatiiaton & Recsal > Grunts fr Disguilieaon &Rasssl> Arps of Paty (it Proce > > Digalifesion & Real > Gnd for Dili &Reszal> Pomona Bas LINIB Opioions formed by the Judge on the bass of fos inwoduced or event cccuring in the couse of the cient Proceedings, or of pri proceedings, do not costa bas for bas or partiality motion unlest they depey a deepssted favorism ‘or ataganiem that would make” fir jalgmet impossible Chit esde> Atrage> ro Hae Vie Le Etkis> Sucioes> Geer Oven ht estte> Atos» Pr a Vie ep Ehes>Stnoe> General Oven LINIE Cours shuld ake eae before levying» sanction a8 serous 3 ro ic vee revocson, (ht Resde> Appese> Sodio Reven> Geel Ore de > > Tesinany > Ceiey of Wines > Gena Ch Pose> Appese> Suds Review Gel Oren dete > > Teimany > Ceiy of Wines > Geren neta [HINTS Distt cout determinations oferty ae eid 10 peat deterenee overmans>Cains> Autry 0 Adi Lap Bes> Sinan > Genel Overview Ci Peed > mbt rss Digi & Res > Gener vein Govemmens>Couts> Autry oA Lep Es» Sino Genel Overview Ct Pedr > nby to see» Digaifition & Res > Gene Oervc {N16 A courts isheent power to squall an storey roe in concem for the inegity ofthe joiciry and the publics Perception tere oes no fue thse ends to punish ely sucessful tempts tampering wih the jad proces. Eridnce > Relvace > Psenaon of Relermt Bvfowe > Soliton feece > Relonie > Praenaion of Relea Evens > sotsien LHINIT When 2 docament relevant an ive ina cae ese there fit sometimes may ifr hat th pay who oblate iS out of reiton tht the cont were nfsorbi ep Biss > Santos > Dixpinay Prceings > Geren Leg ics > Santos > Disiplany Pores > Genet Oveniow LINE In eestng srt oe or ste a ston {or misbelavor by couse the cot may ceri consid te stent to which couse misconduct aberration Counsel: Armeld R. Rost, with whom Camille F, Saou nd Saouf Lav, LLP wereon bri, pen. Andrea C. Kramer, with whom Hach Robers Weis, LLP wasn bi for appeies. ngs: Before Tomei, Thompson, and Kayan, Cleat ues. Opinion by: KAVATTA Opinion KAVATTA, Cieelt Judge Auomey Jefey Ryan C20) peas fom the dsr cous reveeston of his peso fo atc pro ae vice forthe plas in thug avai hit ve rset thse poendings! Te district court evoked Ryas rohac vice admin a ding hat he es the cour sot terptingointerie with he depostion of is li, Ping roe, wea, 1. Background “The condo tht eo the revostion ellen on this ype occured daring postion of Ryzls le by defense cursed en October 24,2} 2012. The depostion ans show hata halPhow io the epasitn, defense counsel aed Rye lt, Th pas case orc ee mgt de purse LLG 8, The gira jue hs al aory ent morales" inh aes we er lean ing oe he aie oun op eat” Page 2018 US. App. LEXIS 21628, 2 than one mite to answer defence counts question, the folowing exchange betven te atone tok plc (Defense counsel 1 would ike the record to refet Me ‘yan is wing ots to islet while she ie anwering & ‘ston. IF he wishes to prove tha’ pot tue rater than ing on a rampage, he can tun back ove the mtd that heist ured over, ad he an show sal what he wrote on it But wil, agai be caging op othe coat that he ws wing on ep And when ookad an he tree cover tas ear at the plains] eyes were looking tthe ep swell. Me Ryan: Noting that [efnse couse) sid in ta ast semen was acute 100 percent fal, [Defense counsel} Then | would eques that you bring that etepod tthe courant the ot ok a Defense couse shen ase the pin while she wa il under th whether she fd seen Ryan ip the notepad over. The Pun amined ta "he napa ts ben inped 3] over tnd refit over” and" sa something in iy prpheral ison” The pli denied Loking tthe rete Afr fbr shimises the deposition was suspended, with dees couse snnoneing tht she was ealing te cout Afr a fnyinue seees, Ryan and the plinti?’made Ssatmens on the dapositon ear Ryn sted his pon hat keene counsel was wasting Her allted deposition tine, and Ryan and the plain bah arused defense counsel of writing ues ding prior depositions of the defendants Ryan abo ftmnowneed tht he was “prepared 10 show to the judge the cep, which, at 1 scirely sine, nly comin the infomation bout the adress of the courthouse which were sringto..- ater toy” ‘Asus eptience with the dsrct cout hd aad been scheduled fr 415 tat fron to restive uneled deposition scheduling dips. After the court adresse the scbodling issues, defense couse desorbed tho nasepd incident and made 1m orl maton for monetary sanctions, insating costs fe the eur rept nto have tre dopostns videoecrd ‘yan beau is rebut by showing the cous notepad ht Ryan ssid was (4) the notepad he had at the deposon, The only wn onthe notepad was the addes of the course, Ryan eo tht dene counsel tw hin wing @ oot because defrse counsels binds onthe tbe woul hive obsrcted ber view of his mpd, He aecued defense coumsel of witing notes to her elms ding prior epstons, Ryan did amit topping the apd over but mien that be only wien he aes ofthe course onthe apd before doings, When the out asked Ryan why he didnot smply show dense course hepa, Ryan et answered hat dfese couse i ot oko se the eked, {fe hd e would hive shown er: “Al she ada Jo wa sk. would have handed ito he, your Hon. Se id not ak 1 ee |e” In a the deposition rans shows tha ppg counsel invite Ryan to tum the notepad over, Pressed on why e id a vole fo show the notepad and reso te dsp, Ryan sed tat e was "depy fen” and ecu defese coe of whispering deposton wines. ‘The ase cout then hear tetimony fom he epson’ court rep. She testified that Ryan wrote someting on te [5 notepad and moved toward his ent. he pail, He then ipa the tp over when assed by defense counsel. The ‘cour eo eal notre! what Ryan ha writen, bute ould see tha there were two diet pcs of wring on the tpn, on atte tp ad one farther down the page. She recalled hat, Mer the deposition was suspended, Ryan le he room with he rotepad fr than mint. When be retard, he el he ated up, made come vat of offer at as aval fr viewing. and placed ton the ble. The cout pore ws nae ther defense ent! hen! Rye’ announcement or looked a the noted Mos significa, te cour repr tested thatthe writing on ‘he nopad tat Ryan paced on the tble afer entring the room wasnt he sare asthe wing on tbe notepad Hate had moved ovat the pl diving the deposition I vae missing 2 few word ofa setence that a appeared unde the wring atthe top ofthe notepad Likewise, the cout reporter testified that the sepa that Ryan showed the court ding the beng was similarly missing he wing that was 09 the nua that ead ‘moved taward his lent '6 during the positon. ‘The pif ao teste, She denied that she looked st the notepad onthe ble wiles question was eng She canned ‘hat Ryan Bpped the naapad over ater defense counsel wet 00 te record about the notepad. She aso opined that te cout ‘report could not have sea what wat onthe notepad Deca the ‘porter coninued transiting during he icieat The lif Ind" ie what Ryan had ken ou ofthe em whe he eft the deposton rom, Page Sof 2014 US. App. LEXIS 21628, °6 Se did wesify tha Ryan showed har the notepad before be theroom andthe notepad contained the countoue adres. Althe ed ofthe bearing, defense counsel mde an orl motion 0 revoke Ryan ro he ie adminsion bocase the court rept’ testimony shoved ht he had fred fle evidence to the cout ‘The court denied the motion without peje btw defense counsel that se could ene iin wen, ae whieh "Ryan as moporniy to rependo i” (One week later the dit cout issued an oder rating elena’ moti fo discovery sanctions. The sericea found the court reporters tesimony “wholly cele” and not undemined by the plitifstesimony. 7]? Spa ra ‘ich Na_1O.J0S25L7S, 2012 US. Dit ENS 185002, 20121, S3S681. a "6? (D_ Mase Oat 31,2012, The coun ‘maiethe lowing pei Fines of fc Me. Ryan wrote something on hit legal pad wile the Piiffsrugled to answer a queton, pushed the pd tovard bis len, and then lipped over to seldom eense couse view. Immediately treater, Me. Ryan fale to do wht the Court would expecta ler to doin this clearance: ether show the legal pad to defense counsel hen she sa her bel, or pas the pa in a sealed envelope (i fer instance, it conti privilered ‘nfomarin, taking saps © memeriie eter at on the record dhring the deposition... Instead, Me. Ryan, i a Ptely false sterent, denied having taken the ations eense counsel (nde court pre) hd wines, When the depostion was temporarily suspended, be tok te lea tthe oom, somehow dpa ofthe relevant writing, td retard. He ner made anoter fe stanton the record, before the pres et dense couse conference roam reguing the eontent ofthe wring oo he el pa [Ath hearing before this Cout, Me Ryan agin bly ee his actos nd knowingly presente 8) as evidence lea pa hat he had intetonlly are 20/2US Di LEXIS 15962. (4) 00. 1m shor, the ase court found as 2 mat of fct that Ryan tempted communicate surety with is let while 3 question was pening at deposition, hat Ryan manutd fe evidence, and that Ryan ido he cout. The court put hese figs in he comet of Ryans pie condi ding the case “This cond ined ang juny demand oa fled amended coplanar ebaining opposing couse’ ast ne cours permsion ol an mended compli wibou ary dean,

    You might also like