Monday, June 16, 2008

Rule 3.3 Requires Candor to the Tribunal. But...

Posted by Alan Childress

An actual motion filed last year in federal court within the Sixth Circuit, shown in full here at Legal Antics (and hat tip to The (New) Legal Writer blog, inspiring this title), states:Bankruptcy_2

Comes now the Appellant, by counsel, and moves the Court to reschedule the Oral Argument currently scheduled for August 1, 2007. The grounds for this motion are that undersigned counsel will be out of town in Oregon, on a 350-mile bicycle trip from July 30 through August 4, 2007, for no other reason than to please his wife. Counsel assures this panel that Oral Argument would be more enjoyable than the aforementioned bike trip.

Elsewhere, Ray Ward's writing blog also comments on the word usage and obscure vocabulary of Judge Bruce Selya of the First Circuit, and on the potential lawsuit Coyote v. Acme.

http://lawprofessors.typepad.com/legal_profession/2008/06/rule-33-require.html

Ethics | Permalink

TrackBack URL for this entry:

http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8341bfae553ef00e55359813d8833

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Rule 3.3 Requires Candor to the Tribunal. But...:

Comments

Post a comment