Friday, December 20, 2013

"The Understatement Of the Year"

Two attorneys who had represented opposing parties in civil litigation ended up in litigation against each other.

The Maryland Court of Appeals affirmed dismissal of the case, noting that "[t]o characterize Farmer and Mixter's relationship as acrimonious might be the understatement of the year. This court is sadly too familiar with the antics of these litigants from a dispute a few years ago..."

After the earlier case settled, Farmer "was so infuriated by Mixter's behavior that he sought sanctions against him."  Sanctions were imposed but reversed on appeal.

Farmer then sent twenty letters to various Maryland lawyers that alleged "unprofessional behavior" and sought information for a bar complaint. Mixter responded with a suit for defamation. Famer sent more letters to attorneys and filed a bar grievance against Mixter.

The court here affirmed the the dismissal of the Mixter suit against Farmer and a second attorney who allegedly conspired with him based on absolute judicial privilege grounds

Because [Attorney Grievance Commission] complaints are not published and lawyers' exposure is protected to a reasonable degree, we are unwilling to overlook the absolute privilege accorded to the AGC process simply because appellant feels aggrieved by the situation.

(Mike Frisch)

http://lawprofessors.typepad.com/legal_profession/2013/12/two-attorneys-who-had-represented-opposing-parties-in-civil-litigation-ended-up-in-litigation-against-each-other-the-maryla.html

Hot Topics, Privilege | Permalink

TrackBack URL for this entry:

http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8341bfae553ef019b0357916c970c

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference "The Understatement Of the Year":

Comments

Post a comment