Monday, January 23, 2012
Recently, a federal judge in Indiana rebuked a lawyer for submitting verbose and irrelevant documents. On a summary judgment motion, instead of being helpful, the lawyer’s “Statement of Material Facts in Dispute” only complicated the court's job:
Rather than identifying potential factual disputes in a concise fashion, Plaintiff’s counsel unfurled an 18-page narrative that is replete with argument and a 154-page surreply that is no better as it contains a great deal of immaterial information.
The lawyer’s rambling documents largely failed to persuade the court. Most of his client’s claims were dismissed. Williams v. Lovchik.