Attorney properly barred from practice in Rockbridge court
Listen to this article
Where the circuit court found appellant in contempt of court, imposed a 60-day jail sentence and banned him from appearing as counsel in the Rockbridge County Circuit Court, the court did not abuse its discretion.
Contempt
Moore, on behalf of a land trust, contracted to sell Irvine two parcels of real estate. He filed a complaint for specific performance.
“The complaint alleged that the Trust had no serving trustee, but that under an order in prior litigation, Moore had sole ‘power to make decisions regarding the sale’ of the real estate at issue.
“Given that the Trust had no serving trustee, Irvine requested that the circuit court appoint a special commissioner to execute a deed conveying the real estate to him.” The circuit court granted the request.
Appellant Jenkins sought leave for seven trust beneficiaries to intervene in Irvine’s suit.
“Irvine opposed intervention and asserted that the beneficiaries were not ‘proper parties’ to the specific performance suit because, under [a] binding order from the prior litigation, Moore was the ‘only person qualified to make decisions regarding disposition’ of the Trust’s property. …
“Irvine’s counsel subsequently moved the circuit court to sanction Jenkins under Code § 8.01-271.1 for various statements he made in the motion to intervene. …
“[T]he circuit court found that ‘several of the allegations’ in the motion to intervene violated Code § 8.01-271.1 and [in a June 21, 2022 order] required Jenkins to pay $4,000 in attorney fees incurred by Irvine in opposing the intervention and in moving for sanctions.”
Jenkins did not pay the sanctions. “The circuit court subsequently issued [a] rule to show cause, and in a response filed by Jenkins on September 29, 2022, he conceded that he had not paid the attorney fees.
“Further, Jenkins asserted that the June 21, 2022 order was void ab initio because the trustee had not been made a party to the original specific performance suit and, as a result, the circuit court lacked subject matter jurisdiction.
“Jenkins did not limit his response to this argument; he also alleged that the case was ‘rife with unethical conduct’ and that the circuit court’s actions ‘would harm the public trust in the fairness of the judiciary.’
“Jenkins further insinuated that the circuit court and others involved in the case ‘believed that they were above the law and could achieve their desired ends without caring whether their manner of doing so was legal or not.’
“He also contended that the circuit court apparently ‘felt this unethical collusion would be legal and beyond question’ and that ‘it is reasonable to ask to what other lengths and for what other purposes the [circuit court] has wrongfully attempted or will wrongfully attempt to use its self-assumed power.’
“Finally, Jenkins maintained that the circuit court was ‘[j]eopardizing the public trust in the judiciary by wrongfully and unethically pursuing the course of action taken in [the land trust] case.’
“He described the circuit court’s behavior as ‘dangerous’ and asserted that, ‘[i]n a just legal system, calling attention to this fact would be heard, considered, and addressed—not sanctioned.’
“At an October 6, 2022 hearing regarding the rule to show cause, Irvine’s counsel confirmed that Jenkins had not paid the attorney fees as previously ordered. Jenkins presented no evidence or argument and relied solely on the pleading he submitted in response to the show cause order.
“The circuit court, by order dated October 12, 2022, found that Jenkins “willfully and intentionally failed to comply” with the circuit court’s June 21, 2022 order.
“The circuit court then found Jenkins in contempt, ordered Jenkins to serve 60 days in jail, fined him $200 per day, and ordered him to pay an additional $800 in attorney fees to Irvine’s counsel as a result of the rule to show cause proceedings.
“The circuit court permitted Jenkins to purge the contempt by complying with the June 21, 2022 order as well as the October 12, 2022 order. Jenkins timely noted an appeal of the October 12, 2022 order.”
Further, “by order entered on October 21, 2022, the circuit court revoked Jenkins’s privilege to appear as counsel of record in the Rockbridge County Circuit Court.
“The order provided that beginning 90 days after the October 6, 2022 hearing, Jenkins could petition the circuit court to restore his privilege to appear as counsel of record. Jenkins appealed from the order.”
‘Unfounded attacks’
“Jenkins argues that the circuit court revoked his privilege to appear as counsel of record after ‘taking offense’ at some of the arguments Jenkins raised in the land trust case. …
“Courts have ‘inherent power to supervise the conduct of attorneys practicing before them and to discipline any attorney who engages in misconduct.’ …
“That inherent power includes the power ‘to suspend or annul the license of an attorney practicing in the particular court.’ …
“Jenkins did not present any evidence to support his allegations in the September 29, 2022 response that the circuit court had engaged in ‘unethical collusion,’ ‘believed that [it was] above the law,’ and did not ‘car[e] whether’ its actions were ‘legal or not.’
“The judiciary ‘is uniquely dependent upon the trust of the people for the effective performance of its work’ and ‘especially vulnerable to unfounded attacks that undermine public confidence in its integrity.’ …
“Therefore, ‘[r]eckless attacks by lawyers are especially damaging.’ …
“Jenkins’s unfounded attacks against the integrity of the circuit court constituted misconduct for which the circuit court was permitted to discipline him. …
“The permissible range of discipline for Jenkins’s misconduct included ‘suspend[ing] or annul[ling]’ his license to practice in the circuit court. …
“When a circuit court ‘has a range of choice’ in deciding whether to sanction an attorney, ‘its decision will not be disturbed as long as it stays within that range and is not influenced by any mistake of law.’ …
“Given Jenkins’s numerous allegations accusing the circuit court of unethical and illegal behavior and his failure to support those allegations with proof, the circuit court did not abuse its discretion when it suspended Jenkins’s privilege to appear as counsel of record before the court.”
Affirmed.
In re: Jenkins, Record No. 1719-22-3, Oct. 17, 2023. CAV (unpublished opinion) (per curiam) From the Circuit Court of Rockbridge County (Russell). (Jared R. Jenkins; JenkinsEsq, PLLC, on briefs), pro se. VLW 023-7-409, 9 pp.
attorney-properly-barred-from-practice-in-rockbridge-court/”>Source link
Attorneys and law firms can elevate their online presence with professionally written content from SEO Content Writing Services monthly plan. Our team of experienced writers specializes in crafting blog posts, articles, and written content that accurately reflect the expertise and knowledge of our clients in the legal field. With a keen eye for detail and a thorough understanding of legal terminology, we provide high-quality writing that helps our clients stand out from their competition and engage with their target audience. Trust SEO Content Writing Services for one time article writing or monthly written content to handle all of your written content needs and showcase your law firm's expertise.
If you need written content, blog posts, or articles professionally written for your website, we can help. Go HERE to find out more.
or email us here: myseowritingservices@gmail.com
To find out more about our article writing or blog post services, fill out the form, thank you.