holding that the First Amendment did not protect a lawyer from sanctions for waging an online campaign in which she encouraged others to engage in ex parte communications with the judges presiding over her client’s case
How later courts described this case
- holding that the First Amendment did not protect a lawyer from sanctions for waging an online campaign in which she encouraged others to engage in ex parte communications with the judges presiding over her client’s case
- noting that it is well established that "those matters not expressly granted in a judgment or order of a court are considered denied” and citing M.J. Farms, Ltd. v. Exxon Mobil Corp., 07-2371, p. 12 (La.7/1/08), 998 So.2d 16, 26, for the proposition that "relief sought presumed denied when judgment si lent as to claim or demand.”
- disbarring lawyer for orchestrating media campaign based on false or misleading information in effort to intimidate judge
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
CANNELLA, J., *
concurring in part and dissenting in part.
Ill dissent in part as to the sanction and would impose a three year suspension, but I concur in all other respects.
Retired Judge James L. Camella, assigned as Justice ad hoc, sitting for Hughes, J., recused.