Lawyer Seriously Slapped Down For SLAPP Attempt Against Librarian Blogger
from the ouch dept
We've covered the concept of SLAPP (Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation) suits plenty of times before. These are bogus lawsuits filed to try to bully a critic into shutting up. In one such case, involving an incredibly broad subpoena against a librarian blogger compiling information on the potential link between mercury and autism, a magistrate judge has seriously smacked down the lawyer who filed the subpoena. The blogger had merely published on her blog information about the fees the lawyer in question had received. In response, the lawyer subpoenaed a ridiculous amount of information from her: "all documents pertaining to the setup, financing, running, research, maintaining" of the blog, "including communications with representatives of the federal government, the pharmaceutical industry, advocacy groups, non-governmental organizations, political action groups, profit or non-profit entities, journals, editorial boards, scientific boards, academic boards, medical licensing boards, any 'religious groups (Muslim or otherwise), or individuals with religious affiliations,' and any other 'concerned individuals.'"
The judge quashed the subpoena quickly, but has now hit back really hard on the lawyer, Clifford Shoemaker, for filing it in the first place:
The judge quashed the subpoena quickly, but has now hit back really hard on the lawyer, Clifford Shoemaker, for filing it in the first place:
Shoemaker has not offered a shred of evidence to support his speculations. He has, he says, had his suspicions aroused because she has so much information. Clearly he is unfamiliar with the extent of the information which a highly-competent librarian like Ms. Seidel can, and did, accumulate. If Shoemaker wanted to know if Ms. Seidel was in part supported by or provided information by Bayer, he could have inquired of Bayer or limited the Seidel subpoena to that information. Instead he issued the subpoena calling for production of documents and a deposition on the day before he stipulated to dismiss the underlying suit with prejudice. His failure to withdraw the subpoena when he clearly knew that suit was over is telling about his motives. His efforts to vilify and demean Ms. Seidel are unwarranted and unseemly....Now that's a smackdown.
I find that Clifford Shoemaker violated Fed. R. Civ. P. 11(b)(1) and Rule 45(c)(1).... The 11(b)(1) violation may also violate Virginia's Rules of Professional Conduct .... Clifford J. Shoemaker’s action is an abuse of legal process, a waste of judicial resources and an unnecessary waste of the time and expense to the purported deponent.
The Clerk of Court is directed to forward a certified copy of this order, the motion to quash, the show cause order, and the response of Shoemaker and Seidel to the appropriate professional conduct committee of the Virginia State Bar in order that it may be made aware of Clifford J. Shoemaker's conduct and so that those authorities may take whatever action they deem appropriate.
As a sanction from this court, Clifford J. Shoemaker is ordered to attend within three months, a continuing legal education program on ethics and on the discovery rules in the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. He is ordered to file a certification of completion of the programs.






Reader Comments (rss)
(Flattened / Threaded)
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
We'll all sign it!
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Steps to the front of the crowd....
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Steps to the front of the crowd...
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Steps to the front of the crowd...
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Holy crap
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
I think "compiling information on the lack of a link between mercury and autism" might be a more accurate description of Ms. Seidel's work.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Lowered expectationsL
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Raised expectationsL
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
People 1: Sharks and bottom feeders: 0
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: We'll all sign it!
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
Truly schooled. :p
EtG
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Let the courts know!
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
We nee more...
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Steps to the front of the crowd...
er... gradual onset of VD?
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
And free speach wins.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Buuurrrrnnnneeeddddd....
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Let the courts know!
Need more judges like this.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Lowered expectationsL
> to me that would be a slap down.
A judge doesn't have the legal authority to disbar an attorney. Only the state bar can do that.
As for the fine/jail, a judge can only do that if the lawyer has met the elements of criminal contempt of court, which filing an overbroad subpoena does not do.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Don't mess with the gravy train
Should've known. The oldest one in the book.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
BWAAAAHAHAHAHA!
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Steps to the front of the crowd...
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Beautiful
Very glad to see this. Very glad indeed.
I will join in the clapping, card signing, and I am going to fill out that review the judge survey thing.
Woot!
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Awesome
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Lowered expectationsL
It will be up to the Virginia Bar Assn. to penalize him further. They will likely fail in this endeavor...but again, disbarment is not up to the judge.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Lowered expectationsL
Hmm, this would look like the beginning of disbarrment procedure.
Oh and the bit about continuing education in ethics, etc. is hilarious.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
You think the Virginia Bar will notice this?
I think the fact that it comes from a sitting judge will ensure that they at least look at this guy.
I suspect the lawyer will be teaching ethics to pre-law students in some community college in 5 years.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Two new Seidel posts on Shoemaker's, uhm, professional conduct
You may find Seidel's two latest posts of interest. I've included the first paragraph of each extensive and detailed post.
Billing the Adversary
http://www.neurodiversity.com/weblog/article/165
Inspecting the Outstretched Palm
http://neurodiversity.com/weblog/article/166/
The content of these two posts is possibly what Shoemaker intended to block with the quashed subpoena.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Add Your Comment