The ABA e-Journal reports on one judge’s attempt to reward good work and penalize bad work. He cut an attorney fees award in a civil rights case for poor writing, proof-reading and pleading.
Mark Hansen writes (excerpt):
“Mr. Puricelli was well-prepared, his witnesses were prepped, and his case proceeded quite artfully and smoothly,” U.S. Magistrate Judge Jacob P. Hart wrote in a Feb. 20 fee opinion. Devore v. City of Philadelphia, No. 00-3598.
But Puricelli’s written work was another story altogether, according to the judge. “Mr. Puricelli’s complete lack of care in his written product shows disrespect for the court,” Hart wrote. “His errors, not just typographical, caused the court a considerable amount of work.”
As a result, the judge awarded Puricelli attorney fees of $300 an hour for his in-court work, but only $150 an hour for his written work.
In his opinion, Hart said Puricelli’s filings were replete with typographical errors. He also said he would be remiss if he didn’t point out some of his “favorites.”
Throughout the litigation, Hart said, Puricelli identified the trial court as the United States District Court for the Easter District of Pennsylvania. “Considering the religious persuasion of the presiding officer, the ‘Passover’ District would have been more appropriate,” Hart wrote.
***
But Hart also said that Puricelli’s mistakes went beyond typos. At the outset, the judge said he ordered Puricelli to file an amended complaint because paragraphs and pages were missing from the original complaint he filed with the court and sent to defense counsel.
And while Hart said he recognized that the case was a complicated one, he said parts of Puricelli’s amended complaint were “nearly unintelligible.”
“Mr. Puricelli’s lack of care caused the court, and I am sure, defense counsel, to expend an inordinate amount of time deciphering the arguments and responding, accordingly,” he wrote.