I finally got around to watching the now infamous video of Texas trial lawyer Joe Jamail taking an expert witness deposition, which made the rounds a couple of weeks ago.
It has to be seen to be believed. Nobody comes off looking very good and the legal profession gets a black eye - almost literally - but Jamail definitely takes first prize for incivility. Nor is Jamail a first time offender, as illustrated by this appendix to the Delaware Supreme Court's decision in Paramount Communications Inc. v. QVC Network Inc., 637 A.2d 34 (Del. 1994):
On November 10, 1993, an expedited deposition of Paramount, through one of its directors, J. Hugh Liedtke, was taken in the state of Texas. The deposition was taken by Delaware counsel for QVC. Mr. Liedtke was individually represented at this deposition by Joseph D. Jamail, Esquire, of the Texas Bar. Peter C. Thomas, Esquire, of the New York Bar appeared and defended on behalf of the Paramount defendants. … During the Liedtke deposition, Mr. Jamail abused the privilege of representing a witness in a Delaware proceeding, in that he: (a) improperly directed the witness not to answer certain questions; (b) was extraordinarily rude, uncivil, and vulgar; and (c) obstructed the ability of the questioner to elicit testimony to assist the Court in this matter.
To illustrate, a few excerpts from the latter stages of the Liedtke deposition follow:
A. [Mr. Liedtke] I vaguely recall [Mr. Oresman's letter]•••• I think I did read it, probably. ••••
Q. (By Mr. Johnston [Delaware counsel for QVC] ) Okay. Do you have any idea why Mr. Oresman was calling that material to your attention?
MR. JAMAIL: Don't answer that. How would he know what was going on in Mr. Oresman's mind? Don't answer it. Go on to your next question.
MR. JOHNSTON: No, Joe-
MR. JAMAIL: He's not going to answer that. Certify it. I'm going to shut it down if you don't go to your next question.
MR. JOHNSTON: No. Joe, Joe-
MR. JAMAIL: Don't “Joe” me, asshole. You can ask some questions, but get off of that. I'm tired of you. You could gag a maggot off a meat wagon. Now, we've helped you every way we can. ...
MR. JAMAIL: Come on. Quit talking. Ask the question. Nobody wants to socialize with you.
MR. JOHNSTON: I'm not trying to socialize. We'll go on to another question. We're continuing the deposition.
MR. JAMAIL: Well, go on and shut up. ... You don't know what you're doing. Obviously someone wrote out a long outline of stuff for you to ask. You have no concept of what you're doing. Now, I've tolerated you for three hours. If you've got another question, get on with it. This is going to stop one hour from now, period. Go.
MR. JOHNSTON: ... I don't need this kind of abuse.
MR. THOMAS: Then just ask the next question. ...
Staunch advocacy on behalf of a client is proper and fully consistent with the finest effectuation of skill and professionalism. Indeed, it is a mark of professionalism, not weakness, for a lawyer zealously and firmly to protect and pursue a client's legitimate interests by a professional, courteous, and civil attitude toward all persons involved in the litigation process.
A lawyer who engages in the type of behavior exemplified by Mr. Jamail on the record of the Liedtke deposition is not properly representing his client, and the client's cause is not advanced by a lawyer who engages in unprofessional conduct of this nature. …
... the Court finds this unprofessional behavior to be outrageous and unacceptable. If a Delaware lawyer had engaged in the kind of misconduct committed by Mr. Jamail on this record, that lawyer would have been subject to censure or more serious sanctions.
The Delaware Supreme Court invited Jamail to make a voluntary appearance to explain his conduct. As far as I know, he never did so.
Is Jamail sufficiently self-aware to realize what a jerk he is? Apparently not, as illustrated by these tidbits from his publications:
- 47 S. Tex. L. Rev. 357: "Advocacy is not going in and being some macho-crazed idiot, but very professional and courteous--as long as you have to be--but show outrage, if it is called for; show excitement, if it is called for. ... When we say "the law," we are talking about an organized, reasonably accepted way for people to live together and settle their disputes without regard to force. Everywhere we look in the world today we see violence."
- 47 Baylor L. Rev. 1157: "Lawyer- bashing has become a popular indoor and outdoor sport, and lawyer jokes can be confidently relied upon to evoke loud guffaws and applause. How did all this happen? How did we get to the point where to acknowledge that you are a lawyer is to invite scoffing and derision?" {ProfB: Try looking in the mirror for the answer to that one}
