Summary
The Michigan Supreme Court denied Geoffrey Fieger's motion to stay a reprimand imposed for undignified and discourteous statements toward judges while he pursued possible review by the United States Supreme Court. The majority concluded that Fieger had not shown irreparable injury because he could continue practicing law and have the reprimand undone if he prevailed on certiorari. Separate concurring and dissenting statements addressed attorney speech, judicial disqualification procedures, and the disclosure of internal court deliberations.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether Fieger demonstrated irreparable injury sufficient to justify staying the Michigan Supreme Court's judgment pending his application for a writ of certiorari in the United States Supreme Court.
- Whether the Court should alter its established practice of granting stays pending United States Supreme Court review only in truly extraordinary circumstances.
Holdings
- The motion for a stay was denied because Fieger presented no evidence that he would suffer irreparable injury if the judgment were not stayed.
- The Court reaffirmed its prior determination that the First Amendment did not bar application of the Michigan Rules of Professional Conduct to Fieger's statements made during the pending lawsuit.
Key quotations
“Mr. Fieger's motion must be denied simply because there is no evidence whatsoever that he would suffer any "irreparable injury" by this Court's failure to grant a "stay."” (729 N.W.2d at 452)
“This is not a hard case or a close call, in our judgment.” (729 N.W.2d at 452)
Factual background
During a pending Court of Appeals lawsuit, attorney Geoffrey Fieger made highly derogatory and profane statements about the judges hearing the case. The statements were found to violate Michigan Rules of Professional Conduct 3.5(c) and 6.5(a). Under an agreement with the Attorney Grievance Commission, Fieger was to receive a reprimand but remain free to practice law without limitation.
Procedural history
The Court had previously held that the First Amendment did not bar application of Michigan attorney-conduct rules to Fieger's statements about judges during pending litigation and ordered a reprimand pursuant to an agreement with the Attorney Grievance Commission. Fieger sought a stay while pursuing United States Supreme Court review. The Michigan Supreme Court denied the motion.