941 F. Supp. 2d 359
S.D.N.Y.2013Background
- Committee reviewed Judge Smith's Report recommending charges One and Three be sustained and proposed five-year suspension; Second Circuit remanded regarding Charges One and Three for culpable mental state findings and remanded Brackett charge issues; prior interim suspension since April 10, 2008; Judge Smith found (1) Brackett charge involved deception and false statements, (2) confidentiality order violation with transcript copies and use in Massachusetts action, (3) culpable state of mind in the misconduct; Committee adopted Smith's findings subject to noted exceptions and imposed seven-year suspension nunc pro tunc to April 10, 2008; Peters challenged findings through objections which were largely rejected; final order adopts Smith's findings and adjudges Peters guilty of Charges One and Three and suspends her for seven years.
- Background continues: Peters was alleged to have coached a junior associate to mark up deposition transcripts to create work product and misled the court, and to have copied transcripts despite a protective order, undermining the court's confidentiality and leading to prejudicial conduct; the Second Circuit affirmed some aspects but remanded for culpable state-of-mind findings; hearing conducted in 2012-2013 resulting in extensive credibility determinations.
- The hearing record showed Peters repeatedly denied key facts, undermining credibility and supporting the findings of Judge Smith; the Committee found no merit in Peters' objections and upheld charges One and Three; the sanctions history included prior disbarment consideration, remitted to seven-year suspension.
- The final Order dates Peters’ suspension to April 10, 2008, with seven-year duration, and notes Peters’ ongoing practice outside this district during pendente lite suspension; Judge Briccetti and others participated or abstained as noted.
- The Grievance Committee concluded the case is sui generis and warrants a longer penalty despite comparators, due to abuse of a junior attorney and repeated mischaracterization of the record; the final sanction is seven years.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Did Peters violate the disciplinary rules regarding the Brackett charge? | Peters argues no culpable state of mind. | Peters contends the findings were flawed or credulity-based. | Yes; charges sustained and culpable state found. |
| Did Peters violate the Confidentiality Order by copying and using transcripts (Charge Three)? | Peters challenges the sufficiency of evidence for culpable state of mind. | Peters denies intentional disregard of the order. | Yes; Charge Three sustained and culpable state affirmed. |
| Is a seven-year suspension the appropriate sanction? | Complainant supported seven years; Smith recommended five. | Peters contends a shorter sanction is warranted. | Seven-year suspension adopted as appropriate. |
| Did the Second Circuit law-of-the-case limit consideration of the Confidentiality Order issue? | Second Circuit's affirmance limited relitigation on confidentiality. | Argument premised on remand for culpable state of mind. | Law-of-the-case applied; culpable state of mind still to be determined. |
| Were Judge Smith's credibility determinations entitled to deference and sustained? | Smith's credibility findings supported by substantial evidence. | Peters contests credibility findings. | Yes; credibility findings given deference and sustained. |
Key Cases Cited
- Anderson v. City of Bessemer City, 470 U.S. 564 (Supreme Court 1985) (deference to credibility determinations and related evidentiary review)
- In re Peters, 642 F.3d 381 (2d Cir. 2011) (affirmed confidentiality-order violation; remanded for culpable-state-of-mind findings)
- United States v. Quintieri, 306 F.3d 1217 (2d Cir. 2002) (law-of-the-case doctrine forecloses relitigation of issues decided on appeal)