Any criminal defense lawyer who has suffered through a civil deposition knows that “civil lawyers” are not like us. It’s long been my theory that this is all about displaced anger at the fact that they tell people at cocktail parties that they’re litigators, but know in their hearts that they couldn’t find the courthouse with a map. They are ashamed of their deception, their pretense.
When they get the opportunity to play “tough” lawyer, this seething anger and shame within surfaces. They go bonkers at depositions over nothing to prove how macho they are. They argue motions over discovery deadlines as if lives are in the balance. And they treat each other like dirt. Or in St. Petersburg, worse than dirt.
From the St. Petersburg Times:
The e-mail messages show two lawyers trying to schedule hearings and depositions for a lawsuit. They can’t agree on dates, or much of anything else.Then it gets ugly.
Tampa lawyer Nicholas F. Mooney calls his opponent a jerk and a “junior lawyer.” Palmetto lawyer Kurt D. Mitchell questions Mooney’s mental health. The name-calling continues over six months.
Jerk? Junior? Seriously? If you’re going to smack each other, you need to do a whole lot better than that. And they did.
Mooney said his caseload includes more than 200 cases, “many of which were more important/significant than these little Mag Moss claims that are handled by bottom feeding/scum sucking/loser lawyers like yourself.”
What do you call it when a lawyer calls another lawyer a “bottom feeding/scum sucking/loser lawyer”? A start.
In October, the insults got truly personal. Mitchell said he was looking online for a mental disability based on Mooney’s “symptoms,” such as “closely spaced eyes, dull blank stare, bulbous head, lying and inability to tell fiction from reality.” Mooney, who said his son has a birth defect, called Mitchell a jerk and suggested he look in the mirror for signs of mental disability. “Then check your children (if they are even yours. … Better check the garbage man that comes by your trailer to make sure they don’t look like him).”
Mitchell’s reply: “While I am sorry to hear about your disabled child; that sort of thing is to be expected when a retard reproduces. … Do not hate me, hate your genetics. However, I would look at the bright side, at least you definitely know the kid is yours.”
Decorum generally suggests that one draw the line at a disabled child. Not a chance. Not only does Mitchell refuse to back off in the face of Mooney’s disabled child, but he seizes upon it as the launching pad for his next round of smacks.
Some may see this as two lawyers who are overly antagonistic, immature and lacking in the judgment normally found in a rock. Not me. I see this as the by-product of the civil litigator syndrome, where machismo lacks a viable outlet and ends up spewing all over a professional relationship. And some thing us criminal lawyers have disagreements. We’re boy scouts, I tell ya.
And so, I offer some unsolicited advice to Messrs Mitchell and Mooney. Nobody wins anything by writing nasty emails. Mud wrestling is where real men prove the mettle.
And the State of Florida wasn’t impressed either.
After two complaints by the Florida Bar, Mitchell was suspended for 10 days and was ordered to attend an anger management class. Mooney gets a public reprimand and must take a class on professionalism.
I understand that private anger management classes are available from Brian Tannebaum to members of the bar at a very reasonable fee, and will be conducted on twitter in order to make sure that the public reprimand if as public as it gets.
Discover more from Simple Justice
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

Geez, Scott, why are you picking on the civil litigators again? It’s not like we don’t envy criminal defense lawyers enough. Civil litigators may well suffer from courtroom-inferiority- complex and require Depo-Provera for depositions, but this is not the root cause of the embarrassing lack of professionalism in this case. I blame the foreign car manufacturers, like Volkswagen, “takin’ our jooooobbbs”.
Besides, the issue is not civil litigators generally, but local practice. Just ask our favorite ethics expert, Jack Marshall, who recently set off another “Ethics Alarm” and posed the question:
“Finally, would this kind of exchange have even been considered unusual if the two lawyers were in New York?”
Did he really say that? Just when you think the bounds of stupidity have been stretched to their breaking point, there’s always Jack Marshall to prove that there’s farther to go.
Do you know if the two complaints were made by the idiot lawyers in this case?
I’m not sure if I’m more offended by two grown men acting like this, or the State Bar policing their conversations.
Presumably one told on the other is the only way to explain the 10 day suspension versus a reprimand (assuming an even past disciplinary record). The bar tends to reward snitching.
Your final paragraph will, no doubt, impact drastically on the flow of key-lime pies.
However, as a civil lawyer, don’t expect sympathy if you come crying to me.