Justice Inos issues order to show cause vs Woodruff
CNMI Supreme Court Associate Justice Perry B. Inos has ordered disbarred lawyer Stephen C. Woodruff to explain why the court should not dismiss his appeal, strike the appendix and portions of his brief, or issue sanctions against him.
Inos issued the order after Woodruff filed a long brief in the wrong font size and an appendix separate from the brief.
Superior Court Associate Judge David A. Wiseman disbarred Woodruff in June 2013 for committing 44 violations of the Model Rules of Professional Conduct. Woodruff appealed the order to the CNMI Supreme Court.
In an order to show cause last week, Inos said several Supreme Court Rules are implicated in Woodruff’s case.
The associate justice said Rule 31-1(a) allows each party a single automatic extension.
Once an automatic extension has been granted, Rule 31-1(c) bars any further extensions, including both automatic and discretionary, Inos said.
Inos said Rule 32(a)(c) instructs parties to use 11-point font size, while Rule 32 (a)(7) restricts briefs to “35 pages total, inclusive of the caption, headings, table of contents, etc.”—unless the court gives permission.
Inos said Rule 30(a)(3) requires an appellant to file his or her appendix and brief together on or before the briefing due date.
The associate justice said when an appellant brief “is not in substantial conformity with these rules,” the court may dismiss the appeal, strike the brief, or sanction the appellant.
In Woodruff’s case, Inos said, a briefing schedule was issued on April 30, 2014.
Woodruff’s opening brief was due on May 30, 2014. He requested for a 30-day extension. The court granted it.
On the last day of that extension, Woodruff sought a discretionary extension for six days. The court granted him seven more days, but warned he would receive no more extensions.
Inos said that when the final deadline arrived, Woodruff filed a 56-page opening brief using 14-point font size.
Inos said that Woodruff filed an appendix to his brief the next day.
The associate justice said Woodruff’s opening brief is too long, in the wrong font size, and lacking an appendix.
I wonder if this guy has mental problems? Or maybe some kind of drug addiction such as prescription drugs, or alcoholism, maybe too much pot. etc.
Things he does (or doesn’t do) is not quite right for an attorney that went to school and has been practicing for a long time before he started to really screw up.
Smoothing is interfering with his mind when many of the things mentioned are small but important and should be second nature to one in his profession.