In Randazzo v. Imbraguglio, 329 So. 3d 282 (La. 12/21/21), Justice Crichton issued a pointed concurrence addressing the use of discourteous language in a writ application filed with the Louisiana Supreme Court. While the Court declined to consider the writ on timeliness grounds, Justice Crichton took issue with the applicant’s blatant violation of Louisiana Supreme Court Rule VII, § 7, which mandates that language in filings must be “courteous and free from insulting criticism.”
Justice Crichton highlighted specific phrases in the writ, such as the trial court’s ruling being described as a “massacre of justice” and the appellate court’s decision as “feckless,” “perverse,” and “aberrant.” He emphasized that such language breaches not only Rule VII, § 7 but also the oath all attorneys take and the profession’s broader ethical and professionalism standards. This concurrence serves as a stark reminder that zealous advocacy must always be tempered with civility and respect for the judiciary. Lawyers are duty-bound to uphold professionalism, ensuring their written and oral advocacy reflects the dignity of the legal profession.
