In Re Disbarment of Isserman

Background

Abraham J. Isserman was one of the defense lawyers at a long, high-profile criminal trial and was sentenced to jail for contempt for repeated courtroom interruptions and insolent objections. Some contempt counts against him were affirmed on appeal. After New Jersey’s highest court disbarred him, the Supreme Court issued a rule asking him to show cause why he should not also be disbarred from practicing before this Court.

Reasoning

The Court applied its rule that looks to state findings about a lawyer’s fitness to practice and placed the burden on Isserman to show good cause. The majority concluded he failed to meet that burden, noting the contemptuous acts, the New Jersey opinion condemning his behavior, and his earlier failure to disclose a 1925 conviction and suspension. The majority therefore ordered that he be disbarred from practice before the Supreme Court.

Real world impact

The immediate effect is that Isserman loses his ability to represent clients before the Supreme Court. The decision also reinforces that repeated courtroom misconduct and a state disbarment can lead this Court to remove a lawyer from its rolls. The order follows established internal rules and does not open a new, independent re-qualification process for lawyers seeking admission to the Supreme Court bar.

Dissents or concurrances

A separate opinion, joined by three other Justices, argued against disbarment, saying Isserman already suffered severe punishment (jail and suspension) and that disbarment for contempt alone would be excessive and unnecessary.