Temple v. United States

Background

An attorney represented a plaintiff suing the Government in federal district court. He missed a deadline to file a brief. When the Government moved to dismiss the case, the attorney told the judge—both in a late brief and in open court—that illness caused the delay. The judge kept the case on the merits, tried it in about an hour, and judgment went for the Government. A year later the attorney was charged with contempt for saying he was ill, tried without a jury, convicted, and sentenced to six months in jail.

Reasoning

The Court of Appeals initially reversed and ordered a new trial on other grounds but also stated—without citing authority—that “lying to a judge” is misbehavior punishable as contempt. On retrial before a different judge, the attorney was again convicted. The Court of Appeals then refused to overturn that conviction because the attorney failed to file a written notice of appeal within the ten days required by the criminal rules, even though he gave an oral notice at trial, filed an appeal bond, and the trial judge later found the delay due to “excusable neglect.” The appeals court said the 1966 amendment to the rule might change results in other cases but declined relief here.

Real world impact

The denial of review leaves in place a contempt conviction based on a lawyer’s false statement about illness and shows that strict timing rules for appeals can block relief, even when a trial judge finds excusable neglect. Other lawyers face real risk of sanctions and must be careful about both courtroom statements and filing deadlines.

Dissents or concurrances

Justice Black, joined by Justice Douglas, dissented from the denial of review, arguing the contempt conviction conflicted with prior rulings requiring proof that misbehavior actually obstructed justice and that the appeal rules should be applied with flexibility.