In Re Snyder
86 L. Ed. 2d 504, 472 U.S. 634, 1985 U.S. LEXIS 98 (1985)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
A single instance of an attorney's rude or ill-mannered letter criticizing court administration does not constitute 'conduct unbecoming a member of the bar' sufficient to warrant suspension from the practice of law.
Facts:
- Robert Snyder, an attorney, was appointed by a federal district court to represent an indigent defendant under the Criminal Justice Act (CJA).
- After completing the work, Snyder submitted a fee claim, but the Chief Judge of the Court of Appeals repeatedly requested additional documentation, which Snyder had difficulty providing due to computer software issues.
- Frustrated with the process, Snyder wrote a letter to the district court judge's secretary, complaining about the low pay and bureaucratic difficulties associated with CJA work.
- In the letter, Snyder stated he would not send any further documentation, writing 'You can take it or leave it,' and requested his name be removed from the list of attorneys willing to accept such appointments.
- The district court judge forwarded the letter to the Chief Judge of the circuit.
- The Chief Judge viewed the letter as disrespectful and communicated to Snyder that the matter would be dropped if Snyder apologized for the letter's tone.
- Snyder refused to apologize, stating he believed he was telling the truth on a matter of principle.
Procedural Posture:
- The Chief Judge of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit issued an order for Snyder to show cause why he should not be suspended for his refusal to accept CJA assignments.
- At a hearing before a panel of the Court of Appeals, the focus shifted from Snyder's refusal to accept cases to the disrespectful tone of his earlier letter.
- Snyder was offered multiple opportunities to apologize for the letter's tone but refused.
- The Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit suspended Snyder from practice in the federal courts of the circuit for six months, finding his letter and refusal to apologize constituted 'contumacious conduct.'
- Snyder's petition for rehearing en banc before the Court of Appeals was denied.
- The United States Supreme Court granted certiorari to review the suspension.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Does a lawyer's single, 'harsh' letter criticizing the administration of the Criminal Justice Act, followed by a refusal to apologize for its tone, constitute 'conduct unbecoming a member of the bar' justifying suspension from practice under Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 46?
Opinions:
Majority - Chief Justice Burger
No. A single instance of rudeness or lack of professional courtesy in a letter criticizing the administration of a court program does not rise to the level of 'conduct unbecoming a member of the bar' that warrants suspension from practice. The standard for discipline under Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 46 requires conduct that shows an unfitness to discharge professional obligations or is inimical to the administration of justice. Snyder’s letter, while ill-mannered, addressed a practical matter in the court's administration, and criticism on such matters is appropriate for officers of the court. His refusal to provide further fee documentation was not a breach of duty to a client or the court, nor was he legally obligated to accept CJA appointments. While civility is expected, one instance of unprofessional tone in this context does not support a finding of contumacious conduct or demonstrate that an attorney is unfit to practice law.
Analysis:
This decision sets a relatively high bar for disciplining attorneys for speech that is critical of the judiciary or court administration. It distinguishes between substantive criticism, even if expressed impolitely, and conduct that truly demonstrates an unfitness to practice law. The ruling protects attorneys who voice grievances about systemic issues from being silenced through the threat of suspension for an unprofessional tone. It narrows the interpretation of 'conduct unbecoming a member of the bar,' requiring more than a single instance of rudeness to justify such a severe sanction, thereby safeguarding a degree of expressive freedom for lawyers acting as officers of the court.
