Former administrative law Judge Roy Pearson hit a snag in a federal appeals court in Washington on Thursday. Call it an admonishment from the bench or maybe a simple "do over."
A three judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit on Thursday dismissed Pearson's opening brief in his dispute with the city and a group of judges, saying that Pearson's court papers failed to comply with the federal rules of appellate procedure regarding the format of briefs.
Pearson, who unsuccessfully sued a dry cleaner for millions of dollars over a pair of lost pants, claims in the federal suit that the city and a group of D.C. Superior Court judges retaliated against him when he was denied reappointment to his post as an administrative law judge.
The appeals court panel -- Chief Judge David Sentelle and Judges David Tatel and Karen LeCraft Henderson -- ordered Pearson to file a revised brief within two weeks. The panel included boilerplate language that failure to comply with the order will result in the dismissal of the appeal.
Lawyers for the District argued in court papers that Pearson cut corners to cram more words into the brief than allowed by circuit rules. Click here for the city's motion to strike Pearson's brief.
Pearson said in response to the criticism that he did not intentionally violate the rules. He called it a "good faith" mistake, one that he attributed to the fact he had never before filed a brief in the circuit.
This article first appeared on The BLT: The Blog of Legal Times.
