Sacramento, Calif., attorney Julie Wolff crossed the line not only with a “rambling and ranting” 202-page appellate brief, but also by referring to her client’s developmentally disabled child as “more akin to broccoli.”
And let’s not forget the gratuitous attacks on the supposedly biased trial court judge, the unfair characterization of an expert witness’ testimony or her attempt to misrepresent the holding of another appellate ruling.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
