Chief
Judge
R.
David
Proctor
of
the
Northern
District
of
Alabama
recently
issued
a
timeout
to
some
attorneys
appearing
before
him,
ordering
both
sides
to
the
lunch
table.
Welcome
to
the
most
awkward
“It’s
Just
Lunch”
date
ever.
Thankfully
for
the
parties,
the
order
contemplates
that
this
event
gets
handled
before
Alabama’s
New
Year’s
playoff
game…
wait,
what’s
that?
ReliaQuest
Bowl?
The
Chief
Judge
has
a
history
of
refusing
to
suffer
pettiness
in
his
courtroom.
In
2023,
he
savagely
roasted
a
lawyer
trying
to
strike
a
response
brief
for
being
15
minutes
late.
That
story
received
enough
coverage
that
one
might
think
that
attorneys
practicing
before
Proctor
would
think
twice
before
giving
even
the
appearance
of
pettiness.
But
apparently
the
message
didn’t
reach
the
parties
in
McCullers
v.
Koch
Foods.
Plaintiff’s
counsel
had
conditioned
consent
to
an
extension
upon
the
defense
pledging
not
to
move
to
dismiss.
There
is
generally
no
good
reason
that
an
extension
such
as
this
should
be
opposed,
let
alone
denied.
The
Golden
Rule—do
unto
others
as
you
would
have
them
do
unto
you—is
not
just
a
good
rule
of
thumb
for
everyday
life.
It
is
a
critical
component
of
legal
professionalism.
Sadly,
in
recent
years
compliance
with
the
rule
is
becoming
rarer
and
rarer
in
the
litigation
arena.
It
is
time
to
reverse
that
trend,
even
if
it
is
only
in
this
case.
But
lunch
dates
are
fraught
with
complications.
Earlier
this
year,
we
reported
on
a
motion
to
compel
lunch
brought
by
a
party
trying
to
force
the
other
side
to
engage
in
a
meet
and
confer.
This
seemed
like
a
pretty
good
idea
from
afar,
but
several
people
wrote
in
afterward
to
say
that
there
are
underlying
issues
in
that
case
that
made
the
idea
of
lunch
utterly
unreasonable.
Though
it
would
seem
like
the
best
way
to
avoid
that
would
be
to
bite
the
bullet
and
go
ahead
with
the
meet
and
confer
if
you
don’t
want
to
take
a
more
literal
bite.
Will
plaintiff’s
counsel
try
to
get
the
2
for
$20
deal
at
Applebee’s?
If
not,
will
defense
counsel
start
ordering
at
a
nicer
restaurant
to
pop
a
couple
bottles
of
Dom
Perignon?
So
many
questions.
On
the
other
hand,
if
either
side
pulls
any
shenanigans,
I’d
imagine
Chief
Judge
Proctor
would
have
a
very
entertaining
response.
(The
full
order
is
on
the
next
page.)
Earlier:
Federal
Judge
Utterly
Done
With
Lawyer’s
Pettiness
‘Motion
To
Compel
Lunch’
Makes
Case
For
Ordering
Attorney
To
The
Lunch
Table
Joe
Patrice is
a
senior
editor
at
Above
the
Law
and
co-host
of
Thinking
Like
A
Lawyer.
Feel
free
to email
any
tips,
questions,
or
comments.
Follow
him
on Twitter or
Bluesky
if
you’re
interested
in
law,
politics,
and
a
healthy
dose
of
college
sports
news.
Joe
also
serves
as
a
Managing
Director
at
RPN
Executive
Search.