MUSIC TOO LOUD IN RESTAURANT; LAWYER SLUGS GIRL; GETS PUBLIC CENSURE.
Matter of William B. Caits
First Dept.
Admitted to Bar: 1975
Discipline imposed: public censure
From: New York attorney Gary E. Rosenberg (personal injury and accident attorney and lawyer; serving Brooklyn Queens Bronx; Queens Injury Lawyer)
Interesting decision reported on August 31, 2010 coming from the Appellate Division, First Department - which covers Manhattan and the Bronx. But this lawyer's bad act happened in a restaurant in Queens. The Court's decision does not give the name of the restaurant.
You know, for a while now I've been writing these blawgs on naughty things lawyers do to get into disciplinary trouble. What badness did the lawyer engage in that got them caught, and put at risk their law license - their means of earning a living?
Sometimes the stories are sad. A drug-addicted lawyer steals from a client. Or greed made them steal. But it's not only stealing that can lose a lawyer his or her license in disbarment. Any felony conviction means automatic disbarment, and misdemeanor convictions can lead to disbarment, to, or lesser penalties such as a law license suspension for months or years, or a slap on the risk, such as with a public or private censure.
Some of my fellow lawyers I feel sorry for, like the drunk driver lawyer who doesn't hurt anyone but is convicted and pays a criminal penalty, and then, maybe, receives a law license suspension and can't support a family.
But one constant applies to me across the universe of disciplinary cases and stupid stuff lawyers do. I never see myself in those decisions or, more specifically, I don't see myself doing the dumb stuff that jeopardizes some lawyers' license to practice law. Oh, maybe I could misplace a file and mess up by blowing a client's case deadline - a rather forgivable disciplinary offense; because it's stealing client money that is the great disciplinary no-no. And that is guaranteed to cost a lawyer his or her law license 100% of the time.
Now to the attorney disciplinary case that is today's subject: William B. Caits. Caits was admitted to the Bar in 1975, so if he was, for argument's sake, 25 years-old when he became a lawyer, today he's about 60 years-old.
So attorney Caits, who's around 60 years-old, walks into a Queens restaurant. Maybe a diner or what have you. And he's with his wife and child. So far, so good.
Caits is disturbed by noise emanating from a portable DVD player in a nearby booth, occupied by a female patron and her father. So Caits asks the girl to turn down the music. She doesn't turn the music down low enough to suit Caits, who next complains to the restaurant manager.
The manager suggests that Caits and his family sit somewhere else in the restaurant.
No maybe Caits was less than thrilled with that suggestion and maybe not. Perhaps the manager offered Cats and his family some free dessert items, or maybe the manager didn't do so, but should have.
We're not sure exactly what happened next, but the decision says, "the verbal altercation escalated, culminating with respondent [Caits] punching the victim." What really happened? I bet that the girl got "mouthy" with Caits in front of his wife and child. Maybe the girl's father did nothing or got mouthy too. Maybe Caits was subjected to insults. Caits appeared to have an attack of Machismo. So he slugged the girl.
Here's what's disturbing to me, Dear Readers. If I was in a restaurant with my family and some "girl" wouldn't lower her music so as not to disturb my family meal, and if she got "mouthy,' I would have hit her too. Or took the music machine and thrown it and, maybe, also jumped up and down on it. Or something. But man, I would have lost it! So, there but for the Grace of God, go I.
On April 6, 2007, following a bench trial in Queens County Criminal Court, Caits was convicted of attempted assault in the third degree (Penal Law § 110/120.00[1] [intent to cause physical injury] ) and harassment in the second degree (Penal Law § 240.26). Both crimes are misdemeanors. The court sentenced Caits to a conditional discharge, $300 fine, and 12-week anger management program. Caits did not appeal, and satisfied all the terms of his sentence.
Whenever a lawyer is convicted of a crime, the disciplinary authorities have to consider disciplinary punishment.
The Appellate Division is not too happy with lawyer Caits, noting that he lied during both his criminal trial and disciplinary hearing testimony: when he said that he did not strike the woman twice and that he did not intend to cause injury.
On the "plus" side, Caits has a record of practicing law for 38 years with an unblemished disciplinary record, presented numerous attestations as to his integrity and good character, and served in the armed forces.
The Appellate Division concluded, "we find the mitigating factors vastly more compelling insofar as the instant misconduct was aberrational and was not indicative of his interpersonal relationship in the course of legal representation."
The penalty: Caits was publicly censured. Which is the Court's way of saying, "Don't do that again."
Caits got lucky. He probably should have just changed his table or left the restaurant. Or just grabbed and "beat up" the music player and not the person operating it.
