Matter of Ramunno

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• finding that attorney violated Rule 3.5(c) when he “engaged in an insolent colloquy with the trial judge . . . which, implicitly if not explicitly challenged the court’s integrity” and stating that disparagement of a court’s integrity is “unacceptable by any standard”
• “[I]t is irrelevant whether Mr. Ramunno intended to cause disruptive effect. Instead, the sole question before the Court is whether Mr. Ramunno’s rude and uncivil behavior was degrading to the court below.”
• court raised sanctions sua sponte

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).