Alex Jones’s Lawyer Norm Pattis Suspended From Practicing Law, Discovers There’s Something Worse Than Losing A Billion Dollars For Your Client On Live

(Photo by Zach Roberts/NurPhoto via Getty Images)

Yesterday, Alex Jones’s infamous defense lawyer Norm Pattis was suspended from the practice of law for six months after he failed to safeguard the Sandy Hook plaintiffs’ personal records.

googletag.cmd.push( function() { // Display ad. googletag.display( "div-id-for-top-300x250" ); });

Or, as he put it, he got “deleted.”

Sponsored Streamline Legal Research And Focus On Decision Making LexisNexis’ Fact & Issue Finder combines AI and human-assisted search to provide digestible, thorough results. From Ethan Beberness

Edited my profile this morning. Deleted lawyer.

— norm_pattis (@PattisNorm) January 6, 2023

Umm,  sir, the correct term is “cancel culture.”

googletag.cmd.push( function() { // Display ad. googletag.display( "div-id-for-middle-300x250" ); }); googletag.cmd.push( function() { // Display ad. googletag.display( "div-id-for-storycontent-440x100" ); }); googletag.cmd.push( function() { // Display ad. googletag.display( "div-id-for-in-story-youtube-1x1" ); });

Connecticut Superior Court Judge Barbara Bellis suspended Pattis for his failure to protect the Connecticut plaintiffs’ personal records along with a mountain of other discovery from the case, leading to the infamous confrontation when Texas attorney Mark Bankston revealed to Jones that his lawyer Andino Reynal had sent over the entire contents of Jones’s phone.

Attorney Mark Bankston told #AlexJones that his attorney messed up and sent him Jones' entire cell phone history. "Did you know that your lawyers messed up and sent me your entire cell phone texting history 12 days ago?" Bankston asked. "You know what perjury is right?" pic.twitter.com/IfIiP5UTIg

— Law&Crime Network (@LawCrimeNetwork) August 3, 2022

Sponsored Sponsored Streamline Legal Research And Focus On Decision Making LexisNexis’ Fact & Issue Finder combines AI and human-assisted search to provide digestible, thorough results. From Ethan Beberness Sponsored From Equity Management to Liquidity: How Morgan Stanley at Work Is Supporting Top Law Firms Read on to learn how empowering your clients with equity solutions can set them and their employees up for success. From Stephanie Wilkins Sponsored Professional Development Leader H. Sandra Bang on Building a Career and Making an Impact As PD Appreciation Month comes to an end, PLI speaks with program Chair H. Sandra Bang about her impressive career path and advice for those… From PLI Sponsored From Equity Management to Liquidity: How Morgan Stanley at Work Is Supporting Top Law Firms Read on to learn how empowering your clients with equity solutions can set them and their employees up for success. From Stephanie Wilkins

To call the entire sequence of events that led up to that moment a clusterfuck would be a major understatement.

It started in April when Jones placed three worthless shell companies in bankruptcy in a briefly successful bid to delay the first Sandy Hook defamation trial. During that proceeding, Kyung Lee, the attorney for the companies, emailed Pattis and Jones’s former lawyer Jay Wolman seeking some emails related to his representation.

Wolman, who had been off the Connecticut case for some time, said that he’d forwarded an external hard drive with all the collected evidence to Pattis in March, cautioning that some of it was subject to a protective order. Lee’s associate then responded to the group with a copy of the order, highlighting the language which restricted access to the Connecticut plaintiffs’ medical, financial, and employment records to attorneys only. Pattis (or his associate) then forwarded the entire drive to Lee, without removing any protected documents, and with no instruction on how to comply with the court’s order.

googletag.cmd.push( function() { // Display ad. googletag.display( "div-id-for-bottom-300x250" ); });

At the same time, Andino Reynal, the tenth attorney defending Jones in the Texas Sandy Hook suit, asked Pattis to send him Jones’s texts. Pattis then instructed Lee to give Reynal the hard drive. Neither Lee nor Pattis appears to have told Reynal about the protective order before he uploaded the entire drive to his server.

On July 22, Reynal told his assistant to email Bankston a link to some document. Instead, the assistant made the entire contents of the hard drive available to counsel for the Texas plaintiffs, after which Bankston sent this message to Reynal:

Sponsored Sponsored PD Appreciation Month: Professional Development & Business Development Mixer 2022 Recent workplace changes like remote work or quiet quitting highlight the value of business and career development training for all legal industry professionals. From Practising Law Institute Sponsored MyCase And LawPay — Better Together Why small and midsize firms win big in a blockbuster merger. From Above the Law

I forwarded this email to my paralegal to download this production. He asked me to take a look because it was a huge amount of material he was downloading, and he wanted me to verify that he needed to download all of it. I looked through the directories and they seemed to contain a lot of confidential information, such as depositions and records relating to the Lafferty plaintiffs, and material which appears to be work product or confidential. My assumption is now that you did not intend to send us this? Let me know if I am correct.

Reynal replied with a message telling Bankston to “disregard” the link, which he told his assistant to deactivate. He made no request for Bankston to delete what he’d already downloaded, which he had 10 days to do under Texas statute.

In the downloaded materials, Bankston discovered that Jones had lied in discovery when he said he didn’t use email or rely on Google analytics, leading to that amazing “Perry Mason moment” in open court. Approximately five minutes after that scene, Pattis emailed Chris Mattei, attorney for the Connecticut plaintiffs, saying, “Chris. Give me a call. I learned moments ago that I may have violated protective order. Norm.”

Mattei was well aware of the violation, since, he, like half the lawyers in America, had watched the scene unfold on live TV. And anyway, Bankston had already told him about the cock up. Pattis conceded that it was his fault, and that he’d released protected materials to Lee and Reynal, neither of whom were attorneys of record. But he insisted it was no harm, no foul because Reynal was “working on the defense of this and related cases.”

US Bankruptcy Judge Christopher Lopez later removed Lee from the subsequent bankruptcy case filed by Infowars parent company Free Speech Systems for failing to disclose that he’d negotiated for the LLCs and Infowars simultaneously. Reynal faced sanctions motions in Texas. And Pattis and Reynal, who entered a limited appearance in Connecticut (after he’d already accessed the parties’ files), faced sanctions in Judge Bellis’s courtroom.

Which brings us to yesterday, when Judge Bellis dropped the hammer on Pattis.

First she reminded him that he’d already gotten dinged during discovery for “cavalier actions and willful misconduct” when he improperly disclosed the plaintiffs’ personal records during a motion to depose Hillary Clinton. She went on to hold that Pattis violated several Rules of Professional Conduct, including, Rule 1.1 Competence, Rule 1.15 Safekeeping Property, Rule 3.4 Fairness to Opposing Party and Counsel, Rule 5.1 Responsibilities of Partners, Managers, and Supervising Lawyers, and Rule 8.4 Misconduct.

Among the aggravating factors, the court noted that Pattis already got dinged in this very case with regard to an affidavit in which the Danbury District Grievance Panel determined the attorney was “sloppy” and “exercised bad judgment.” Similarly, the vulnerability of the plaintiffs, Pattis’s invocation of his Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination when questioned by Disciplinary Counsel, and Pattis’s 30 years practicing law were black marks against him.

“Simply put, given his experience, there is no acceptable excuse for his misconduct,” she wrote.

Pattis has vowed to appeal. But in the meantime, he’s representing Proud Boy Joe Biggs who faces trial next week in DC on charges of seditious conspiracy for his actions on January 6, 2021. Be there, will be wild.

Liz Dye lives in Baltimore where she writes about law and politics.

Topics

Alex Jones, Andino Reynal, Courts, Defamation, Government, Guns / Firearms, Judge Barbara Bellis, Legal Ethics, Norm Pattis, Sandy Hook