Courts

Cruel Seventh Circuit Order Refuses To Reschedule Hearing After Miscarriage

Do better.

By  
on

gavel-statue-2771088_640Appellate work is not for the faint of heart. It’s tough, demanding work and nothing is going to change that. But when a colleague suffers a loss, it’s just basic human decency to offer the barest minimum of accommodations. That doesn’t make the profession soft; on the contrary, recognizing that full humans with lives outside of work are the ones making arguments in court will only attract more and better minds.

But that’s not how the Seventh Circuit sees it. In a recent case, oral arguments were set when tragedy struck an attorney working for the appellant — his wife suffered a miscarriage — and his co-counsel is at trial during the scheduled argument. As such, opposing counsel was contacted and an unopposed emergency motion to continue oral argument was filed:

In light of the situation, and the need for Affiant to be with his wife for emotional support as well as go to numerous doctors appointments, and that co-counsel will be on trial in the above cited matter in the Eastern District of Missouri in St. Louis and, Affiant submits he will not have sufficient time to sufficiently prepare for presentation of Appellant’s oral argument as currently scheduled.

Affiant, therefore, respectfully requests that this Court continue presentment of oral argument in the instant appeal from September 8, 2022, to a date amenable to the Court.

Affiant has communicated this request to the attorneys for the government, who have indicated that Affiant can represent to the Court that the government has no objection to the granting of this request.

Well, this seem eminently reasonable. After all, the attorney’s family has gone through a traumatic event, and a little grace never hurt anyone. And even opposing counsel agreed to the postponement.

…Unfortunately, the Seventh Circuit did not agree. And, as the argument took place this morning (which they *graciously* allowed to take place over Zoom), there isn’t even an opportunity for public outrage to do its thing.

Listen, there may have been a time when a man was supposed to just stiff-upper-lip when something personal was going on. But in the year 2022, I certainly would have hoped that toxic masculinity was behind us, or at a minimum, not expected by a federal court. Reality, however, is a different matter.

Sponsored

Kathryn Rubino is a Senior Editor at Above the Law, host of The Jabot podcast, and co-host of Thinking Like A Lawyer. AtL tipsters are the best, so please connect with her. Feel free to email her with any tips, questions, or comments and follow her on Twitter (@Kathryn1).

Sponsored

1 2Next »

Topics

, ,