I know that in theory a court can sanction an attorney for violating rules of professional conduct, but in reality does this happen so rarely that pursuing a complaint against an attorney is usually a waste of time?
Understandably, two opposing parties may have a different understanding of the facts and how they apply to the law and can pursue a good faith claim based on that. However, after a bench trial that went horribly for him, in the event that an attorney literally fabricates findings of facts and memorandum of law as if a work of fiction, are the courts likely to sanction him? To compound the mess, a judge literally cut and pasted this attorney's screed into a "decision" that bore no resemblance to evidence or law. On appeal, we are confident it will be overturned.In addition to the fact that the decision was a deplorable cut and paste job from an incompetent and dishonest attorney's work, it contained not one citation to the trial or case law. So inadequately supported was the decision, that we requested an articulation from the judge. Denied. We petitioned the appeals court to order an articulation. They compelled the judge to articulate his decision. The judge then ORDERED us all to produce "proposed articulations" for him!! So, we, of course, articulated why the decision was fundamentally and factually in error and law. The entire body bore no resemblance to actual facts discovered at trial. The judge again literally cut and pasted 85% of the work as "his" articulation. We appealed and will likely be hearing the appeals court decision shortly. Any thoughts on this are appreciated.