Kevin Gleason Offers Wine as Peace Offering to Bankruptcy Judge Olson.

So it all comes down to this: an apology and a bottle of wine.

What, no flowers?  No chocolate?

And guess what -- those vituperative responses was all borne from frustration:

B. The Responses Are the Product of Frustration.

14. Attorney Gleason’s responses are the product of frustration due in large part to the
Court’s mistaken conclusion that his client had assented, pursuant to an agreed order, to the turnover of his commission to the plan administrator. The proper method to seek redress in such circumstances is to file an appeal, which Attorney Gleason did. During the pendency of the appeal, which was filed on November 4, 2010, the Court issued the Show Cause Order and later submitted the order for publication with Westlaw. This unfortunate turn of events escalated what was initially perceived as a mere legal conflict into something more personal in nature. The Responses, while intentional, do not reflect a dishonest or selfish motive.

I see -- the old "Westlaw-as-provocation" defense.

In other words, the judge should have kept quiet about the whole thing, but he had to go and blab about it to all our neighbors!

Is Local Bankruptcy Bar Too "Understandably Tepid" To Represent Kevin Gleason?

Tepid Bankruptcy Bar

Kevin Gleason has a show cause hearing to worry about in front of Bankruptcy Judge Olson just because of a bunch of words he put on digital paper (and then filed with the Court).

So naturally he reached out to hire an attorney to represent him.

But this was not easy, according to his motion to continue:

Immediately upon receipt of the En Banc Order, I began a search for counsel.

3. The response from attorneys practicing before this Court was understandably tepid.

4. It was suggested that I seek counsel outside of this District, and I immediately reached out to my first choice, the Honorable Francis G. Conrad.

5. Former Judge Conrad is currently of counsel to the firm of Jager Smith, practicing from offices in Manhattan and Boston.

A Big City lawyer, I see.

But Judge Conrad has hip surgery plus rehab coming up, so will Judge Olson reschedule the hearing?

Stay tuned......

Judge Olson Schedules En Banc Show Cause Hearing Against Kevin Gleason.

Olson Gleason En Banc Show Cause

Bankruptcy attorney Kevin Gleason's blistering response to Judge Olson's order to show cause is already legendary, and led to an order by the Judge promising further sanctions.

Well things do not look so good, according to today's order, and may include possible criminal sanctions:

The nature of Attorney Kevin Gleason's April 18, 2011 written response to the court's sua-sponte show-cause order is such that the continued show-cause hearing will be en banc. 

Local Rule 2090-2(B)(1) provides:

Upon order to show cause entered by at least one judge, any attorney appearing before the court may, after 30 days' notice and hearing and for good cause shown, be suspended from practice by the court, reprimanded or otherwise.

The continued show-cause hearing will consider appropriate sanctions under the court's inherent authority for Gleason's November 2, 2010 and April 18, 2011 Rule 9011(b) violations.  The continued show-cause hearing will also address whether the tone and/or content of Gleason's April 18th written response constitutes civil or criminal contempt of this court.  Attorney Kevin Gleason is ordered to appear and articulate cause why civil or criminal  contempt sanctions should not be imposed.

Mark your calendars:  June 16th at 1:30 p.m.

No mention as to whether Mr. Gleason should be taking his toothbrush to this hearing as well.

One Way to Answer an Order to Show Cause.

Gleason Response

Anyone remember SD FL Bankruptcy Judge John K. Olson?

Well on March 31st he entered an order to show cause against Hollywood bankruptcy attorney Kevin C. Gleason, reported at 2011 WL 1355300 (Bankr.S.D.Fla).

Kevin's response is an interesting read, to say the least.

The opening paragraph is a doozy -- so much for mindfulness...

(It would have made a really great first draft!)

To my loyal tipsters -- what happened at the 4/20 hearing?

Judge Olson Recuses!

Judge Olson Recusal Order

Bankruptcy Judge Olson, who previously denied a motion to recuse based on his partner's employment in the bankruptcy group at Ruden McClosky, has now changed his mind and granted a second motion to recuse (although he still thinks he doesn't have to):

 On September 3, 2010, the Defendants filed “Second Motions” seeking my recusal and vacatur of rulings. These “Second Motions” are actually reconsideration motions which do not satisfy reconsideration standards. Nevertheless, for the reasons stated on the record at the hearing conducted October 28, 2010, the Plaintiff believes that recusal and reassignment will be beneficial as a practical matter. I will accordingly recuse myself to speed these adversary proceedings to a more prompt conclusion.

So I guess the Judge is saying that if the plaintiff did not otherwise agreed, the second motion would also have been denied.