FOLLOW US

(USA Herald) - An attorney representing a high-end wedding photographer who sued competitors in Texas court alleging a conspiracy to restrict trade should have known better than to bring the suit, a Fifth Circuit panel concluded, reversing a district court order that placed his client on the hook for the "groundless" suit. This case serves as a reminder of the importance of conducting oneself in good faith during a legal action and the severe consequences that can result from acting in bad faith.

According to Samuel Lopez, an investigative paralegal and reporter for the USA Herald, in the unpublished decision, U.S. Circuit Judges Carl E. Stewart, Don R. Willett and Andrew S. Oldham ruled against attorney William Gammon and sided with the bankruptcy trustee for his former client, who had accused the lawyer of malpractice, writing that "no reasonably prudent attorney" would have brought forth the charges, which ended up with the photographer being sanctioned, paying fines and eventually filing for bankruptcy.

In his original case filed in Texas state court in 2014, photographer Jerry Hayes, co-owner of Champion Printing & Copying LLC, sued two local wedding photographers he claimed had conspired to block him from taking pictures at weddings. Gammon took up the case, alleging that the photographers violated Texas antitrust laws.

The state court granted summary judgment in favor of the photographers and ordered sanctions against Champion Printing, which totaled $41,518.75. Champion Printing was unable to pay, landing in bankruptcy court where the issue was taken up by trustee John Patrick Lowe. Lowe sued Gammon, arguing that he committed legal malpractice and "'knew or should have known' that the initial filing was groundless," according to court documents.

On Friday, the Fifth Circuit sharply disagreed, suggesting that "a cursory inquiry into Texas Law" should have made clear the antitrust claim would not pass muster. The court pointed out that the lawyer should have known better and that the photographer's social media posts blasting the other photographers were used to indicate his suit was "in bad faith."

In conclusion, the case serves as a reminder of the importance of conducting oneself in good faith during a legal action and the severe consequences that can result from acting in bad faith. Samuel Lopez, an investigative paralegal and reporter for the USA Herald, notes that legal malpractice case like this one are not only costly but also damaging to the reputation of the attorney and the legal system.