U.S. v. Britton

Dist. Ct. erred in summarily holding defendant’s counsel in contempt for, among other things, failing to appear at previously scheduled status conference that Dist. Ct. had mandated that counsel personally attend. While Dist. Ct. found that counsel had lied with respect to statements made in motion to continue show cause hearing, Dist. Ct. could not use summary contempt procedures under Rule 42(b) to make instant contempt finding since: (1) counsel’s failure to appear at status conference did not occur in Dist. Ct.’s actual presence; (2) any false statements that counsel made in motion to continue show cause hearing did not occur in Dist. Ct.’s presence; and (3) any testimony given by counsel at show cause hearing could be found contemptuous only after Dist. Ct. relied on extrinsic evidence and engaged in fact-finding. Ct., though, rejected counsel’s claim that evidence at show cause hearing was insufficient to establish contempt where contents of counsel’s motion to continue show cause hearing, as well as counsel’s testimony, was sufficiently “troubling” to warrant new hearing.