Legal Battle Over a Sandwich Leads to Trouble for 2 Attorneys
One wanted to eat their sandwich; the other wanted the room for a meeting. The argument went all the way to NZ’s Legal Complaints Review Officer.
New Zealand’s Legal Complaints Review Officer (LCRO) Fraser Goldsmith has had to adjudicate a spat between two criminal lawyers over whether a sandwich should have been eaten in an interview room, with allegations from both sides about how the other behaved, and who said what to whom.
He was required to reach a decision after an earlier finding of the local legal Standards Committee was rejected.
Neither lawyer is named in the finding, but are referred to as the applicant (the lawyer who had the sandwich) and the respondent (the lawyer who wanted to use the room in which he was eating it).
The saga began when both lawyers were scheduled to represent clients in the District Court list on the same day. The court building has a lawyers’ room and three client interview rooms.
During a 15-minute court break, the applicant entered an empty interview room to eat a sandwich, as “a self-management measure for his diabetic condition.”
The respondent was a duty lawyer, who entered the room because she wanted to have a confidential discussion with her clients. The applicant did not wish to leave.
Related Stories
