Dixon v. Clem

Attorney Jeffrey Blum represented David Dixon (plaintiff), a high school carpentry teacher fired for taking topless photos of a female student. Blum brought a civil-rights action on Dixon’s behalf under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 alleging the school principal and other school officials (defendants) violated Dixon’s right to due process. Blum filed claims and motions personally attacking school officials that contained inappropriate language or were completely wrong but still required the officials to respond. The court warned Blum his actions were improper, but he continued making personal attacks and instructing opposing counsel and the judge as to “proper procedures” each should follow. Blum also made arguments that directly contradicted explicit language from state appellate precedent. Dixon lost, and the school officials moved to recover attorney fees under 42 U.S.C. § 1988, which allows fee shifting in § 1983 cases. The court denied the motion, concluding Dixon’s claims were “extremely close to the line” but not frivolous. Instead, on its own initiative, the court sanctioned Blum $6,938. After listing Blum’s improper conduct, the court said it was “reluctant to hold Dixon responsible [for] the conduct . . . but [had] no reluctance toward holding Mr. Blum responsible.” The court concluded the “total effect” of Blum’s misconduct was to cause the court needless delay and the school officials unnecessary expense. Blum appealed but once again submitted briefing raising inappropriate arguments. Blum likened a school official claiming qualified immunity to a judge raping a claimant in chambers and calling it a trial to invoke quasi-judicial immunity, then called Dixon’s trial a “historical docudrama” “about halfway between a bona fide tribunal hearing and a rape.” Before ruling, the appellate court discovered three federal courts—including itself—had previously reprimanded or sanctioned Blum in other cases.