In re Gates

Misc. Case No. 18-00301-KRH (2018)

From our private database of 47,000+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

In re Gates

United States Bankruptcy Court for the Eastern District of Virginia
Misc. Case No. 18-00301-KRH (2018)

Facts

Richard Gates (defendant) was a licensed attorney permitted to practice before the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Eastern District of Virginia (the court) (plaintiff). Gates had repeated conflicts with the court’s security officers while going through security to enter the courthouse. On multiple occasions, Gates set off the magnetometer at the courthouse screening point. If an officer asked Gates to remove an item of clothing or submit to additional screening, Gates became verbally abusive, using profane and insulting language to demean the officers in front of the public. This behavior caused delays for other members of the public trying to enter. Security officers repeatedly reminded Gates that his behavior was unbecoming for a member of the bar. On one occasion, Gates angrily slammed his shoes into a screening container so hard that one bounced to the floor. Gates was then escorted to the courtroom by a United States marshal, who warned him that his behavior was unacceptable. Gates replied that he felt the screening procedures were too strict. On a separate day, after this warning, Gates set off a waist-level alarm on the magnetometer. The security officer asked Gates to remove his belt and undergo additional screening. Gates became verbally abusive, used extensive profanity, and forcibly flung his belt on the conveyor belt. The belt hit the arm of a woman in line behind him. The security officer apologized to the woman; Gates did not. The court issued an order to show cause to Gates, asking him to explain why he should not be disciplined for repeatedly directing disruptive and abusive behavior toward courthouse security when entering. The United States trustee presented evidence of Gates’s misbehavior, and Gates presented evidence on his own behalf. The court then considered whether to discipline Gates.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Huennekens, J.)

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 899,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.

Here's why 899,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 47,000 briefs, keyed to 994 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 899,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 47,000 briefs - keyed to 994 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership