About a month ago I posted a note about a case in which the court found one of the briefs in the case to be total "gibberish." See here.
More recently we have found out that the brief was actually written by the client and that the lawyer was sanctioned for it.
The story apparently began when a plaintiff filed a pro se 386-paragraph complaint. After the defendant moved for summary judgment, the plaintiff filed a response that the appeals court called “woefully noncompliant” with the local rule governing summary judgment briefs. At some point, a lawyer began to represent the plaintiff, and, eventually, the lawyer allowed the client to write and submit an appellate brief that the court found to be "a monstrosity," “incoherent,” and “utterly frivolous.”
An now comes news that the Federal Appeals Court for the 7th Circuit has ordered the lawyer to pay attorney fees and double costs to his opponent.
You can read more about this case in Bloomberg Law, The ABA Journal, and The Law For Lawyers Today.
UPDATE (12/27/19): Lawyer Ethics Alerts Blog has a comment on the case here.