Blog

Since we’re starting a new year, here’s a resolution – I plan to be a totally different person in 2026. Nicer. Kinder. More careful. But also less tolerant of bad actors…at least while I’m still in the legal profession.

On that note, here’s a tiny bit of news (speaking of bad actors). I was recently involved in a case in federal court in Florida. I withdrew for technical reasons, but after I left, the opposing party asked the Court to sanction me (and my co-counsel) for various reasons. (My response and declaration). Today the court REJECTED the motion for sanctions. Yay. Conor McGregor wins again.

In 25+ years of practicing law, I’ve faced a few sanctions motions. To date, my track record on them is 100% victorious.

The story is almost always the same — some foolish lawyer has a super-weak case they know they’re going to lose. To bolster their slim chances of winning (or maybe delay losing), they pull one of the oldest and weakest plays in the book – they ask for sanctions against me.

Remember the kids’ story about The Boy Who Cried Wolf? That’s what 99.99% of sanctions motions feel like…and for good reason.

One of the earliest sanctions motions I can recall fighting was WAAAY back in 2013 during the “cheerleader” case. What happened was crazy — during the case, the plaintiff (Sarah Jones) sent an email directly to my co-counsel with some comments about the terms of a proposed settlement. Her email is shown here (ACW and ABM were the initials of my two co-counsel in the case…so I guess she didn’t cc: me on the initial message):

This situation — a party emailing counsel directly — was unusual because Sarah had a lawyer, and there’s an ethical rule which says lawyers can’t speak directly with an opposing party IF that party is represented by counsel (with some exceptions). Every litigator knows that rule by heart.

Clearly aware of this ethical problem, my co-counsel (Alex Ward) sent a short response to Sarah explaining it was improper for us to speak directly with her since she was represented by a lawyer. Technically, this email back to Ms. Jones arguably violated the no-contact rule, but this is how most lawyers handle this situation…and I’m sure the Kentucky Bar would have been fine with it (the highlighting was added by someone else).

Later that same day, Sarah’s lawyer (Eric Deters) sent this quick little reply to clarify – we “have permission to always communicate with her.” This is important because the no-contact rule says a lawyer can’t speak directly with an opposing party UNLESS they have permission from the other side’s counsel. Kindly enough, Mr. Deters even added me to the email chain even though I wasn’t initially included.

After Mr. Deters gave his written permission to ALWAYS communicate with his client, I reached out to Sarah to follow-up on the topic of settlement. As part of this, I asked if she would like to talk directly with my client (Nik Richie) to see if we could resolve the case without more fighting. Totally benign conversation.

In response, Mr. Deters did something I can only describe as INSANE — he moved for sanctions against me. Here are his pleadings:

• Motion for Sanctions
• Exhibits

In his motion, Deters literally told the court I did NOT have permission to communicate directly with Sarah…despite the fact he gave me permission IN WRITING. No wonder he’s no longer practicing law.

Not surprisingly, the Court denied Deters’ Motion for Sanctions. Here’s the court’s order.

I can’t recall the number of times I’ve dealt with similar attacks, but I can happily report this fact – in 25 years of doing this, I have never been sanctioned by any court for my litigation conduct. I admit I fight hard for my clients, and sometimes I will push the limits, but only when all other efforts have failed, and only when I can do so ethically and properly.

Having said that, my personal goal is to make 2026 my BEST year ever. I still have a little unfinished business to take care of. I’m going to handle that PRIVATELY…for the most part. Once that’s done, I’m moving onward and upward.

P.S. Comments are OFF intentionally. If you feel a burning need to spread hate, bile and lies regarding a certain other case, don’t do that here. EVER. AGAIN.