What is Reprimand in Law?
In the legal sense, a reprimand is a formal rebuke of an attorney by the authority that oversees the attorney’s license to practice. Reprimands are issued by professional licensing boards as a disciplinary action against a licensed professional, and they also can be levied against people who have not been given their professional license yet, but who are working in an internship program or are under a direct order by a court (as sometimes happens with lawyers involved in certain types of criminal cases). While reprimands do not have the same implications that disbarment may, they can have a long-term negative impact on an attorney’s career.
Disciplinary actions taken against lawyers typically involve informal sanctions, such as informal admonishments and nudges to attorneys to follow the law , to more formal actions that are put on a public record and overseen closely by attorneys’ disciplinary boards at the state level. Peer review organizations may be called upon to investigate the conduct in question under the supervision of a disciplinary board. The type of complaint against the lawyer and the circumstances surrounding it dictate the type of reprimand that will be issued and whether an attorney must face disciplinary hearings before the reprimand is issued.
Reprimands may come as a surprise to attorneys, as some disciplinary actions may be taken against them of which they are not aware. Others may avoid a reprimand altogether by undertaking some action to repair the situation through mediation. Primarily, reprimands tend to be issued when an attorney has acted unethically, witnessed unethical behavior and allowed it to continue, or otherwise failed to abide by the laws regulating attorneys.
Types of Reprimand in Law
There are two general types of reprimands used in law: informal and formal. In many cases, reprimands are given informally before the commencement of criminal proceedings. For example, a reprimand may be given by a police officer after committing a minor offense, such as littering. An example would be a first-time littering offender being stopped by a police car, with the officer then getting out of the vehicle and simply telling the offender to pick up the litter and dispose of it properly. A formal reprimand on the other hand refers to a serious breach of law of which sufficient evidence exists to warrant a prosecution, but chosen not to on the grounds of the lack of a reasonable prospect of conviction or of public interest considerations.
Regarding youth offenders, the Youth Criminal Justice Act Section 6 states that "A youth justice conference is a meeting of a youth justice conferencing convenor (the convenor) and the persons who have been invited to attend the conference to discuss an offence alleged to have been committed by a young person attending the conference (the young person); the impact of that offence on the victim of the offence; and ways in which the young person can redress the harm caused to the victim by the offence."
In England and Wales, many first-time and juvenile offenders may receive a reprimand entailing nothing more than an oral warning from a police officer. There are two types of reprimands, namely a form of caution called ‘simple caution’ and ‘conditional caution,’ which is intended to prevent the offender from going to court.
Effects of a Reprimand Under Law
In terms of legal consequences, the biggest concern with a reprimand is that it may appear on state and other background checks as a "conviction" or a type of conviction. Like other impacts of a reprimand, this will vary by state and different laws. In certain cases, having a reprimand on a legal record can be a minor issue as a result of other factors in the case or later legal history. For example, in some cases, even with a reprimand, other criminal history may be more concerning to law enforcement or to courts. Thus, a reprimand may have less of an impact on rights to firearms, housing, and so forth than the direct language of the statute might suggest. However, this does not mean that there are no consequences of having a reprimand on a legal record. For example, the following may happen: Again, the impact will vary according to the type of reprimand. In some states, particularly when the reprimand was prompted by an act of violence, the consequences can be severe. Being convicted of a misdemeanor or felony in most states will end any chances of a criminal record being expunged. Even being convicted of a lesser crime can impact one’s future. Next, we will discuss the eventual consequences of a reprimand. Reprimands are similar to some extent to suspended sentences in that they may be treated differently by different courts and law enforcement. While they may not always be treated as a legal conviction, there may be certain collateral consequences in the future.
Issuance of a Reprimand Under Law
The primary authority for the power to reprimand in the immediate sense falls under the purview of the presiding judge of a court. This body generally comprises the senior-most superior judge, and may be referred to as the Court of Appeal, Appellate court, Court of First Instance or otherwise, depending on the jurisdiction. Reprimand thus occurs in the court and judicial context in a way that is formal, and might be given to a jury, law office, or a particular attorney in relation to their previous or current conduct in one or more cases.
Reprimand in the formal sense is distinct from informal rebukes that might occur outside of the court system, or processes that are more general in nature and address multiple attorneys over time. For attorneys who exhibit a general pattern of behavior that is deemed to align with conduct codes and ethical regulations , the reprimand process may be handled through the state bar association or other entity. Reprimands, like other actions against attorneys, fall under the jurisdiction of the State Bar’s attorney discipline system.
If the reprimand process aims to address an isolated incident with an attorney, where the conduct or situation is not indicative of a greater issue with that individual, the reprimand is generally a non-public and informal action meant to correct that behavior.
In either case, the reprimand process is generally initiated by a complaint on the part of an aggrieved party, who outlines the alleged conduct of the subject attorney and demonstrates how this conduct is against statutory mandates or legal standards governing attorney work. This complaint begins the reprimand process, and may result in a reprimand with sanctions, or from non-judicial bodies, warnings, charges or disbarments.
Examples of a Reprimand Under Law
Reprimands can vary widely in their application and implications, both within the legal and regulatory systems and the workplace. The following are a few notable examples of reprimands in legal contexts:
- First Offenders and Conditional Discharges – In many jurisdictions, first time offenders charged with a criminal related offense may be eligible for what is commonly referred to as a conditional discharge. Depending on the circumstances, as part of the conditions of their sentence, the convicted individual may have to adhere to certain conditions, such as community service, drug or alcohol counseling or rehabilitation, and possibly pay a fine or restitution. If the convicted individual meets the conditions of their sentence and does not have any subsequent convictions, their record may be eligible to be expunged and they would not have to report the conviction when seeking employment, housing, etc.
- Rules of Professional Responsibility – Licensure boards, such as a state bar association, have specific Rules of Professional Responsibility that apply to licensees. Exceeding the bounds of expected standards in the representation of a client could lead to a reprimand. For example, in 2012, an attorney was reprimanded by the California State Bar Court for sending a letter regarding the representation that contained false and misleading statements and which implied that the threat of the letter was being made on behalf of the full service law firm. The letter also provided any information supporting the assertion that the practice was a full service law firm, as the law firm’s website indicated. In this case, mitigation was given to the attorney for having no prior history of discipline, as well as personal and charitable ties with the complainant.
- Regulatory Agencies – The enforcement of rules and regulations that govern public and private entities falls under the mandate of regulatory agencies. Discipline rendered by a regulatory agency has binding effect over its regulated populations. An example of a reprimand issued by a regulatory agency would be in the field of healthcare. For instance, while it is commonly understood that practicing medicine without a license is subject to criminal penalties, more sophisticated regulatory enforcement could result in reprimands by state or federal agencies. The Office of Inspector General for the Department of Health and Human Services ("OIG") recently entered into a settlement agreement totaling nearly $2.9 million with a national cardiovascular implant company that had allegedly made false statements to the federal government. The $2.9 million settlement stipulated to resolve claims that its cardiovascular implant product were not tested when used with some patients undergoing surgery. While the settlement did not admit liability, it did provide that the company will not be able to receive reimbursement payments from federal health care programs until September 15, 2015. Some states may also have medical boards that could impose sanctions for misconduct. This was highlighted when a New York medical doctor was reported to the New York State Board for having illegally traded food stamps in return for cash, which entitled him to prompt review of his license application in accordance with New York’s State Comptroller’s Office Indoor Air Unit Audit.
Contesting or Appealing a Reprimand
In some instances, it may be possible to challenge or appeal a reprimand following the disciplinary proceedings. Under section 48 of the PS Act, a decision can be reviewed on the following grounds: Ground 1: that an error has been made in relation to one or more findings of fact; Ground 2: that new and relevant evidence has become available that was not available at the time the decision was made; or Ground 3: that the decision is otherwise unreasonable. It should be noted, however, that grounds one and two do not provide an option to challenge a finding relating to the conduct the subject of the reprimand. This is because a finding by the Authority, in relation to the existence of the conduct, has already been determined and can only be challenged through judicial review. Section 50 of the PS Act sets out the process for an appeal against disciplinary decision made against a police officer (who was a previous rank of constable) to the PSC. That is, the appeal must be made within 28 days after receiving written notification of the decision , although leave to extend this timeframe may be granted. The period for appealing a command or management reprimand decision to the PSC is not specified in the PS Act and thus the PSC’s rules apply here. An application for review of the decision must be made in writing within 14 days after the decision was made, which carries with it a further discretion to extend the timeframe on the application of the appellant. Alternatively, a command reprimand issued under Part 6 of the PS Act may be challenged in the Supreme Court of the Australian Capital Territory, on judicial review grounds. Ground 1 of section 48 provides the option of challenging a reprimand on the basis that an error of law has been made. The Supreme Court of the ACT is able to set aside the decision and refer the matter back to the Authority. It is also possible for an officer to bring a complaint against their colleagues for misconduct, breach of the Code or PS Act using a formal complaints process. A certain level of power imbalance exists for those facing disciplinary action, which can make it difficult to assert rights in these circumstances. This being so, it is important to have as much information about available processes, and the impact of each, prior to making a decision on how to respond.