In the Matter of Disciplinary Proceedings Against Harriet Bouslog Sawyer, a Member of the Territorial Bar of the Territory of Hawaii, 1

Harriet Bouslog Sawyer became a member of the Territorial Bar of Hawaii in 1941. Since then, except for four World War II years when she was in Washington, D. C., she has been engaged in the active practice of law at Honolulu. A large part of her work has been in the courtroom. Prior to 1941 she had been admitted to practice in Indiana and Massachusetts.

On August 29, 1951, a federal indictment was returned in Honolulu against Charles Kazuyuki Fujimoto and Jack Wayne Hall and five other residents of the Hawaiian Islands charging them jointly with violations of the Smith Act, 18 U.S.C.A. § 2385 . On Labor Day five days later on the Island of Kauai she was pleading the cause of the defendants before a Labor Day audience, castigating Smith Act cases in general and this case in particular. That speech resulted in no charges against her and the date she commenced representation of defendants in the case is not clear. The Honolulu Smith Act case went to trial on November 5, 1952. Eventually the trial was concluded and a jury verdict was returned on June 19, 1953, finding the defendants guilty. 2 It is definite that throughout the extended trial she was representing one or more…

I agree with Judge CHAMBERS in his holding that the respondent’s conduct was grossly improper.

Unquestionably, this Court has jurisdiction in this cause where constitutional objections are raised as to a disbarment proceeding, because the question of according due process of law to the lawyer is always involved. Therefore, this Court has the authority to examine the proceedings. The panel which first heard the cause and now the whole court, with one dissenting judge, agree to this proposition.

Due process of law, both substantive and procedural, was accorded. As the opinion of Judge CHAMBERS shows, the Hawaii Bar Association filed with the Supreme Court of Hawaii a complaint against Harriet Bouslog Sawyer, which contained two charges of professional misconduct. Since Mrs. Sawyer was duly and regularly admitted by the Supreme Court, she was an officer of that court and responsible to it for alleged professional misconduct. In accordance with its own Rule 19, that tribunal referred the cause to its Committee on Legal Ethics and Unauthorized Practice for investigation, which required the Bar Association to furnish a bill of particulars. The Committee held several sessions of the…

(dissenting).

I join Judges POPE and HAMLEY in dissenting to the majority decision of the Court.

I have a very different view of what the facts are in this case. The majority accept the conclusion of the Hawaii court that appellant “engaged and participated in a wilful oral attack upon the administration of justice in and by the said United States District Court for the District of Hawaii and by direct statement and implication impugned the integrity of the judge presiding therein and in the said pending case, * * * ” 1 I am satisfied that there is nothing in the record to support that statement. I think this is one case in which it is peculiarly important that we scrutinize with care the proof as to just what did happen.

If appellant used the precise words and made the exact statements that those who testified against her say she did, there is a serious and substantial question as to whether the judgment below does not violate her rights under the First Amend *214 ment. This is no ordinary case. It is the case of one who has a record of defending persons accused of crime, of representing unpopular labor unions, and of even going to far as to appear for Smith Act defendants. I cannot overlook as a judge what I know as an ordinary citizen in common with every one else, that…

260 F.2d 189 In the Matter of Disciplinary Proceedings against Harriet Bouslog SAWYER, a member of the Territorial Bar of the Territory of Hawaii, Respondent. 1 No. 15109. United States Court of Appeals Ninth Circuit. June 9, 1958. Certiorari Granted November 17, 1958. See 79 S.Ct. 153 . COPYRIGHT MATERIAL OMITTED John T. McTernan, Los Angeles, Cal., Myer C. Symonds, Honolulu, Hawaii, A. L. Wirin, Los Angeles, Cal., for petitioner. A. William Barlow, U. S. Atty., Honolulu, Hawaii, Edward N. Sylva, Atty. Gen., Territory of Hawaii, Morio Omori, Sp. Deputy Atty. Gen., Honolulu, Hawaii, for respondent. Before STEPHENS, Chief Judge, and HEALY, POPE, FEE, CHAMBERS, BARNES and HAMLEY, Circuit Judges. CHAMBERS, Circuit Judge. 1 Harriet Bouslog Sawyer became a member of the Territorial Bar of Hawaii in 1941. Since then, except for four World War II years when she was in Washington, D. C., she has been engaged in the active practice of law at Honolulu. A large part of her work has been in the courtroom. Prior to 1941 she had been admitted to practice in Indiana and Massachusetts. 2 On August 29, 1951, a federal indictment was returned in Honolulu against Charles Kazuyuki Fujimoto and Jack…