Background
Connie Reguli, a Tennessee lawyer licensed since 1994, faced disciplinary complaints arising from conduct between 2014 and 2018 in matters connected to judicial proceedings. The complaints described an escalating pattern that included using unsupported contempt petitions to coerce a CASA volunteer, communicating with represented parties, filing motions for a represented litigant despite appellate-court instructions that she lacked authority, and making false, misleading, or irrelevant accusations against judges.
The most serious allegations concerned Reguli’s campaign against juvenile-court personnel and her representation of Wendy Hancock. Reguli published judges’ and justice-system officials’ personal information, encouraged social-media followers to contact them, promoted accusations of corruption and child trafficking, and endorsed or amplified messages that caused officials to fear for their own safety and their families’ safety. She also helped Hancock evade law enforcement during a protective-custody matter and Amber Alert by supplying a burner phone and concealing Hancock and her child in Reguli’s home.
After lengthy proceedings, a Board of Professional Responsibility hearing panel recommended disbarment. The Williamson County Circuit Court affirmed that recommendation, and Reguli appealed directly to the Tennessee Supreme Court.
The Court’s Holding
The Tennessee Supreme Court affirmed the circuit court’s judgment and held that Reguli must be disbarred. The Court characterized her conduct as a years-long, orchestrated effort to intimidate judges and justice-system officials, provoke public fear and hostility toward the justice system, spread disinformation and conspiracy theories, and flagrantly defy court orders.
The Court emphasized that the misconduct was connected to proceedings in which Reguli participated as a lawyer. Her social-media activity went beyond criticism of public officials: she disclosed personal information, mobilized followers to send harassing messages, and made or amplified comments suggesting physical harm. Her assistance to a client evading law enforcement in defiance of a protective-custody order and Amber Alert further demonstrated the severity of the misconduct.
Concluding that Reguli’s actions sought to intimidate justice-system participants and “directly poison the well of justice,” the Court determined that no sanction short of disbarment was acceptable.
Key Takeaways
- A lawyer’s speech and social-media activity may support professional discipline when connected to judicial proceedings and used to intimidate participants or undermine the administration of justice.
- Publishing officials’ personal information and directing followers to contact them can become sanctionable misconduct when it foreseeably produces harassment and threats.
- Repeated ethical violations, defiance of court orders, and assistance in evading law enforcement can establish an escalating pattern warranting disbarment.
Why It Matters
The decision draws a firm distinction between legitimate criticism of courts and an attorney’s organized campaign of false accusations, doxing, harassment, intimidation, and obstruction. Lawyers remain subject to professional duties when using social media, particularly when their statements and actions relate to pending or prior proceedings.
The ruling also confirms that disbarment may be required when a lawyer’s cumulative misconduct threatens the safety of judicial personnel, undermines public confidence in the courts, and directly interferes with enforcement of judicial orders.