Coronavirus disease 2019, better known as COVID-19, hit the entire world in 2020. It effectively shut down the planet as scientists and researchers sought means to counteract it.
There's still much to learn about the aftereffects and lingering maladies associated with COVID-19. One characteristic that's common to those who have tested positive is a "brain fog" that seems to affect the thought process of the afflicted. Add an attorney in Florida as possible proof of what can happen under its sway.
A judge acting as a referee for the Florida Bar Association filed a recommendation on May 21, 2025. It suggests that the questionable and unprofessional behavior of Clayton Bowers Studstill was due to his addled mental state while having been diagnosed with COVID-19. It recommends that the Florida Bar not sanction Studstill for his transgressions and indicates the courts aren't done adapting to the effects of COVID-19 quite yet.
When Being Feverish for Justice Is a Bad Idea
The COVID-19 lockdown forced changes to many systems and procedures that had been done in a certain manner for decades. Perhaps nowhere was this more true than in the legal system of the United States. Already struggling to keep up with a record number of pending cases, the concept of ceasing all court proceedings seemed unfathomable.
Embracing technology, the courts adapted to the temporarily prohibited traditional gathering of both parties, their attorneys, and a judge in a courtroom by going virtual. Online conferences allowed the system to continue to adjudicate cases. When face-to-face proceedings became possible again, the legal system recognized that video conferencing still served a viable role in the legal process.
Still, there are times when an illness should preclude a person from appearing in any manner, especially one that makes coherent thinking difficult or even impossible. Or, if you're an attorney in the throes of COVID-19 delirium, it allows you to do unwise things and then forget about them.
Can I Get a Witness?
In early June of 2022, Studstill and his co-counsel were preparing for a contested paternity suit that involved his wife, Cassie. Studstill passed the Florida bar exam in 2005 and had a clean record as an attorney during his 20 years of practicing.
On June 4, Studstill tested positive for COVID-19 at a medical facility. After learning of his diagnosis, his co-counsel filed a motion for continuance the next day. The following day, which was the scheduled beginning of the trial, Judge Michael Kraynick requested to see Studstill in bed. Studstill's wife established a video link, which seemed to satisfy Kraynick, who approved a two-day delay.
Studstill tested positive for COVID-19 again the night before the trial, but showed up in court anyway. He later testified that he was intimidated by Kraynick and felt the judge was demanding he appear in person. He made it through the opening day of June 8 without incident, but was in much worse condition the following day. Compelled to get his expert witness on the stand, Studstill tried to power through his illness.
When the court excused the psychotherapist to confirm some of her testimony, he told the witness not to discuss the trial with anyone. During a break, Studstill was observed talking to her by the opposing counsel, which violated the judge's order of sequestration. They informed Kraynick, who confronted Studstill.
When first questioned, Studstill said he'd been thanking the witness for her testimony, now that she was finished. On further questioning, Studstill reversed course and said he'd been making sure she wasn't leaving. After a lunch break, Studstill's co-counsel said he "wasn't feeling well" and wasn't planning on returning.
Kraynick requested that Studstill return to the courtroom. After stating that he didn't feel well and was making mistakes he shouldn't, the judge released him. Studstill ended up in a hospital, where it was confirmed he had an active case of COVID-19.
I Have a Doctor's Note
Judge Kraynick alerted the Florida Bar, which filed ethical violation charges against Studstill on January 31, 2024. He was cited for lying to a judge and violating sequestration. An investigation was opened, with Judge James Yancey appointed as referee.
In his report, Yancey recommended that Studstill not be sanctioned. Noting that Studstill had no previous violations during his twenty years of practicing law, Yancey attributed the attorney's lapses in judgment to the effects of COVID-19.
Yancey's stance doesn't mean that Studstill is free and clear yet, but it's a step in the right direction for the attorney.
Related Resources
- Courtroom Proceedings (FindLaw's What To Expect in Court)
- What Are Legal Ethics and Professional Responsibility? (FindLaw's Learn About the Law)
- Oklahoma Prosecutor Suspended for Watching Jury Deliberations (FindLaw's Practice of Law)
