Larry Klayman filed lots and lots and lots of lawsuits as founder of Judicial Watch. But sometimes, his legal machinations have suffered for lack of follow-through.

Consider, for instance, the reasons U.S. District Judge John Bates cited Friday in dismissing a breach of contract case Mr. Klayman -- now acting on his own -- filed last year against attorney David Barmak and the law firm of Mintz, Levin, Cohn, Ferris, Glovsky, and Popeo, P.C. This has been rather nasty, at one point bringing in embarrassing allegations made by Klayman's ex-wife.

Sounding a bit perturbed, Judge Bates noted, after first observing that Mr. Klayman never bothered responding to a defense request to dismiss the case:

"(Klayman's) current silence is not simply an unexplained hiccup in an otherwise diligently prosecuted case. To the contrary, plaintiff requested no fewer than six extensions of time during briefing concerning defendants' motion to dismiss his complaint."

The judge went on:

"(Klayman) has also failed to comply with even the most basic of discovery requirements: three months after they were due, plaintiff still has failed to produce adequate Rule 26(a)(1) disclosures, a failure for which the Court has imposed monetary sanctions...Additionally, according to defendants, plaintiff has not responded to defendants' request for payment of the Court-imposed sanctions."

Courtroom lesson: There's more to lawyering than filing a lawsuit.