April 07, 2012
Is "Professionalism" just a Lawyer-Centric Scam?
For those of you interested in minor blogislative history, and for what it's worth, one article gave rise to the WAC/P? blog 7 years ago. Reprinted from a 2005 "Law Week edition" of The San Diego Daily Transcript, here's "Professionalism Revisited: What About The Client?", written by one of the most hard-working, polished and physically attractive of trial lawyers, lobbyists and business warriors on this failing, commercially degraded and cover-your-ass planet. Note that the piece ends with "rules of professionalism"--but from the client's perspective. (Hey, what a concept.) Excerpts from Rules 1, 5 and 6:
1. We come first. Be nice--but if in doubt, use the rules. If you feel you know the lawyers you are dealing with, we will follow your advice and instincts. If you are in doubt about the lawyers, or if it might compromise us to deviate from the formal procedural rules, please stay close to those rules.
5. If you have, or would like to have, a personal relationship with opposing counsel, that's fine, but don't let the relationship hurt us--the client. We don't care as much as you do about your maintaining or developing collegiality with other lawyers in your jurisdiction; in fact, we could not care less.
6. If opposing counsel shows animosity toward you for following the procedural rules and keeping things moving, that is tough. This is not about the lawyers. We hired you to represent us. We would like you to get this done. Again, as your client, we seldom think that aggression and persistence are "unprofessional".
Posted by JD Hull at April 7, 2012 12:34 AM
Post a comment
Thanks for signing in, . Now you can comment. (sign out)(If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)