I was representing a client in a domestic related trial, which was vigorously contested. The opposing lawyer, after the wife’s witnesses testified, said he would not cross-examine them but just present his case through his witnesses in rebuttal. Can a lawyer not cross-examine witnesses who have testified adversely to their client and when the lawyer has strong proof that the witnesses’ testimony is not accurate?
This is a column for ethics, not necessarily commenting on lawyers’ wisdom or lack of wisdom in trial tactics. But a lawyer has to be competent under Rule 1.1 of the Rules of Professional Conduct and do the appropriate preparation. Under Rule 1.4, a lawyer has to fully communicate with a client.
