NY State Bar Tells Lawyers: Play Nicely
In an era when politicians and pundits alike are bemoaning society's lack of civility, the New York State Bar Association is announcing today that it has adopted new standards that tell lawyers how they should behave in the sandbox, so to speak. But don't worry: you most likely won't get sanctioned for throwing a temper tantrum.
April 22, 2019 at 10:47 AM
3 minute read
You think it goes without saying that a lawyer should be polite. A lawyer shouldn't pretend he has his client's approval when he doesn't. A lawyer shouldn't impose a deadline on his adversary that is more onerous than necessary.
But in an era when politicians and pundits alike are bemoaning society's lack of civility, the New York State Bar Association is announcing today that it has adopted new standards that tell lawyers how they should behave in the sandbox, so to speak. Don't worry though: You most likely won't get sanctioned for throwing a temper tantrum.
The standards, approved this month by the association's House of Delegates, will be presented to the administrative board of the state court system. If adopted by the administrative board, they will carry more heft but still be aspirational.
“Civility and professionalism increase the effectiveness of the justice system and enhance the public's trust in the legal profession,” said Chief Judge Janet DiFiore in a statement that the state bar association plans to release today. “These updated guidelines, which reflect the growing complexity of modern-day law practice, serve as benchmarks, confirming the honorability of the legal profession.”
The state bar first adopted civility standards in 1997 but they, of course, didn't envision the technology that allows a lawyer to text a reply to another lawyer with lightning speed. They didn't take into account the increasing informality of responding by email in the wee hours of the night. Or the ability to post damaging comments on social media.
“I think that this is a particularly important effort,” said Michael Miller, president of the state bar association. “We live in a time when civility is on the decline and the public discourse has coarsened. Zealous advocacy and civility are not incompatible and we must do everything possible to encourage courtesy and civility in our profession and beyond.”
It took two years to come up with the new standards because some lawyers were concerned about making them too specific and others worried they weren't far-reaching enough, said Andrew Oringer, chair of the Committee on Attorney Professionalism and co-chair of Dechert's ERISA and executive compensation group.
“Their value will be to the extent that they get talked about,” Oringer said. “I hope that they enter the discourse again. That they become reinvigorated and people start to talk about them again. Some courts will look to them for guidance when someone is complaining but that's a really grey area.”
He added, “I'm an ERISA lawyer and to do something for the greater good this is nuts. From my perspective, this is cool. This is amazing.”
The new standards apply to lawyers handling transactions as well as litigators. The previous guidelines were mostly focused on how to behave in court.
Here are the highlights:
- A lawyer should not impose deadlines that are more onerous than necessary or appropriate to achieve legitimate commercial and other client-related outcomes.
- A lawyer should focus on the importance of politeness and decorum, including such elements as the formality of the setting, the sensitivities of those present and the interests of the client.
- A lawyer should be careful not to proceed without proper authorization or otherwise imply that authority from the client has been obtained when such is not the case.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View All'Rampant Piracy': US Record Labels File Copyright Suit Against French Distributor Believe
5 minute readUS Judge Rejects Morgan Stanley Reconsideration Bid in Deferred Compensation Litigation
US Bankruptcy Filings Rise 16.2% as Interest Rates, Inflation, and End of COVID Relief Hit Hard
3 minute readTrump Win Ignites Global Legal Market: Lawyers Prepare for High Demand & Uncertainty
Trending Stories
- 1Judicial Ethics Opinion 24-57
- 2Milbank Leads Bonus Race, Rolling Out Year-End Pay News
- 3Teen Overseas Boarding Schools Face Wave of Miami Federal Lawsuits
- 4Decision of the Day: While Judge Was 'Moved' by Immigrant Couple's Efforts to Cast Votes in 2024 Election, Late Registration Denied
- 5California-Based Portal Crypto Exchange Faces Delaware Investor Class Action
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250