We often discuss civility on this blog and we have had some serious challenges to our rule from those who have denounced civility as a standard, including the hosts of some blogs. Indeed, we have discussed the gradual decline of civility and courtesy in society from sporting events to television. Now the California bar is taking a commendable stand and requiring new lawyers to take an oath to behave with “dignity, courtesy and integrity.” That may surprise you if you assumed that such a commitment is already express in the oath of lawyers in all states. It is not and the change was a direct response to what the California bar found was (much like our own experience) a rapid decline in civility among lawyers.
The oath will hopefully result in more actions taken against those who bring down the profession with rude and unprofessional conduct. I came across one such lawyer in New Orleans during the impeachment trial of Judge Thomas Porteous. This lawyer was representing a potential witness and responded to a simple inquiry by a young associate with a litany of profanity and threats. This was not a hostile witness nor in preparation of service of a subpoena. When I called, he was a bit more retrained but was rude and offensive as he chest-pounded this way through the call. It was shocking even for someone who have practiced for a many years. There is a difference of course between being tough and being uncivil. I have been in a lot of heated cases where there is no love loss between lawyers. However, the vast majority remain civil and professional. Those who do not are the source for the negative perceptions of many of our profession. This is why I have objected to the increasing appearance of embarrassing and unprofessional advertisements from lawyers (here and here). We seem to be losing control over the conduct and decorum of our profession.
On the civility front, the lack of the oath does not mean that it is not already required. All bar rules that I have reviewed contain professionalism requirements. Likewise, court rules expressly require such standards. However, adding civility to the oath is an important reminder for young lawyers who may be influenced by embarrassing figures like Nancy Grace on television.
The full line added to the oath will read: “As an officer of the court, I will strive to conduct myself at all times with dignity, courtesy, and integrity.”
Amen, California, amen.
Source: ABA Journal
“those who have denounced civility as a standard”
I expect civility to be the rule in a courtroom setting.
Out here in the rest of the world, though (where lying sacks like Dick Cheney can get a half a million people killed, run up two trillion in debt doing it, while they defend torture and say “deficits don’t matter”), those of you upset at a lack of civility need to either grow up, or get a fainting couch.
“Horrible idiots ought not to expect civility, though you see why [they] clamor for it. It’s a cheap way of pretending you belong at the grownup table, despite exhibiting otherwise utterly grotesque, stupid, and awful behavior.”-Thers
http://whiskeyfire.typepad.com/whiskey_fire/2014/05/my-new-favorite-person-is-named-nigel-jaquiss.html
“Dignity, integrity and courtesy” does not include civility. So one could say “Thank your for your insane comment ickDayhead.” And that would be ok.
+1 to you Professor Turley.
Once again, why no commentary about the CA bar allowing a scofflaw, criminal to become a lawyer?
Come on guys, my comment was not uncivil or indeed untrue. I might believe this site is a con as well for you not publishing my brief comment!
Dredd, I have found facts don’t necessarily matter. My attorney sold me out to the other side despite not only facts but perjury by the defendant
Nick, What a sad commentary,
I’m sure a number of them would swear at the civility.
Mr Turley, sir. You might consider requiring your “Weekend Contributors” to take a similar oath: “As an author on the blog, I will strive to conduct myself at all times with dignity, courtesy, and integrity.”
Why should you consider that? First of all, to retain your personal credibility in discussing “civility”; second, to set an example; third, to avoid having some other blog use the weekend edition of your blog as an example of hypocrisy.
leej, I believe your complaint is annually the most common complaint about attorneys. You have company in that misery.
Based on my experiences with too many lawyers, they need to also reaffirm, maybe on a yearly or more basis, honesty and zealousness when working on their clients cases,..
I have a friend who was a Public Defender in KC. She married a barrister in the UK. Barbara worked to become a barrister and was constantly amazed @ the entirely different mindset. Civility rules, as did honor, something on the endangered list in our entire culture. About 10 years ago they moved from London to Chicago where her husband got a job w/ a large international law firm. Barbara’s husband had a difficult time adjusting, but has made the transition. Barbara decided to not wade back into the Cook County swamp. She is a stay @ home mom.
For years now, some large corporations have had business codes of conduct and professionalism that are well-vetted, apply to lawyers as well as other employees, and for which the tone is set at the top. These “codes” are implemented through the performance management process. The best enforcer of lawyer conduct in law practice has typically been the approval of the client who pays the fee. Will that client return?
We all know and either remember or forget the lawyer we meet along the way who is uncivil. In my experience, such conduct has reflected on the competence, stability or emotional maturity of that lawyer. It is a red flag to watch carefully when representing the client on the other side.
Quaeres: How will this oath be enforced? What say those who educate lawyers?
I think it was Maya Angelou who said that people will remember how you made them feel more than what you had to say.
Yes indeed it does Dredd. While the full acceptance of it has yet to be embraced. Also difficult in the face of provocations, it’s a challenge! I know. I also know full well what a blog that has no civility rules or guidelines looks like. The Ann Althouse blog was so bad at the end that she herself shut down commentary, then attempted to reopen months later, then again it became like Mad Max and now all comments are moderated by her first before publication. She reaped what she sowed, with her years long “civility bullshi*t” philosophy. This blog is going through some challenges, but with time it think we may find that civility can occur, even with edgy styles of communication.
Good luck to those lawyers though. 😉
Nothing proves a case like the facts.
The civility rule works better than not having one.
I think civility is great but I would rather corporate lawyers swear an oath to be truthful. I have seen defense lawyers do and say some very “uncivil” things while speaking slowly, quietly, calmly and what one might call civilly. It will be interesting to see if lawyers representing humans will have more complaints lodged against them than vice versa as a strategy. Cynical I know but I’ve seen it all.
Hasn’t modern society and the role model governing bodies have become pretty much negated any positive expectation that might derive from taking an oath?
The best that can said for lawyers is that some are better at it than others. The profession has come to be too much about winning, and winning has come to be a goal accomplished by any means and at any cost.
Hopefully the Judges will have to take that Oath as well.
To the extent that civility might impair the ability of an attorney to represent an uncivil client, would a civility oath not violate a typical state bar association’s attorney’s oath?
Are the terms, ‘”adversarial” and “civility” other than mutually adversarial and foundationally bereft of mutual civility?
I fully agree with you on all fronts, especially Nancy Grace. One thing I have missed is any discussion on the admission to the CA bar of a person who is simply spitting on Federal law by refusing to obey the immigration laws. I think that this is also an important issue. Being civil is a matter of courtesy, intellect, and facilitates the process of law. How can one be an officer of the court, and simply say, I refuse to obey Federal law and constantly violate it and induce others to do the same?
Certainly worthwhile
Reblogged this on CLINGERS… BLOGGING BAD ~ DICK.G: AMERICAN !.