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
LAWYER, n. One skilled in circumvention of the law.
bill – at least give ambrose bierce credit for the quote.
I gotta go with Schulte on that one, and I hope he’s right. It may be the one of the forms of political statements one can make at no cost.
I gotta go with Schulte on that one, and I hope he’s right. It may be the one of the forms of political statements one can make at no cost.
Paul: “it appears that you can flip off cops according to the 2nd Circuit.”
Well, no. Had you read the story, you’d see that they just overturned the dismissal and let the suit go forward.
Supak – if you read the decision, they supported his right to flip the officer off.
“a shot in the dark”
My hunter safety course taught me not to do that.
Paul: “Could you enlighten us?”
I doubt it.
I will admit it was a shot in the dark. Sometimes we hope against hope.
Nick, you keep saying that, and I keep telling you I don’t care about clicks. If I did, I wouldn’t be wasting my time in here with you guys.
supak – I cannot understand why you waste your time with us? Could you enlighten us?
Paul, of course assault is illegal. That was my point. I think it should stay that way.
“I have no problem with people flipping people off.”
Good, because I was flipping you off last time we talked.
every = ever – geez, need to clean my glasses again.
terrible = terribly
Paul, you want to talk about politicians doing it, I started with Rockefeller, but W did it. Cheney had some pretty choice words for various people, even while on the Senate floor.
Now, do you want to play “holier than thou” or do you want to argue the merits of the case?
I suggest that flipping off anyone should be legal.
I have been assaulted for it.
Assault should be illegal.
Supak – someone could overrule me here, but I think assault is illegal in all 50 states. I have no problem with people flipping people off. I have done it myself, but usually to friends who are getting snotty. I don’t think I have every flipped someone off where I thought they would be terrible offended by it.
Paul Schulte:
“You guys know that some attorney is going to challenge this as an affront to ‘free speech.’”
Silly Paul.
It’s Money = Speech
not
incivility = speech
Didn’t Nelson Rockefeller fight in court for his right to flip off some hecklers (hippies)?
I guess that right doesn’t apply in court.
We’ll see if it applies to flipping off cops…
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/04/nyregion/obscene-gesture-produces-6-years-of-legal-battling.html
“He later filed a civil rights lawsuit, and although a lower court judge dismissed the case, the prestigious United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit in Manhattan reversed that decision on Thursday, ruling that Mr. Swartz’s lawsuit can go forward.”
Supak – it appears that you can flip off cops according to the 2nd Circuit. And according to the police chief, it is not uncommon in that little town. The President of the United States uses the hidden finger to flip people off, there are several photographs of him doing it.
I thought the Judge would handle civility in court.
Adding the civility language to the oath can’t hurt, however, I am not sure it will help much. The vast majority of attorneys that I have interfaced with over 32 years of practice have been civil and reasonable. However, it only takes a few to spoil the record.
leejcaroll
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
…
==================
Anecdotal.
The constitution is a civility rule.
Civility rights.
Sorry you got sold out.
That violates your civility.
It is a fact.
You guys know that some attorney is going to challenge this as an affront to ‘free speech.’
Annie,
“posting other commenters (liberals) real names and professions, where they lived and even their children’s names and workplaces. It was a Mad Max scenario in which some commenters were threatening other commenters with physical violence”
I’d argue there’s a difference between incivility and violations of privacy and terroristic threatening.
But no, I wasn’t on Althouse. I did get in some trouble for calling out BS at Intrade, though.
I’m not sure “Dignity, integrity and courtesy” will beat out a prosecutor who is running for re-election.
Scott, have you ever been on the Ann Althouse blog? It got so bad there that there were commenters (conservative loons) that were posting other commenters (liberals) real names and professions, where they lived and even their children’s names and workplaces. It was a Mad Max scenario in which some commenters were threatening other commenters with physical violence and more. With the extremists out there, I’m glad for a modicum of civility and protection from stalkers.
Leon Drozd:
“I think it was Maya Angelou who said that people will remember how you made them feel more than what you had to say.”
The actual quote from Maya Angelou is:
“I’ve learned that people will forget what you said, people will forget what you did, but people will never forget how you made them feel.”
Precisely why I try to make Republicans angry. It’s the least they deserve.