Work Matters: Five Professional Values to Live By
Professional Responsibility is in my teaching portfolio. I teach the Model Rules but also professional values. Without the second, we are left with…
April 01, 2018 at 06:00 AM
5 minute read
Professional Responsibility is in my teaching portfolio. I teach the Model Rules but also professional values. Without the second, we are left with just so much useless scaffolding. Here then are just a few of those many values with some thoughts on how to transmit them.
|No. 1 : The Value of Winning
This may seem like an odd place to start. After all, we seem to be living in a legal world in which compromise is the most cherished value, and putting up a fight the least. But Model Rule 1.2 (Allocation of Authority) states that the client sets the goals and we set the agenda to meet them. And, guess what, there are times that the client wants to fight and win.
I learned the means to teach that value from a student. We chat in the library: “I like PR. You teach it in a philosophical way.” Puzzled, I ask what she means. “Well you talk about the history of the rules and why we have it.” I realized then that I was not explaining effectively the reason for why I teach that way. Switch to the following week and my new frame: “In your career, you will be in thousands of fire fights against opposing lawyers. And I promise you that the lawyer who knows the rules and the reasons for them will have the advantage over the lawyer who just knows the rules, whether in PR or other areas.” This frame works so much better.
|No. 2 : The Value of Diligence
Seems obvious, doesn't it? MR 1.3 is direct: ”A lawyer shall act with reasonable diligence and promptness in representing a client.” Work hard, maintain a conscience, and all will be well. But this value goes deeper. It requires the lawyer to think about the client both retrospectively and prospectively. We will not live forever so, if a solo, do you have a plan for another lawyer to take over your files when you die (or are disabled)? If not, you are violating the rule.
Do you confuse “no harm” with “no foul”? In class I recently posed a hypothetical to a student: “You pull an all-nighter to get a brief filed at 5 p.m. You get it done. The client loves it. Whew! Did you violate the rule?” A wise student asks: “How long did I have to get the brief done?” I say: “One month.” He nails it: Violation.
|No. 3: The Value of Self-Sacrifice
Many of the rules are animated by this value. “Self-sacrifice” as a concept won't appear anywhere in the academic literature or the commentary to the rules or in the case law. But it's there and it's real. It is embodied in Model Rule 1.8, what I call “Personal Conflicts”: Do a business deal with a client and you must warn them that you may put your interests ahead of them; fall in love with a client and embrace delayed gratification (no sexual activity); get stiffed by a client on fees, but don't accept media rights for a high-profile case until the matter is over.
In teaching this value, I give a history lesson. The law did not start the day you entered law school. No, it stretches back over 2,000 years. You are a lawyer in Ancient Rome and you must go to the town square and “professus” to the fellow citizens that their needs came ahead of your needs. From the Latin comes “professional.”
|No. 4: The Value of Discretion
The Model Rule is 1.6, “Confidentiality of Information.” This is an absolute rule with only a few exceptions. (In teaching, I draw an unmarked outline of an Absolut Vodka bottle and challenge the students to identify it. Usually a former bartender gets it; exceptions are called “mixers,” so a rule is either straight up or with “mixers.”) It is a value because clients must be able to tell us anything and know that we will not blab. If they do not have that trust, then we cannot effectively represent them. We do this even when it hurts. (Check out “Professus” supra.) State Bar of Texas Ethics Opinion No. 663 embraces the concept that if a lawyer is slammed by a client in a social media review, she may only respond “to the extent necessary” and not do a data dump of confidential information in response.
|Value No. 5 : The Value of Loyalty
MR 1.7 deals with concurrent representation. You represent the Cowboys quarterback in contract negotiations. Jerry wants to hire you to evict box holders behind on their rent. No can do. The QB would always be wondering “Do I come first or does Jerry?” Seneca, a Stoic philosopher, wrote that “loyalty is the greatest good in the human heart.” He knew values.
But the most important value, the one that ties together the universe of values, is this: faith. The legal system works because we have faith in other lawyers and in judges and in jurors to follow the rules. To embrace the rule of law. Because no amount of sanctions or discipline can compel lawyers to follow the rules. There are not enough courts nor disciplinary committees to do that. And what is “faith”? Where do you find it? Can you draw a map? No, because it lives inside of us.
I leave you with Hebrews 11: “Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.”
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 AllThe Narcissist’s Dilemma: Balancing Power and Inadequacy in Family Law
8 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Supreme Court Will Review Constitutionality Of FCC's Universal Service Fund
- 2'It Refreshes Me': King & Spalding Privacy Leader Doubles as Equestrian Champ
- 3Class Action Filed Against Houston Health Savings Account Firm for Allegedly Confiscating Client Funds
- 4These 2 Lawyers Just Became Florida Judges
- 5'Disease-Causing Bacteria': Colgate and Tom’s of Maine Face Toothpaste 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