What is required of a "great" lawyer / justice?

[LeeSinTop]

Hello everyone. I have been looking into this question for some time and I'm finding different results online. So in your opinion, what is required of a quote on quote great lawyer / justice? What are some must haves?

[CleanHands]

A way better memory than I have.

[Hegdis]

A sense of empathy and respect for clients. A strict adherence to the professional codes of conduct. And integrity - you say what you mean, keep your word, and don’t take advantage of others when they make a mistake or have a bad day. 

[CleanHands]

1 minute ago, Hegdis said:

A sense of empathy and respect for clients.

Interestingly, when asked if she likes her clients, Marie Henein responded "I don't know. Probably not--I don't like most people. Who cares?"

I'm not saying that you are wrong, or that Henein isn't a great lawyer. I just find this interesting because it goes to the OP's point about getting different answers from different people.

[Hegdis]

You don’t need to like them. You do need to allow them the same dignity you expect for yourself. 

[epeeist]

1 minute ago, CleanHands said:

Interestingly, when asked if she likes her clients, Marie Henein responded "I don't know. Probably not--I don't like most people. Who cares?"

I'm not saying that you are wrong, or that Henein isn't a great lawyer. I just find this interesting because it goes to the OP's point about getting different answers from different people.

I thought empathy was putting yourself in other's shoes to understand. Which totally does not require liking them, only understanding them and their motivations and reasons for the behaviour in issue.

[CleanHands]

I didn't mean to derail things with a semantic argument. I agree that taken on their literal face, the two different statements aren't necessarily contradictory. But it was more the tone and subtext that I was driving at--it seemed to me at least that Henein was implying that it doesn't really matter at all how or what she thinks of her clients and that this has no bearing on her ability to be an effective advocate (I do realize I'm extrapolating and perhaps she didn't mean to go that far).

And I see both sides of the coin (as I interpreted them at least). Because I agree that empathy and respect are important from a client management perspective. But also on the criminal defence side of things I was not sentimental and I honestly believe that an ingrained appreciation of principles such as the presumption of innocence, the right to be secure against unreasonable search and seizure, etc, are sufficient for great advocacy (though not great client relations) even if one loathes their client on a personal level. But I am legitimately intrigued to hear other takes on this.

[Rashabon]

1 hour ago, LeeSinTop said:

Hello everyone. I have been looking into this question for some time and I'm finding different results online. So in your opinion, what is required of a quote on quote great lawyer / justice? What are some must haves?

It's "quote unquote" and you don't really need that in text when you can actually type quotation marks.

A great lawyer knows how to respond to their client's needs. That's the key. You can be the most technically gifted lawyer in the world but if you can't actually do what your client wants, or steer them to what is possible if their wants are not possible, you could be a good lawyer, but struggling to be great.

[123]

2 hours ago, CleanHands said:

I just find this interesting because it goes to the OP's point about getting different answers from different people.

It's an interesting question, to which I don't think there is a single answer.

First, lots of lawyers have pretty different jobs. We all overlap to an extent. Canadian lawyers go through a similar licensing process. We share professional regulators and professional responsibilities. We share a title. We usually have clients. We work at desks, and usually in front of computers. We work with the law. We therefore have some things in common, and most definitions of legal excellence would involve some overlapping features in terms of ethical grounding, technical legal ability, and client management skills. But depending on who your clients are (institutional vs individual, wealthy vs impecunious, sophisticated or not) and your practice type (broadly, litigator or solicitor, but lots of divergence and overlap within those categories), different lawyers can have very different day-to-day experiences. My retail law practice arguably has at least as a much in common with social work, as it does with commercial litigation. And to me, big law feels like a fundamentally different job. Could I be great at it? Maybe, although probably not. Would people working on multi-national corporate transactions be great at dealing with schizophrenic, meth-addicted, detained clients on $900.00 legal aid certificates? Possibly, but I seriously doubt most of them want to try. And willingness to do that work is really a prerequisite to getting good at it.

Second, area of practice aside, I've seen two lawyers be great at the same job, despite having entirely different traits. Cross-examination is a core competency for criminal defence counsel. But within that, I've seen lawyers deploy completely different traits and approaches to great effect. I've seen the textbook cross done brilliantly - tight, unrelenting, aggressive questioning, that calls into question the reliability and truthfulness of their prior testimony by giving them nowhere to hide. But one of the best crosses I've ever seen was just a perfectly pleasant defence lawyer asking seemingly innocuous questions to a witness who, completely unwittingly, repeatedly undermined the Crown's case and his own thoughts from earlier in the trial. Both great to watch. Both by diligent and prepared advocates. But beyond being well-prepared by bright legal minds, I'm not sure there are a tonne of unifying traits. There are lots of different valid approaches to providing effective advice and advocacy, and I'm not sure it makes sense to say "you need to be this or do that" to be great at practice.

Edited September 9, 2022 by realpseudonym

[LeeSinTop]

3 hours ago, Rashabon said:

It's "quote unquote" and you don't really need that in text when you can actually type quotation marks.

Thank you for the lesson. I'm glad you pointed it out or else I would have used it incorrectly in the future. 

[LeeSinTop]

.

Edited September 10, 2022 by LeeSinTop

[CleanHands]

8 minutes ago, LeeSinTop said:

What's everyone's take on this?

That you converted the thread from an interesting question/conversation to ill-advised cringe.

[LeeSinTop]

1 minute ago, CleanHands said:

That you converted the thread from an interesting question/conversation to ill-advised cringe.

Noted, thank you.