Jump to content

Social faux pas


willow

Recommended Posts

willow
  • Law Student

What are some of the common social blunders from lawyers you've seen in practice or as a student?

 

I imagine the vast majority of lawyers have above-average people skills, but I've heard some suggestions of the opposite mentioned in passing and am kind of interested in hearing more on this topic. Having a disability that impacts my social skills myself, direct examples help me out a bit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

CleanHands
  • Lawyer
29 minutes ago, willow said:

I imagine the vast majority of lawyers have above-average people skills

There are studies suggesting that lawyers have lower emotional intelligence on average than people in other professions.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

LMP
  • Law Student

I wouldn't say I've been paticularly blown away by anyone's people skills. If anything I've been suprised at some of quirks or attitudes I've encountered. 

Maybe the more client facing folks are different, but I wouldn't bet on it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, LMP said:

Maybe the more client facing folks are different, but I wouldn't bet on it. 

Maybe a little, but I wouldn’t say the majority are above average. 

I don’t know why lawyers would have above average interpersonal skills. The barriers to entry — law school admissions and licensing — contain almost no screening for personality traits. There are job interviews. But a huge premium is placed on how people test via the LSAT and law school exams. So you can have no basic table manners and still gain admission into law school and get hired and called. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

willow
  • Law Student

Maybe I have it all wrong then!

35 minutes ago, LMP said:

If anything I've been suprised at some of quirks or attitudes I've encountered. 

Would you be able to share the types of quirks or attitudes that have been surprising? As vaguely as you can (depending on how identifying it could be) of course.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Phaedrus
  • Lawyer

I've seen clerks dress down to flannel and dumb down their language to be more relatable to unsophisticated clients. I get the instinct, but it comes off cringey. 

Judges usually don't take issue with counsel using their phones at counsel table pending their appearance, but for the love of god get off Instagram/Twitter/Tiktok. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

LMP
  • Law Student
19 minutes ago, willow said:

Maybe I have it all wrong then!

Would you be able to share the types of quirks or attitudes that have been surprising? As vaguely as you can (depending on how identifying it could be) of course.

I think the biggest social blunder I see among students is how they treat support staff. 

Most people aren't outright rude (though some are) but there's a couple of folks who treat support staff as if they don't exist (until they need something).  

 

  • Like 8
Link to comment
Share on other sites

CleanHands
  • Lawyer

It's funny when opposing counsel alternate between being super aggressive, confrontational and even insulting, and being really polite and respectful and asking for cooperation and collaboration.

If your style is to be a dick, fair play as long as you can actually back it up with solid legal and advocacy skills. But don't tell me I don't know what I'm doing and I'm unreasonable one day and then super politely and nicely ask me to consent to something contentious the next. Now I both don't want to cut you any slack and I won't take your bluster seriously either.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I actually had a call today with one of our HR people about a specific plaintiff lawyer who is often a real asshole at mediation. Our plan is to only use mediators who are strong personalities, and ask them at the start to tell the person not to be an asshole. But why do people act like this? We will just walk out of the mediation from now on.

You're not doing your clients any favours by being an asshole!

And I told her that if she ever has to walk out of a mediation because someone is being an asshole, I will back her up 100% because every firm out there should know that they can't be assholes to our HR people.

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

erin otoole
  • Lawyer
4 hours ago, CleanHands said:

I could share some stories of exceptional social incompetence, but since you asked for "common social blunders," I will mention that one of the most common and one you should be most mindful of avoiding at this stage in your journey is that many law students who haven't yet secured jobs have a very transparently transactional approach to their interactions with lawyers and even other students. By which I mean, they inadvertently make it clear that other people can only be useful to them insofar as they can assist them with career advancement. 

How much blame can you put on the students? Even a Windsor single JD is staring at $19.5k a year of tuition and $60-80k in students loans, all for a "cheap" lower tier school. Just think back to the stress of missing your shot on bay street and coming to terms with no/minimal 2L or articling prospects. I have had numerous students from various schools reach out. Its very awkward, and I know what they are calling/emailing me for but I remember how impossible it all felt back in the day. They smile I smile on the Zoom what's the problem here? Should I expect the barista at Starbucks to truly care about my day? Of course not but some pleasantries are nice we all know what we are here for. 

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

CleanHands
  • Lawyer
18 minutes ago, erin otoole said:

-Snip-

Obviously there's a way to go about these things, and there's a way not to. If you can't recognize the distinction, you were probably one of the types I was referring to.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yogurt Baron
6 hours ago, willow said:

I imagine the vast majority of lawyers have above-average people skills

Weighing in here as a non-lawyer who provides support to lawyers, in case that perspective is helpful on this one:

It depends, here, what you mean by "people skills". Of the lawyers I work for, absolutely, a disproportionate number of them have big, colourful personalities - they "pop". A lot of that is just the ego of being in a prestigious profession and having been the smartest person in a lot of rooms. Many lawyers can make you like them via surface charm - but that's a different thing from emotional intelligence. There are a lot of different types of "people skills". Emotional intelligence, empathy, kindness, diligent preparation - there are clubs in your bag other than doing the Jack McCoy* thing.

*Or, you know, a reference from the 21st century or whenever.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is a lot of good advice in that post that applies to every area of law, not just criminal law. People will learn about you based on their initial interactions with you, and they will remember it, and it will forever impact the ability you have to advance your clients' interests. Maybe I disagree that your reputation is all you have - after all, you have your legal training too! - but your reputation will impact the way that you can do your job on every file.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

GreyDude
  • Law Student
On 5/18/2023 at 9:30 AM, Jaggers said:

There is a lot of good advice in that post that applies to every area of law, not just criminal law. People will learn about you based on their initial interactions with you, and they will remember it, and it will forever impact the ability you have to advance your clients' interests. Maybe I disagree that your reputation is all you have - after all, you have your legal training too! - but your reputation will impact the way that you can do your job on every file.

At the risk of seeming far too earnest, and speaking as a non-lawyer with a long history in another field, I will add that this is excellent advice for any profession, not just law. How we treat people matters, and it doesn't matter if they're the company president, the secretary, the person who operates the photocopier, the barista, or the janitor. Whether and to what degree we respect the common humanity in others gets noticed, and it forms a major part of everyone's reputation. And (this is important) while it's not impossible to fix a damaged reputation, even a minor stain on it can last for years and impede our ability to achieve even our most important goals.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Aureliuse
  • Lawyer

I agree with all of the above, I won't repeat those point, but to add some of my own.

1. Please, please, please be accurate and fair in your representations of the other side's position, especially if he or she is a self-rep in court, or if it's an uncontested, ex parte proceeding (where only one side gets to make submissions).

Few missteps and oversteps destroy your reputation as a lawyer as effectively than misrepresenting the other side's position.

THIS IS A MAJOR FAUX PAS in, I daresay, any courtroom.

If you inadvertently misrepresented, apologize immediately or correct the record.

 

2. Maintain a poker face/have thick skin. You will hear comments, rumors, views from colleagues, judges, students, clients, ex-clients, their (ex-)partners that are critical of you as a person, as a lawyer, on your appearance, dress, speech, tone, knowledge, skill etc.

Lawyers love to gossip. Judges will make comments at pre-trial or conferences you believe are wrong in law. A junior lawyer may be huffing and puffing too much that exceeds their station at court. A court clerk may mispronounce your name or forgot a task you delegated.

Don't roll your eyes, chuckle, or frown in court; or interrupt abruptly. Don't openly call into question the other's mistakes. You look like a petulant child.  It's discourteous. Clients take cues on how to behave in court from you, don't give a judge another reason to rule against your client.

 

3. Learn how to handle disagreement: in complex and difficult litigation involving novel/controversial law, you will run into interpretations or positions that you strongly disagree with.

During settlement discussions, keep a straight face and an open mind. Even on simple points, LISTEN to what the other lawyer has to say.

Please don't:

Don't call into question the other lawyer's competence to practice law,

Don't go on and on and on about how the other lawyer/he/she will lose at trial,

Don't drop names of "big shot" lawyers in a practice area and how they think the lawyer is wrong,

Don't talk about cost consequences against the lawyer's client,

Don't estimate how much that lawyer's legal fees that are being thrown away,

Don't declare how the other lawyer is wasting everyone's time,

Don't suggest the other lawyer may have ulterior motives/personal stake in the litigation,

Don't threaten a motion for refusing to agree.

(I had all of these happen to me in high conflict family law litigation)

 

A lot of litigation is about "discovery," parties are entitled to adjust their litigation position, make/amend settlements at each stage, and weigh their options from time to time.

Agree to disagree politely, narrow the issues, tell the judge what the disagreement might be. Learn to handle a diversity of views and positions.

 

4. Limit your banter in court with court staff/lawyers/judges in the hallway/courtroom - this one might be controversial.

A court DATE is ABOUT YOUR CLIENT, focus on the client.

A short polite reply to "how are you" from a court staff, a judge, a lawyer is sufficient. Don't go on about "my fishing trip/vacation in Bermuda."

Focus on making the client feel at ease. It's about them. Their case is under the microscope, but so are you. Some clients are so afraid to speak up, or correct you, or ask questions.

Clients wont understand how you won a hard argument on a weak point, but clients will understand when you offer to "debrief," spend an extra 5 minutes to give them a little prep talk, or visualize the courtroom for them.

Clients want to be heard, and wants to know that their lawyer is there for them.

Don't forget who you are, and what you do, and the professional obligations that come with it.

Edited by Aureliuse
  • Like 6
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Aureliuse said:

 

Please don't:

 

Don't go on and on and on about how the other lawyer/he/she will lose at trial,

Don't talk about cost consequences against the lawyer's client,

Don't estimate how much that lawyer's legal fees that are being thrown away,

Don't threaten a motion for refusing to agree.

 

Wait, what? How is raising cost consequences or bringing a motion if the other party doesn’t agree a faux pas? 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

LMP
  • Law Student
7 hours ago, Cool_name said:

Wait, what? How is raising cost consequences or bringing a motion if the other party doesn’t agree a faux pas? 

In my experience, as a student, it is never raised as a procedural step. But rather brandished like a blunt instrument. 

Especially if they see you're a student or junior, some OC will just jump on you with this stuff "You think I don't know the law? I've been doing this 25 years, you're going waste everyone's time and your client is going to have pay all my costs". And so on, in that same vein. 

Really not a very convincing bluff, especially when they later say off the record that they agree with the point being raised. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've had a few lawyers threaten me with motions. Sometimes I'll do some research or check with other lawyers on the motion's merit. I've usually ended up  telling counsel to file the motion and that we'll see what the Court thinks. No takers so far.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wouldn't roll my eyes in front of a decision-maker, but raising your eyebrows can be effective.

13 minutes ago, realpseudonym said:

I've had a few lawyers threaten me with motions. Sometimes I'll do some research or check with other lawyers on the motion's merit. I've usually ended up  telling counsel to file the motion and that we'll see what the Court thinks. No takers so far.

One of my biggest mentor's most common comments was "So let them file their motion". I can hear him saying it to this day, even though I haven't worked with him directly for over 10 years. Sometimes you have to just let them file their motion.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

And you may settle it after they file, but showing that you're not really afraid of it can help get you there.

But it will cost you $10K, which for the company I work for is nothing, but is not true for everyone obviously.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Chewy
  • Law School Admit
21 minutes ago, realpseudonym said:

I've had a few lawyers threaten me with motions. Sometimes I'll do some research or check with other lawyers on the motion's merit. I've usually ended up  telling counsel to file the motion and that we'll see what the Court thinks. No takers so far.

Give me 3 years and a six-pack.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Jaggers said:

I wouldn't roll my eyes in front of a decision-maker, but raising your eyebrows can be effective.

One of my biggest mentor's most common comments was "So let them file their motion". I can hear him saying it to this day, even though I haven't worked with him directly for over 10 years. Sometimes you have to just let them file their motion.

In the same vein, sometimes you just need to file a motion. A common example is lists of documents. At a certain point, you need to tell counsel that you need the list by x date or you will file a motion. You almost always then get the list as they can go to their client with a concrete deadline and concrete consequences for not meeting it.

 

3 hours ago, LMP said:


In my experience, as a student, it is never raised as a procedural step. But rather brandished like a blunt instrument. 

Especially if they see you're a student or junior, some OC will just jump on you with this stuff "You think I don't know the law? I've been doing this 25 years, you're going waste everyone's time and your client is going to have pay all my costs". And so on, in that same vein. 

Really not a very convincing bluff, especially when they later say off the record that they agree with the point being raised. 

All of that just falls more into the don’t be an asshole category IMO. It is perfectly reasonable to advise that you will be seeking costs in a letter to opposing counsel, especially if they are being obtuse and your only option is to file a motion 😋.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Aureliuse has made fantastic points that I whole-heartedly agree with.

And yes, there's an incredible power in being able to shrug and say "let's see what the judge thinks". Yes, sometimes opposing counsel will be trying to give you a heads up that your position is untenable - but I'd say at least 80% of the time they're advocating for their client by pushing you to test your confidence. The single most effective advantage you can have is not being afraid to go to trial.

I don't mean, ignore reasonable resolutions in favour of trial. I mean be confident taking your case before a judge. It still astonishes me how many lawyers will do almost anything to avoid an actual hearing. (Crown are not immune to this, although they are less likely to fall into it given their repeated exposure to the court.) If you can convince the other side that you have no trouble going to trial, they're going to seriously evaluate their file to a degree you usually won't see otherwise. Positions get more reasonable, issues get narrowed, and often both parties emerge with greater respect for the other.

As for dealing with senior counsel. You have a great advantage being a new Call: your knowledge of the law is probably much more up to date. One of the biggest pitfalls some senior counsel fall into is one day they just sort of stop absorbing changes to the law as readily as they used to. They get kind of stuck, and overly confident in an argument that served them well back in 2013. Their confidence is sincere. Their position isn't as strong as they think it is. Don't get too worried if senior counsel seems to think you don't know what you're doing - sometimes it's not you that's in for a rough hearing, especially if the law has evolved in the last five years.

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By accessing this website, you agree to abide by our Terms of Use. YOU EXPRESSLY ACKNOWLEDGE AND AGREE THAT YOU WILL NOT CONSTRUE ANY POST ON THIS WEBSITE AS PROVIDING LEGAL ADVICE EVEN IF SUCH POST IS MADE BY A PERSON CLAIMING TO BE A LAWYER. We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.