The View from the Bench

The Practice Corner: the View from the Bench
By Daniel DeWoskin

In February, I attended a panel discussion hosted by our own DeKalb Bar Association and moderated by Phyllis Williams. The title was “A View from the Bench: Professionalism in the Courtroom,” and the panel consisted of the Honorable Gregory A. Adams of the DeKalb Superior Court, Honorable J. Antonio DelCampo of the DeKalb State Court, and Honorable Elliott A. Shoenthal of the DeKalb Juvenile Court.

Although the discussion was interesting and enjoyable to attend, there was little that should have been enlightening to practicing members of the Bar. We have all attended seminars that remind us of the importance of professionalism and even common courtesy in our work. What made this particular panel discussion worthwhile was hearing these reminders from those among us who we might think are more insulated from seeing less-than-professional behavior.

As it turns out, the judges on this panel are not the passive sort that we occasionally encounter. These men pay attention not just to the substance of the litigation before them, but also to the tone of the parties. Although it does not necessarily qualify as a waste of time, most of us should not find it refreshing to hear that judges appreciate good preparation, honesty in our dealings with the court, opposing counsel, and all parties, and integrity. Instead, what I found refreshing was to hear firsthand that the judges are paying attention.

Judge Adams pointed out that he has seen some lawyers “blur the line between advocacy and meanness.” If I recall correctly, the judge was speaking more in regard to the practice of family law, but it is clearly applicable to the practice of law in general. I know exactly what sort of conduct and mentality he is referring to, and yet the more I think on it, the more preposterous it seems for those two traits to be near one another on a spectrum. Is it possible to be so zealous in one’s advocacy that it rises to meanness? Unquestionably, whenever an attorney even comes close to having to ask himself or herself this question, he or she has lost sight of the proper role of counsel.

I freely admit that my work is very personal for me. Like all good attorneys I have ever met, I care about my clients and their cases. At times, certain aspects of the litigation are frustrating and I can find myself drawing too close to the problem to be a part of the solution. Experience has helped me to recognize when these situations begin to occur so that I can take a step back, reassess the situation, and respond accordingly and professionally. As the judges reiterated during the discussion, to do anything short of this does a disservice to our clients, to the courts, and to ourselves as lawyers. All of this can be summarized by Judge Adam’s comment that while you “are there as an advocate, do not lose sight that you are a person.”

I mentioned that this panel discussion was also a public forum. I understand and appreciate the candor of the judges on the panel, but if I had just a moment to address any members of the public who may have been in attendance, I would tell them that most, if not all, of the attorneys in the room are embarrassed to hear judges stress the importance of simple courtesy or of accurate billing. When asked about pet peeves, Judge Shoenthal mentioned inaccurate billing by attorneys and failures to show up for scheduled and noticed appearances. Judge Shoenthal added sloppiness in pleadings, such as when a lawyer cuts and pastes information without thorough review to create a document that has incorrect facts, dates of birth, or information that is presented to the court.

The latter issue is one that we all may be guilty of at one point or another. Even the best among us, with the benefit of spelling and grammar review and true attention to detail, can overlook such an error. It has always occurred to me that a danger to these sorts of mistakes lies in the message that can be conveyed to the court, opposing counsel, or even my clients about how important the case is to me. Making a mistake does not simply mean that we do not care about the quality of our work, but depending on how it is made and our reaction upon learning it others may come to inaccurate conclusions.

Of course, I find no fault with Judge Shoenthal being honest about these issues, but I would want to ensure that members of the public realize that as lawyers, we are overwhelmingly a community that winces when we see or hear about unprofessional or unethical conduct. We are human and we make mistakes, but we are also aware of how important our cases are to our clients and others.

Judge DelCampo spoke of a lawyer who came before him on a motion arguing that the particular governing law in a case was X and had been for 30 years. When the judge researched the issue after hours, he learned that X was not the law, but that Y was the law. The following day, when this lawyer was confronted with this information, the lawyer confessed dismissively that he had no authority for his previous assertion. Judge DelCampo explained that when these sorts of events take place, a lawyer’s credibility is compromised in a way that can take years to repair, if repair is even possible.

I enjoyed hearing the judges’ approaches to some litigation vary from one another. For instance, Judge DelCampo explained that he occasionally prefers to handle certain issues or impediments in litigation or discovery informally with the consent of all parties and counsel, whereas Judge Adams prefers the more formal and rigid approach of motions, records, and hearings. Both judges conceded that the legitimacy of any approach is dictated by specific circumstances, but there was clearly a lesson in the value of knowing your court just as you know your case.

Although I have not practiced law in juvenile court, I could appreciate Judge Shoenthal’s further emphasis of this point. Many of the cases he sees from day to day involve the same advocates and witnesses, which showcase the importance of adhering to customs that, at their most basic level, amount to professionalism and courtesy.

All in all, I am quite pleased with my decision to attend the discussion. When I am next before any of the judges who spoke, I am confident that the cases will be dealt with expeditiously and with the measure of concern we expect from the court.