Half an hour ago, you sent opposing counsel’s inexcusably incendiary e-mail to your client. Now in your in-box is your client’s outraged demand that you fight fire with fire. Although you are satisfied that you have been sufficiently provoked to justify a scorched earth response and you certainly know how to make one, perhaps you should first consider a simple question: is it tactically wise to do so?

We all know that few, if any, clients want wimps for lawyers. We also know that attorneys whose clients perceive them to be unable to stand up to pressure are likely to find themselves replaced and unpaid. But we know more. For example:

• Opposing counsel may well respond to your “fire” with more of her own, leading to an increasing cycle of malevolence.
• Hostility between counsel can substantially drive up fees and costs and can foreclose opportunities for early and mutually beneficial resolutions of a matter—something for which the client may subsequently seek to hold you responsible.
• Although your client and you may assume that a judge or bar disciplinarian will see things the same way that you do, there is no guarantee that this will be so. Even if you are absolutely, positively convinced that you do not live in a glass house, others may not agree that you were more sinned against than sinning. “A plague on both your houses” is often the reply.

What, then, are lawyers who refuse to give in to bombast to do? In many instances, the best and most effective response will involve firmness mixed with a heaping dose of civility.

Download to read the full article, Civility: The Ultimate Legal Weapon?

© 2011 Bloomberg Finance L.P. All rights reserved. Originally published by Bloomberg Finance L.P. in the Vol. 2, No. 1 edition of the Bloomberg Law Reports—Law Firm Management. Reprinted with permission. Bloomberg Law Reports® is a registered trademark and service mark of Bloomberg Finance L.P.

This publication has been prepared by Hinshaw & Culbertson LLP to provide information on recent legal developments of interest to our readers. It is not intended to provide legal advice for a specific situation or to create an attorney-client relationship.