Be A Passionate Advocate, But Don’t Take Anything Personally
Have passion for your work, but don't take personal offense when you disagree with your adversary.
Do not make it personal. It is always a mistake. It is great to have passion for your work and to be a zealous advocate, but to do so does not require you to either express your personal opinions or take personal offense when you disagree with your adversary.
I have been litigating now for over seventeen years, a good portion of them in the contentious and often dramatic areas of employment discrimination and criminal law, first as a prosecutor and now as a seasoned defense attorney. Many of these cases present issues that are personal to the litigants on both sides. Most people do not like to be accused of discrimination or a crime, no one likes it when their employer gives them the boot, and every prosecutor likes to get the bad guy. Even when emotions run high in these cases, the most effective litigators I have seen are the ones who fight like hell for their side, but never take it personally.
I recently dealt with a midlevel associate on the defense side of an employment discrimination case who failed to keep his emotions in check. The associate took over settlement negotiations when the partner on the case took ill. Throughout the case, as expected, each side had very different positions on the reason for the plaintiff’s dismissal – the defendants were adamant it was because of incompetence, and I was equally adamant it was disability discrimination. The associate on the case defended most of the depositions, and he made his personal opinion about the plaintiff quite clear on many occasions. His clear bias likely originated with a relative of his in the same profession whose experience he compared to the plaintiff’s. Rather than evaluate the facts in our case independently, this attorney simply could not see past his own preconceptions. While I was able to clearly evaluate the challenges in the plaintiff’s narrative, he simply could not see the weaknesses in the defendants’ position to properly evaluate their potential exposure to liability. The facts of this case were personal to him, and he did not hide that he was personally offended by the discrimination claim. As a result, this associate enabled his client to stall settlement discussions, which lowered the overall value of the settlement for both sides. Fortunately, I was able to force negotiations to move forward before too much damage was done. As much as I liked, sympathized with, and fought for the plaintiff, I was able to see both sides clearly, and most importantly, that her position was not clear-cut. My emotions were in check, so I was finally able to get her a fair settlement despite my adversary’s dislike for her.
The Business Case For AI At Your Law Firm
Another example is when I could have taken an attorney’s opinion personally but fortunately avoided the trap. I, along with my stellar colleagues at our firm, was defending an emergency petition brought under the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction. After several days of emotional testimony and heated cross-examination, the petitioner decided, much to the chagrin of his counsel, to withdraw his petition with prejudice. In simple terms, my team out-litigated the petitioner. Rather than go quietly, petitioner’s counsel leaned over to me and asked if I knew the judge outside of the courtroom. He explained that he thought we might socialize outside of the court because the judge and I were both Latino and members of the Puerto Rican Bar Association. In other words, he likely believed we did not prevail, but simply got favoritism from the judge that forced his client’s hand. Insert shock here _______________. Although my body temperature instantly skyrocketed, and I bit a hole in my tongue (yes, I was offended), I took a breath and politely said no. Of course, before he made that comment, throughout the trial, petitioner’s counsel had been disrespectful to the judge, had insisted that we had no chance of prevailing on our defense, and was clearly offended that we were asserting any defense at all. He made a point of reminding us that he was an “expert” in the field. He took our zealous advocacy and the fact that we ultimately won as a personal affront. My team rose above and since we kept our cool and our professional demeanor, we served our client well.
Yes, love your work and fight like hell for your clients, but do not take anything personally. At the end of the day, even attorneys are just regular people, with regular lives, who provide a service to our clients for a living. Taking any of what happens in our cases and in the courtroom personally is not effective, nor is it zealous advocacy. It is just counterproductive, and life is just too short for any of us to waste our time on it.
Christine A. Rodriguez is of counsel to the firm Balestriere Fariello and successfully represents individuals and small businesses in all manner of employment discrimination, civil rights, criminal defense, civil litigation and commercial litigation matters. She also advises small businesses on all aspects of legal matters from contract to employee issues. You can reach her by email at christine.a.rodriguez@balestrierefariello.com.
Sponsored
The Business Case For AI At Your Law Firm
Law Firms Now Have A Choice In Their Document Comparison Software
Generative AI In Legal Work — What’s Fact And What’s Fiction?
How Transactional Lawyers Can Better Serve (And Maintain) Their Clients
AI’s Impact On Law Firms Of Every Size
