by Robert G. Riegel Jr. and Adam G. Adams, III
Co-Chairs, 4th Circuit
Professionalism Committee
Some of you have been saying that you are tired of reading and hearing about professionalism.
It is true that the subject has been heavily treated in a general way in periodicals like this and The Florida Bar Journal for the last few years. JBA President Tom Beverly’s recent column examined some of the reasons for this and encouraged participation at the upcoming Judicial Bar Symposium on Professionalism set for Feb. 21 from 2-5 p.m. at the Hilton.
Let me take just a minute of your time to expand upon the reasons — in addition to getting 3.5 hours of hard-to-find CLE credit for ethics/professionalism and hearing Bill Sheppard as Moderator — that you should definitely attend.
First, if you are tired of just reading about professionalism and would like to be in an environment where lawyers and judges engage in substantive discussions about real-practice issues, this Symposium is perfect. Last year’s Symposium featured over 30 judges and over 100 lawyers who analyzed various situations involving professionalism issues in litigation which you have either encountered before or could any day.
At this year’s Symposium, we expect to again have many judges, including Supreme Court Justices Harding and Lewis, First District Court of Appeal Judges Van Norwick and Webster, U.S. District Court Judges Nimmons, Schlesinger and Adams, several U.S. magistrate judges and numerous circuit and county court judges from the 4th Judicial Circuit. This mixing of lawyers with Federal and State court trial and appellate judges and justices provides a terrific opportunity to understand how litigation issues that involve the decorum, integrity, and strategic ploys of litigators are analyzed and handled by both judges and lawyers.
Second, the issues to be discussed in an open-forum environment this year are meaty ones, including problems such as a) attorneys expressing or implying in trial that opposing counsel has been trying to influence a witness’ testimony, b) situations where an attorney in fact has tried to improperly influence a witness’s testimony, and c) lawyers calling a witness a liar in closing argument. We also will look at issues relating to inadvertent disclosures, rude conduct by an attorney in a deposition, and factors related to the appointment of a special master when the process is, or appears to be, being abused.
Third, whether you like to be outspoken in a large group or prefer to interact in a smaller group, there is a place for you in this Symposium. We will have tables with lawyers from different practices and judges from different levels of state and federal courts, and issues will be discussed at the small group level and then comparisons made in the large group. The first two years of this Symposium proved that there is often significant disagreement between lawyers, and even between judges, about how to handle some of these litigation issues. You have a unique opportunity to listen to, and to provide input on, these important questions.
Finally, the Symposium concludes with an open forum where you can raise your own issues or dilemmas for analysis by fellow litigators and many of the judges before whom you appear. Some of our most interesting issues in the past have come from the audience as the Symposium has developed or in the open forum, so be thinking about situations you have concerns about. And that points to a final reason for you to be present.
If you are not, who knows if your opponent in your big case will be getting input on the sticky issue you have had with him or her?