Friday, December 21, 2018

Reaffirming Civility in our Legal Community

By Honorable G. Patrick Hillary, 17th Circuit Court Family Division


During my years on the bench, I have determined that one of the most important qualities for an attorney or jurist to possess is civility. 
Anyone who has practiced law has a war story about a case that was particularly challenging as a result of an attorney or judge’s demeanor.  Without civility, court dockets would be overloaded with needless, protracted litigation, and the practice of law would be nothing but an adversarial battlefield littered with damaged relationships and exasperated litigants, along with a dysfunctional, if not destroyed, bar association.  When cases are drawn out in this manner, it costs the litigants more in attorney fees and the court in docket time.  
In my opinion, civility does not equate to simply following the canons of ethics.  One must abide by the canons to avoid suffering a grievance or perhaps losing the license to practice law; these are the minimum standards that everyone must abide by to practice law.  However, I believe it is incontrovertible that a barrister can abide by the canons and not be civil in the practice of law.  (In other words, you can follow the rules of ethics and still be discourteous!)
For years, I wanted to help maintain civility in the practice of law, and in 2016, two local attorneys approached me about just that.  We created a committee to develop a judicial education session. That committee consisted of local attorneys and judges drawing from the Grand Rapids Bar Association and Western Michigan University Thomas M. Cooley Law School Center for Civil Discourse, along with representatives from the State Court Administrative Office (SCAO) and the Michigan Judicial Institute (MJI).
We first reviewed existing civility standards and codes from different legal organizations so that we would have a broad understanding of the various civility concerns.  Many of the other codes and rules researched were specific to certain types of legal practices.  I hoped to develop civility standards that were broad enough to apply to everyone in the practice of law. 
After completing a substantial analysis of civility codes and rules from several organizations,[1] the committee synthesized all of the information into our own 10 civility standards.  The amalgamation of information to arrive at the 10 civility standards resulted in approximately 100 related subparts, which we decided to weave into the civility presentation.
10 Civility Standards
  1. I understand that an attorney’s and judge’s duty to be civil is of utmost importance and displaying civility does not equate to weakness on my part.
  2. I will follow proper protocol in and out of the courtroom, as well as assure accuracy of pleadings, statements and representations.
  3. I affirm that compliance with reasonable counsel requests will occur when practicable and aggressive representation of litigants will be done without displaying aggression towards others.
  4. I understand that being agreeable does not correlate to agreeing to be defeated and that obliterating the opposition is not part of winning.
  5. Respect will be shown at all times to litigants, participants, lawyers and judges in and out of the courtroom.  I will treat others as I would like to be treated (The Golden Rule)
  6. I will be a professional first and a businessperson second by attempting to resolve issues in person or telephonically and submitting only professional communications at all times.
  7. As an attorney or judge I assert that I will maintain control of the client or courtroom rather than allowing emotions to control the case.
  8. I assert that if constructive criticism is needed, it will be offered in private and never harshly or in public.
  9. I will cultivate a proper demeanor in actions as well as speech by understanding how I say something often means more than what is said.
  10. As an attorney or judge, I will surround myself with respected mentors, continue to actively learn civility and the law while teaching the same to others.
The committee hopes that new attorneys will take some or all of our material and subsume those lessons into their daily practice of law.  For those attorneys who have been practicing law for a few years—but perhaps without direct guidance—the civility standards can serve as an instructional process to help them develop into better attorneys.

We had the opportunity to deliver our first presentation of the project in conjunction with the Grand Rapids Bar Association on October 24, 2018.  The presentation was well attended by approximately 60 attorneys and judges.  There were attorneys from small, medium, and large firms.  The breakout sessions resulted in lively conversation and interesting input pertaining to topics ranging from dealing with the obnoxious attorney to handling a partner asking for actions that one might not think are civil.  The oral and written comments reflected that newer attorneys greatly benefitted from the discussions with experienced attorneys and judges at their tables. 
Generally, all of the evaluation comments were favorable. However, one area was overwhelmingly high.  The feedback indicated a strong desire for this topic to be considered in a longer seminar.  Based upon the evaluation feedback from our first presentation, we learned that our one hour and 15-minute presentation could have extended much longer because the breakout sessions were deemed extremely valuable and more time was desired for those purposes. 
Attendees’ comments indicated that the topic is timely as those in the legal profession are ready to embrace and reaffirm civility. There was agreement that incivility is very prevalent today, unavoidably evidenced daily between political parties in news reports.  I am optimistic that a reminder about civility will continue to serve as a positive motivator for everyone involved with the practice of law.
I have been asked to present a summary of this event at a future judicial conference.  I also plan to volunteer to present the seminar to various counties which express interest. The PowerPoint presentation will be made available to any interested parties in the future, and handouts can be obtained by contact my assistant at Kristie.Brynes@kentcountymi.gov.

Judge Hillary was elected to the bench in January of 2001.  He earned a Bachelor of Science Degree in Business Administration in 1979 and his Juris Doctorate in 1983.   Judge Hillary has practiced law since 1983 and was a sole practitioner prior to being elected.  His private practice spanned business, corporate, real estate, wills/trusts, estate planning and family law.  He served as presiding judge of the 17th Circuit Court Family Division from 2004-2009.

Judge Hillary served as a faculty member for the Michigan Institute of Continuing Legal Education, the State Court Administrative Office Child Welfare Services Division and the Michigan Judicial Institute.  He has served on numerous boards in the community and created the Parents and Children section of the Grand Rapids Bar Association. He also taught as Adjunct Professor at Davenport University and Thomas M. Cooley Law School.  Judge Hillary participated as a member of the National Child Welfare Advisory Board in Washington D.C., which assisted in the enactment of laws to protect children brought into the United States without adult supervision.


[1] Civility codes and rules reviewed included: Federal Civility Standards; Florida Bar – Practicing with Professionalism Program; American Board of Trial Advocates Civility Code; American College of Trial Lawyers Civility Standards; National Conference of Professional Responsibility; State of Utah and U.S. District of Utah – New Lawyers Training; State of Oregon New Lawyers Mentoring Program; ABA Section of Dispute Resolution – Civility and the Legal Profession; Business Law Section – American Bar Association “Business Law Today”; Georgia ICLE Materials and Georgia Commission on Continuing Lawyer Competency; Attorneys Civility Characteristics from Grand Rapids Bar Association.