Snipe Hunting in the NDTX

All attorneys seeking to be admitted pro hac vice in the Northern District of Texas are required to read and abide by the standards of conduct set forth in Dondi Properties Corp. v. Commerce Savs. & Loan Ass’n, 121 F.R.D.284 (N.D. Tex. 1988) (en banc) (“the Dondi Opinion“).

As part of a particularly contentious pair of related cases that involved multiple motions for sanctions and motions to strike, the judges of the Northern District of Texas convened en banc “for the purpose of establishing standards of litigation conduct to be observed in civil actions litigated in the Northern District of Texas.”  The Northern District summarized the problem as follows:

With alarming frequency, we find that valuable judicial and attorney time is consumed in resolving unnecessary contention and sharp practices between lawyers.  Judges and magistrates of this court are required to devote substantial attention to refereeing abusive litigation tactics that range from benign incivility to outright obstruction.  Our system of justice can ill-afford to devote scarce resources to supervising matters that do not advance the resolution of the merits of a case; nor can justice long remain available to deserving litigants if the costs of litigation are fueled unnecessarily to the point of being prohibitive. … We now adopt standards designed to end such conduct.

The standards of practice adopted by the en banc court in Dondi, taken from the Dallas Bar Association’s “Guidelines of Professional Courtesy” and “Lawyer’s Creed,” include the following:

(A) In fulfilling his or her primary duty to the client, a lawyer must be ever conscious of the broader duty to the judicial system that serves both attorney and client.

(B) A lawyer owes, to the judiciary, candor, diligence and utmost respect.

(C) A lawyer owes, to opposing counsel, a duty of courtesy and cooperation, the observance of which is necessary for the efficient administration of our system of justice and the respect of the public it serves.

(D) A lawyer unquestionably owes, to the administration of justice, the fundamental duties of personal dignity and professional integrity.

(E) Lawyers should treat each other, the opposing party, the court, and members of the court staff with courtesy and civility and conduct themselves in a professional manner at all times.

(F) A client has no right to demand that counsel abuse the opposite party or indulge in offensive conduct. A lawyer shall always treat adverse witnesses and suitors with fairness and due consideration.

(G) In adversary proceedings, clients are litigants and though ill feeling may exist between clients, such ill feeling should not influence a lawyer’s conduct, attitude, or demeanor towards opposing lawyers.

(H) A lawyer should not use any form of discovery, or the scheduling of discovery, as a means of harassing opposing counsel or counsel’s client.

(I) Lawyers will be punctual in communications with others and in honoring scheduled appearances, and will recognize that neglect and tardiness are demeaning to the lawyer and to the judicial system.

(J) If a fellow member of the Bar makes a just request for cooperation, or seeks scheduling accommodation, a lawyer will not arbitrarily or unreasonably withhold consent.

(K) Effective advocacy does not require antagonistic or obnoxious behavior and members of the Bar will adhere to the higher standard of conduct which judges, lawyers, clients, and the public may rightfully expect.

In the words of the court, “Attorneys who abide faithfully by the standards we adopt should have little difficulty conducting themselves as members of a learned profession whose unswerving duty is to the public they serve and to the system of justice in which they practice.”

PRACTICE TIP – If you practice in the Northern District, re-read the Dondi Opinion at least once a year.  It certainly can’t hurt to remind yourself of the civility demanded by the judges in this District.