The Zeal Shortage
Brooklyn Law School
Hofstra Law Review, Forthcoming
NYLS Legal Studies Research Paper No. 05/06-24
Emory Public Law Research Paper No. 06-13
Although the duty of zealous advocacy enjoys nominal approval in most state bar rules and the secondary literature, today the majority of writings about zeal in the practice of law present zeal in a negative light. Critics use this word to object to lawyers' dishonesty, hyperpartisanship, aggressive or confrontational work styles, rudeness, and disregard for the interests of adversaries, the courts, and the public. This article, part of a Hofstra University symposium, builds on the literature that praises zealous advocacy (much of it written by symposium honoree Monroe Freedman) to identify a shortage of zeal in American legal practice and identifies legal education as a culprit. Arguing that new rules of professional responsibility could enhance the supply of zealous advocacy, the article endorses the Massachusetts variation on Model Rule 1.3, and presents a new Model Rule 1.18(e) with comments.
Number of Pages in PDF File: 34
Keywords: zeal, zealous advocacy, professionalism, pro bono, legal education, lawyers, Model RulesAccepted Paper Series
Date posted: May 17, 2006
© 2014 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
This page was processed by apollo2 in 0.360 seconds