Footnotes (153)



The Zeal Shortage

Anita Bernstein

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 Rules

Accepted Paper Series

Download This Paper

Date posted: May 17, 2006  

Suggested Citation

Bernstein, Anita, The Zeal Shortage. Hofstra Law Review, Forthcoming; NYLS Legal Studies Research Paper No. 05/06-24; Emory Public Law Research Paper No. 06-13. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=902288

Contact Information

Anita Bernstein (Contact Author)
Brooklyn Law School ( email )
250 Joralemon Street
Brooklyn, NY 11201
United States

Feedback to SSRN

Paper statistics
Abstract Views: 1,099
Downloads: 113
Download Rank: 138,392
Footnotes:  153

© 2014 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.  FAQ   Terms of Use   Privacy Policy   Copyright   Contact Us
This page was processed by apollo2 in 0.360 seconds