I was recently assisting one of our insured lawyers who found herself in a difficult situation. Opposing counsel, a relatively young lawyer, believed that her production of documents in a litigation matter was incomplete. Rather than picking up the phone to discuss his concerns or attempting to resolve the issue informally, he immediately sought sanctions. Throughout the dispute, he repeatedly communicated with our insured lawyer in a demeaning and condescending manner, both in correspondence and in conversations.

As I listened to the facts, I found myself thinking about an issue that deserves more attention within our profession: the difference between zealous advocacy and incivility.

Some lawyers seem to believe that going for the jugular at every opportunity makes them effective advocates. They approach every disagreement as a scorched-earth conflict that must be won at all costs. They are more interested in dominating opposing counsel than efficiently advancing their client’s objectives. They mistake hostility for strength and discourtesy for toughness.

In reality, incivility rarely advances a client’s interests. The lawyer who immediately escalates a disagreement without first attempting a conversation often increases costs, delays resolution, and creates unnecessary conflict. The lawyer who sends insulting emails or adopts a demeaning tone may gain temporary satisfaction but usually damages credibility in the process. Judges, clients, and opposing counsel can often distinguish between a lawyer who is confidently advocating for a position and one who is simply being difficult.

The irony is that civility is often the more effective strategy. Most disputes in litigation involve reasonable disagreements. A quick phone call can frequently resolve a discovery issue that might otherwise consume hours of attorney time and thousands of dollars in fees. Professional relationships built on mutual respect often allow lawyers to solve problems efficiently, negotiate practical solutions, and focus their energy on the issues that truly matter.

Litigation is, by its nature, an adversarial process. Lawyers have an obligation to advocate for their clients and protect their clients’ interests. But litigation also requires a surprising amount of collaboration. Lawyers must work together to schedule depositions, exchange discovery, negotiate protective orders, resolve procedural disputes, and, in many cases, explore settlement opportunities. When opposing counsel approach these tasks professionally and respectfully, cases move more efficiently, costs are reduced, and clients are often better served. Lawyers can be adversaries on the merits while still being collaborators in the process.

There is also a larger point. The legal profession is surprisingly small. The lawyer you insult today may be opposing counsel again next month. A few years from now, that lawyer may become a referral source, a mediator, a judge, a law partner, or even a client. Careers are long, and reputations have a way of following lawyers wherever they go.

None of this means lawyers should be passive. Zealous representation remains an important professional obligation. Lawyers should advocate forcefully for their clients, raise legitimate concerns, pursue appropriate motions, and hold opposing parties accountable when necessary.

But zealous advocacy and incivility are not the same thing. A lawyer can be firm without being rude. A lawyer can disagree without being disagreeable. A lawyer can pursue sanctions when warranted while still treating opposing counsel with professionalism and respect.

The most effective lawyers I have encountered over the years are rarely the loudest or the most combative. They are the lawyers who combine competence with professionalism. They understand that relationships matter, that credibility and reputation matter, and that treating people with respect is not a sign of weakness. It is a sign of confidence.

The legal profession is built on relationships. We should never forget that lawyers can be adversaries on the merits while still being collaborators in the process.