How friendly are learned friends supposed to be during court breaks?
<p>In a courtroom, just when everyone arrives before the hearing, how common or expected is it for the opposing lawyers to shake hands (covid aside) and have small talk pretending (or really being) friendly to each other?</p>
<p>In other words, would a lawyer who has never met the other one face to face before but has only communicated with them formally by email, be expected to just approach them before the hearing begins, shake hand and say the usual blablabla?</p>
<p>How does that extend to breaks in the middle, or when the hearing finishes?</p>

<h2>About the same as it is for engineers, doctors, architects, hairdressers, plumbers etc. to be collegiate</h2>
<p>It’s a job. You have shared interests (at least your profession). Why wouldn’t you be friendly?</p>
<p>It’s your client’s who have a dispute; not you.</p>

<p>Happens all the time, as the pool of local lawyers in certain specialties might be low.   In fact, not only can lawyers be friendly with each other, but they can also hang out after work while working on the same case.  In the often cited film &quot;My Cousin Vinny&quot;, the titular Vinny, a defense attorney, is cordially invited to go hunting with the Prosecutor who is at present, prosecuting Vinny's cousin and client for First Degree Murder.   Not only does this happen (Vinny explaining this to his girlfriend is one of the funniest scenes in the film), but upon hearing about Vinny's horrible hotel living conditions (cheap hotels that are near increadibly loud noises in the wee hours of the morning) he offer to let Vinny stay at his hunting cabin to help matters (the film goes out of the way to avert the evil/amoral attorney trope as the prosecutor is only an antagonist and not a villain and what little we learn of his past history is quite sympathetic).</p>
<p>In fact, many lawyers have relationships with the judges that can be cordial (or not.  I recently heard of a humerous story of a lawyer who's biggest selling point is that he can ensure that you will never have your case go before an infamously terrible judge... because he and the judge have a bitter personal dislike of each other that forces the judge from recusing himself from any case where the lawyer is representing a party).   In fact, there's an old addage among lawyers that &quot;Good Lawyers know the law, but GREAT lawyers know the Judge.&quot;  Basically knowing the judge's character and what arguements he'll be accepting of and what he will be not accepting of will help with getting a favorable outcome.</p>
<p>The evil or amoral lawyer trope actually stems from this because lawyers can and often on good terms with the guy who they are arguing against in a court room.   It's often like those Looney Tune cartoons where the sheep dog and the coyote beat each other up until the five pm whistle blows, they clock out, and then carpool home.</p>

<p>Not only is it permitted, <em>best practices</em> are to be friendly and civil.</p>
<p>One of the important reason that lawyers are used in the legal system is so that difficult and technical discussions over a case, with respect to settlement or procedural matters, can take place between two people whose relationship with each other is not tainted by the events that gave rise to the litigation.</p>
<p>In a system in which more than 90% of criminal cases and more than 95% of civil cases are resolved prior to trial, often by settlement, an effective lawyer needs to be able to carry on a civil and productive conversation with opposing counsel in pretty much every case. And, an ability to do that, not just in the present case, but in general, for a lawyer's entire portfolio of cases, is greatly enhanced by having at least a minimal, civil, interpersonal social relationship with opposing counsel (especially in jurisdictions where the counsel are likely to encounter each other in more than once case, which is true in all but the very largest megacities and even then only in high volume practice specialties like Los Angeles County divorces).</p>
<p>Indeed, in Colorado, lawyers for each side are required to have a general and broad ranging discussion of the case with each other in the first few weeks of the case, pursuant to Colorado Rule of Civil Procedure 16, and are required to confer and discuss with each other every single proposed motion to be filed in the case before it is filed (and certify that the conferral has occurred or been attempted in a reasonable manner as the first time discussed on the first page of every motion) in an effort to find points of agreement that can simplify the litigation, pursuant to Colorado Rule of Civil Procedure 121, § 1-15.</p>

lawyer rules-of-court professional-ethics barristers