The COVID-19 pandemic has taken an enormous toll on us. It imposed a human cost: as of July 2022, more than one million Americans have reportedly died from COVID-19,¹ and even those who recovered may still suffer “a number of long-term health problems such as persistent pulmonary damage, post-viral fatigue, and chronic cardiac complications.”² It imposed an economic cost: damaging the global economy, disrupting international trade relationships, and causing unemployment. It imposed a political cost: “disrupting international politics and creating new tensions between adversaries and allies alike.”³ And it imposed a social cost: separating families, friends, and neighbors through social distancing mandates and stay-at-home orders, and preventing in-person activities like classroom learning and restaurant dining.

The social cost of COVID-19 has researchers and commentators wondering, “Has COVID-19 occasioned a crisis of civility?” and “[is] Civility dead?”⁴ As one author aptly remarked, “Less tangible, but more insidious, is the growing sign that the uncertainty, angst, isolation, and distancing of the past [many] months has emboldened a small but growing number of individuals to become more disruptive and confrontational, and less civil and tolerant in their interactions with public officials, businesses, co-workers, neighbors and strangers.”⁵ The same may be true for interactions between lawyers, as costs of the pandemic include greater disruptions to home life stemming from remote work,⁶ more requests from opposing counsel for deadline extensions, and disagreements over whether proceedings should take place in-person or virtually.⁷

But—global pandemic, or not—lawyers have an obligation to treat one another with civility and courtesy. Article VIII of the Illinois Rules of Professional Conduct imposes upon all lawyers the “obligation zealously to protect and pursue a client’s legitimate interests, within the bounds of the law, while maintaining a professional, courteous and civil attitude toward all persons involved in the legal system.”⁸ This responsibility stems from the lawyer’s role as “an officer of the legal system and a public citizen having special responsibility for the quality of justice.”⁹ Similarly, the Standards for Professional Conduct within the Seventh Federal Judicial Circuit—which have been adopted by the Northern District of Illinois¹⁰—set forth the “Lawyers’ Duties to Other Counsel,” which include “treat[ing] all other counsel, parties, and witnesses in a civil and courteous manner, not only in court, but also in all other written and oral communications.”¹¹ The seventh circuit’s standards further require lawyers to refrain from “offensive conduct,” “disparaging personal remarks or acrimony,” and “unfounded accusations of impropriety.”¹²

A lawyer’s responsibility to treat others with civility has been recognized by courts as well. For example, in Adger v. R&L Management Co., Inc., the federal district court referred to the duty to act civilly and courteously as a reminder “about how we should treat each other, as human beings as well as lawyers and judges.”¹³ In Evans v. Dart, another federal district court “note[d] with dismay the unprofessional tone of Plaintiffs’ counsel’s letter, a letter riddled with sarcastic rhetorical questions and screenshots of text messages airing interpersonal conflicts,” and remarked that “[s]uch communication reflects poorly on the legal profession and are [sic] inconsistent with the court’s expectations.”¹⁴ Similarly, in In re GSSI Liquidation, Inc., the bankruptcy court admonished the lawyers for making “rude” and “improper” arguments in violation of the seventh circuit’s standards, which “ill serve[d] their clients and adversely affect[ed] each counsel’s credibility.”¹⁵ The court cautioned that the lawyers “can rest assured that judges are not impressed or persuaded by those types of rude arguments.” The lawyers in U.S. Neurosurgical, Inc. v. City of Chicago went even further, launching “unnecessary and unfounded attacks on opposing counsel” that prompted the court to strike the offending remarks.¹⁶

While these judicial opinions serve as good reminders, ultimately, it is not the job of the judiciary to remind lawyers to act civilly. As the American Bar Association put it, “The legal profession is largely self-governing.” It is therefore each lawyer’s responsibility to ensure his or her compliance with the applicable legal, ethical, and professional duties—including the duty of civility.

Valerie Brummel is a commercial litigator with Riley Safer Holmes & Cancila LLP.