Read on Twitter
I keep hearing younger litigators identify agressiveness as synonymous with success in litigation. This is a myth. Being agressive in litigation does not make you better. In fact, being too agressive is the halmark of an inexperienced litigator.
Yes, you should advocate for your client to the best of your ability, however, many lawyers, litigators in particular, forget that litigtion is not about the lawyer. It's about the client. You are an advocate for your client, and their needs should come before your ego.
Agressiveness is not always a good quality in litigators. In fact, I think lawyers that value agression over compromise and civility do the entire legal field a disservice. There's a reason people don't like trial lawyers ....
Some of the best litigators out there are soft spoken, calm, and focused on the outcome. They know their craft and don't have to parade their agressiveness for everyone to see. It's not like you see on TV or in the movies. Litigation is not that sexy.
I am an agressive and outspoken person IRL, but let me tell you, if being soft and quiet will help me win in litigation (or negotiations), I'm not coming in swinging a bat. My best weapon is often a record of reasonableness.
So the next time you want to whip out your metaphorical penis and wave it around so that everyone can see how agressive you are, maybe don't ... think of your client and how best to serve their needs. Litigation is not a cage match, it's a chess match.
