Best Practices for Communication with Opposing Counsel to De-escalate Conflict and Avoid Accusations
To minimize conflict and preempt accusations of procedural abuse, adopt a disciplined communication strategy rooted in professionalism, precision, and transparency. First, prioritize written communication (e.g., emails or letters) to create a clear record, ensuring all requests, objections, and proposals are concise, legally grounded, and free from adversarial rhetoric. Second, explicitly frame disagreements around legal merits—citing relevant rules or case law—rather than personal attacks, and offer reasonable accommodations (e.g., staggered deadlines or phased discovery) to demonstrate goodwill. Third, avoid absolute or threatening language; instead, use conditional phrasing ("We propose...") and invite collaboration ("Would you consider...?"). For high-stakes issues, supplement emails with a brief phone or video call to humanize dialogue, but follow up with a summary to document understandings. Finally, promptly escalate unprofessional behavior to the court only as a last resort, after providing clear warnings and attempting to resolve disputes informally. This approach not only reduces tensions but also builds a record of your reasonableness, insulating you from claims of procedural gamesmanship.
