This talk will explore many aspects of Nelson Mandela's biography with particular emphasis on his training and development as a lawyer. It will also describe how President Mandela practiced the skills of lawyering throughout his entire life. The talk will also focus on the deep spiritual life that Nelson Mandela developed and how this inner life continually impacted his lawyering skills as well as who he is as one of the greatest individuals of the 20th Century.
William H. Manning, Partner, Robins Kaplan, LLP
Michael L. Russell, Waller
1.0 Dual
$0 | Attendance Only (No CLE Credit)
$0 | CLE Easy Passholder
$35 | NBA Members
$89 | Non-Members
Not an NBA Member? Join the NBA and register at the member rate.
Registration is available online or by calling 615-242-9272.
If you prefer a physical registration form, you may download one here to submit with payment to the NBA.
Lawyers can be humanitarians in addition to being advocates. To be an effective lawyer, one must stand in the shoes of the client and understand what is important to them. A lawyer's overarching duty to the client, court, and public requires a burning commitment to the moral underpinnings of the legal profession, and consciousness of the economic, social, and political factors that shape the world.
From the moment we are admitted to the bar, you vow to uphold the overarching duties owed to the client, the court. and the public. You vow to "truly and honestly demean [yourself] in the practice of [your] profession to the best of [your] skill and abilities," including "demonstrat[ing] respect for the legal system and for those who serve it, including judges, other lawyers, and public officials."1
"I [] do solemnly swear or affirm that I will support the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of the State of Tennessee, and that I will truly and honestly demean myself in the practice of my profession to the best of my skill and abilities, so help me God."2
These duties are coequal - they are undeniably intertwined and coextensive. To the client: a lawyer is multidimensional, he is an advisor, an advocate, a negotiator, and an evaluator.3 To the court: a lawyer must aid in maintaining the integrity of the adjudicative process.4 A lawyer's duty to the client and court is underscored by his duty to the public: he must actively seek to improve the law, to improve access to the justice system, to improve the quality of legal services, and he must further the public's understanding of the law.5 To hold one duty over another is to disregard the foundation upon which the legal system rests upon. Without understanding how each duty is related, there is no effective advocacy. A lawyer who fails to acknowledge his professional obligation to his client, the court, and the public, acts in violation of his oath of office.6
"In the course of representing a client a lawyer shall not knowingly: (a) make a false statement of material fact or law to a third person. . .”7
While lawyers must be zealous advocates, their advocacy is not without limits - lawyers cannot lie and lawyers cannot treat others unfairly simply because it helps their client. Lawyers have a duty to be honest and true even in situations where a small lie would benefit their client.
The overarching duty described in Tennessee's oath of office is further explicated in Rule 4.1. Rule 4.1, which requires truthfulness 1n statements to others, describes a concept that not only applies to actions within the scope of legal employment, but to an ideology that may serve as a guide in the course of one's daily interactions. Under Rule 4.1, lawyers are expected to avoid misrepresentations of fact.8
- by incorporating or affirming a statement of another that the lawyer knows is false.9
- by partially true but misleading statements or omissions that are equivalent of affirmative false staternents.10
- Applies in the course of representing a client
- Applies to transactions with third parties
- Applies to statements of material fact
- Applies to knowingly false statements
"It is professional misconduct for a lawyer to ... engage in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit, or misrepresentation."11
- Applies regardless of whether a lawyers conduct involves representing a client
- Applies broadly to misconduct. whether by statement or otherwise
Lawyers are truth tellers at all times - even when not acting in their capacity as lawyers. Rule 8.4(c) describes a broader spectrum of truthfulness that extends beyond actions in the legal realm. Rule 8.4(c) heightens the standard of truthfulness and holds lawyers accountable for violations in the legal context and for any activity that indicates a lack of the characteristics necessary to practice law.12
Rule 8.4(c) suggest that a lawyer’s ethical and moral disposition is not limited to his actions in his capacity as a lawyer but must flow through his every day activity. Nelson Mandela exemplifies a legal career and life that upholds truthfulness in every breath, action, and thought. Great lawyers are more than just advocates: they are truth tellers with an unyielding loyalty to ethics.
“You can never have an impact on society if you have not changed yourself…Great peacemakers are all people of integrity, of honesty, but humility.” – Nelson Mandela
"In representing a client, a lawyer shall exercise independent professional judgement and render candid advice. In rendering advice, a lawyer may refer not only to the law but to other considerations such as moral, economic, social, and political factors that may be relevant to the client's situation."13
A lawyer must not consider how she will be enriched, but how the client will be enriched. A lawyer’s relationship to his client is analogous to a statesman's relationship to his people. As is evidenced by his life, Mandela rarely considered how he would individually be enriched as a result of his work. His client was the people of South Africa. His first consideration was always what he could do to fulfill his peoples’ needs and how they could be enriched. Lawyers have a duty to their clients to exercise their independent professional judgement. The primary principal that emerges from Rule 2.1 is that a lawyer must not allow her personal interests to impact his independence in representing a client. even where there is a conflict of loyalties.14
Rule 2.1. which is titled Advisor, identifies one of three roles that a lawyer typically embodies. While this section is rarely the subject of disciplinary action, the section functions as a guide the lawyer in his role as an advice giver, or advisor. Rule 2.1 and its comments emphasize the importance of candid advice that considers the "moral, economic, social and political factors that may be relevant to the client's situation."15 Such considerations are particularly pertinent in today's ever changing legal landscape and require lawyers to express a deep concern for their clients.
Each client carries with her a unique set of experience and concerns that if undiscussed or unacknowledged will result in ineffective advocacy. Hot button issues like race, economic status, and politics may reveal themselves as motivating factors for clients. It is a lawyer's duty to bring these considerations to light and advise their clients appropriately.
“If you talk to a man in a language he understands, that goes to his head. If you talk to him in his language, that goes to his heart.” – Nelson Mandela
This CLE handout was written collaboratively by Shui Li, an associate at Robins Kaplan LLP and Bill Manning, a partner at Robins Kaplan LLP.
1 Tenn. Sup. Ct. Rule 6 (LEXIS 2017); Tenn. Sup. Ct. Rule 8 pmbl. (LEXIS 2017).
2 Tenn. Sup. Ct. Rule 6 (LEXIS 2017).
3 MODEL RULES of PROF'L CONDUCT pmbl. (AM. BAR ASS'N 2016).
4 Id. at r. 3.3 cmt. n.2.
5 Id. at pmbl. cmt. n.6.
6 Lockett v. Bd. of Prof’l Responsibility, 380 S.W.3d 19, 30 (Tenn. 2012).
7 MODEL RULES of PROF'L CONDUCT r. 4.1.
8 Id. at r. 4.1 cmt. n.1.
9 Id.
10 Id.
11 Id. at r. 8.4.
12 Lawyers are accountable for offenses involving violence, dishonesty, breach of trust and interference with the administration of justice. Even where these offenses are minor, lawyers are still accountable. Id. at r. 8.4 cmt. n.2.
13 MODEL RULES of PROF'L CONDUCT r. 2.1 (AM. BAR ASS'N 2016).
14 Richardson-Merrell, Inc v. Koller, 472 U.S. 424, 434-435 (1985) (holding that a personal desire for vindication is not grounds for appeal because the decision should depend entirely on the client’s interest; citing Rule 2.1
15 MODEL RULES of PROF'L CONDUCT r. 2.1.
