U.R.D.C. 801

As one of the learned professions, the practice of law is founded upon

principles of fairness, decency, integrity and honor. Professionalism connotes

adherence by attorneys in their relations with judges, colleagues, litigants,

witnesses and the public to appropriate standards of behavior. The district

courts of Wyoming, in furtherance of the inherent power and responsibility of

courts to supervise proceedings before them, shall hold attorneys to the

following standards of professional behavior:

(a) Standards of Behavior in Adjudicative Proceedings. —

(1) Attorneys shall at all times treat all persons involved in adjudicative

proceedings, including litigants, witnesses, other counsel, court staff and

judges with candor, courtesy and civility, and demonstrate personal

honesty, fairness and integrity in all of their dealings.

(2) An attorney shall at all times be civil and courteous in communicat-

ing with all persons involved in the adjudicative process, whether orally or

in writing.

(3) Attorneys shall at all times extend reasonable cooperation to opposing counsel. Attorneys shall not arbitrarily or unreasonably withhold

consent to opposing counsel’s requests for reasonable scheduling or

logistical accommodations, nor shall they condition their cooperation on

disproportionate or unreasonable demands.

(4) An attorney shall not use any form of discovery, or the scheduling of

discovery, as a means of harassing opposing counsel or counsel’s client and

such conduct, in addition to representing a potential violation of the

Wyoming Rules of Civil Procedure, shall be deemed a violation of professional standards.

(5) Attorneys shall be reasonably punctual in their communications

with all persons involved in the adjudicative process and shall appear on

time for all duly scheduled events involved in the adjudicative process,

unless excused or detained by circumstances beyond their reasonable

control. When an attorney, or an attorney’s client, or a witness under the

reasonable control of an attorney, becomes unavailable for a duly scheduled event, then the attorney shall promptly notify opposing counsel and,

where appropriate, court reporters, court personnel, and others involved

in the event.

(6) Attorneys shall not initiate any ex-parte communication with a

judicial officer concerning any matter pending before the judicial officer

unless such communication is expressly authorized by (a) an applicable

rule of procedure, (b) a written order issued by the judicial officer, or (c) an

agreement between all counsel involved in the pending matter. This rule

shall not apply to communications between attorneys and appropriate

personnel of the court or tribunal concerning scheduling or ministerial

matters.

(7) Attorneys shall confer with opposing counsel and shall endeavor in

good faith to resolve disputes before seeking the Court’s intervention. This

requirement applies to the filing of motions generally, in addition to those

matters that arise under the situations addressed by this rule.

(8) When the Court is required to intervene, the Court may render any

or all of the following sanctions against an attorney who is found, after

notice and opportunity to be heard, to have violated this rule:

(a) A formal reprimand;

(b) Monetary sanctions, including but not limited to the reasonable

expenses, including attorney’s fees, caused by the attorney’s conduct; or

(c) Such other sanctions as the Court deems appropriate under the

circumstances.

(b) Courtroom Decorum. — The conduct, demeanor and dress of attorneys

when present during any court proceeding shall reflect respect for the

dignity and authority of the Court, and the proceedings shall be maintained

as an objective search for the applicable facts and the correct principles of

law.

(1) Arguments, objections and remarks shall be addressed to the Court.

(2) Counsel shall stand when addressed by the Court or when speaking

to the Court.

(3) When examining a witness, counsel shall stand at the lectern and

not walk around the courtroom.

(4) Counsel shall request permission to approach the bench or the

witness.

(5) Counsel shall instruct clients and witnesses as to appropriate

demeanor and dress.

Comment. Courts, litigants, and the public rightfully expect attorneys

to adhere to a very high standard of professional behavior. Stated posi-

tively, such behavior is exemplified by candor, courtesy, civility, honesty,

integrity and fairness in all aspects of an attorney’s involvement in the

adjudicative process. This conduct is too often overlooked by attorneys who

view themselves solely as combatants rather than professionals entrusted

with the fair and orderly administration of justice according to established

rules of procedure and substantive law. Attorneys who engage in obnoxious,

caustic, or rude behavior, or who use their professional position to demean,

degrade, or harass others involved in the adjudicative process violate the

standard of professional behavior. While it is impossible to define all

conduct violating the standard of behavior enunciated by this rule,

shouting, cursing, and the use of obnoxious gestures are each strong

indicators of a violation. Personal attacks on opposing counsel are never

appropriate.

Attorneys must strive to uphold professional standards of behavior in

order to avoid the loss of trust by the public in our system of justice. As a

self-policing profession, it is incumbent upon attorneys to demand adherence to professional standards of behavior, not only by themselves, but by

other attorneys with whom they deal. Attorneys should emphasize adherence to these standards by those whom they employ or become associated

with, including out-of-state counsel. As attorneys should always first

attempt to resolve any differences between them on their own, not every

violation of this rule warrants reporting it to the Court or tribunal.

Nevertheless, attorneys should consider it part of their professional obligation to report serious or repeated violations of the standards of behavior to

the controlling adjudicative authority. Further, judges or other adjudicative authorities should consider it part of their obligation to enforce

violations of this rule, irrespective of how they became aware of the

violation.

This rule should not be construed by attorneys as creating another

avenue for filing unnecessary or inappropriate motions. Rather, it is

expected that adherence to this rule will obviate a wide variety of motions

that result in unnecessary demands upon the Court’s time and resources.

The mere fact that this rule has been adopted should provide incentive

enough to eliminate the misconduct at which it is directed. Rarely should

it be necessary for the Court to sanction an attorney for conduct in violation

of this rule.