The Friendly Bar series, No. 1: Do not define a lawyer by one case

Law360 Canada (June 16, 2025, 12:32 PM EDT) --

Concillia Muonde

In the legal profession, it is all too common for lasting impressions of a colleague to be formed based on a single file or interaction. Whether it is a difficult case, a tense negotiation or an adversarial court conference, that one experience often comes to define a lawyer’s entire professional identity. Informal whispers such as “They are unreasonable” or “They are unprofessional — avoid them” circulate rapidly, ultimately hardening into a reputation that may be undeserved and unrepresentative.

Advocacy in context

Such impressions are rarely reflective of the complexities underlying legal practice. Lawyers operate within demanding circumstances: evolving facts, time-sensitive deadlines and clients with varying degrees of co-operation. The conduct demonstrated on one file often mirrors the challenges unique to that matter, rather than the lawyer’s overall character or ethics.

Our profession requires us to zealously advocate for our clients within the boundaries of the law. This can necessitate firmness and strategic decision-making that, when viewed out of context, may appear unyielding or aggressive. To judge a lawyer solely by one case ignores the broader reality of their competence, judgment and professionalism.

The impact of digital narratives

In today’s digital era, online reviews and informal commentary contribute significantly to perceptions of lawyers. Websites offering client ratings, Google reviews and discussions within professional circles all shape reputations, often before any direct interaction has occurred. Unfortunately, these narratives frequently reflect client dissatisfaction stemming from unmet expectations or misunderstandings, rather than an objective assessment of legal skill or ethics.

When counsel accepts a new file, it is customary to undertake discreet due diligence, including inquiries and review of reported decisions. However, it is important to remember that clients who have cycled through multiple lawyers may leave a trail of subjective criticisms that do not fairly represent any single lawyer’s capabilities.

Lessons learned and professional responsibility

Early in my career, I encountered referrals accompanied by disparaging remarks about prior counsel. I initially believed I would be the one to “resolve” the issues. With experience, I came to appreciate that many of those earlier lawyers were competent professionals whom I later respected and consulted. This revelation underscored the importance of withholding judgment based solely on incomplete information or one-sided accounts.

As members of the legal profession, we have an ethical duty not to perpetuate reputational harm based on limited encounters or client complaints. The full scope of a lawyer’s work, including their conduct over time and across various matters, must be the foundation of any assessment.

The Rules of Professional Conduct

The Rules of Professional Conduct offer critical guidance on this topic. They emphasize fairness, context and proportionality in evaluating lawyers’ behaviour. Isolated incidents are not grounds for censure; rather, it is sustained patterns of misconduct that undermine public confidence in the profession.

The adversarial nature of legal advocacy is acknowledged, along with the necessity for zealous representation. Civility, integrity and respect are mandated, but perfection is not expected. The rules prohibit personal attacks and unsubstantiated allegations, ensuring that commentary on colleagues is responsible and evidence-based.

Towards a more respectful profession

We must be vigilant not to let anecdotal judgments calcify into accepted truths that damage our profession’s integrity. The lawyer who appeared inflexible on a file may have acted under challenging instructions. The opposing counsel who seemed difficult may have been protecting important legal principles. Recognizing these nuances fosters a more respectful and collegial professional environment.

Let us commit to thoughtful, measured assessments that consider the whole lawyer, not just their most difficult file. In doing so, we uphold the profession’s dignity and better serve the public interest.

This is part one of a series.

Concillia Muonde, B.Sc. (Econ), B.S.W. (Hons), M.S.W., J.D., is the founder and principal of Concillia Muonde Law Office, a family law practice based in Ottawa. Drawing on a multidisciplinary background in law, social work and economics, she brings a trauma-informed, client-directed approach to resolving family law matters. Her practice is focused on supporting survivors of family violence, LGBTQ+ clients and others navigating complex parenting and relationship breakdowns.

The opinions expressed are those of the author and do not reflect the views of the author’s firm, its clients, Law360 Canada, LexisNexis Canada or any of its or their respective affiliates. This article is for general information purposes and is not intended to be and should not be taken as legal advice.

Interested in writing for us? To learn more about how you can add your voice to Law360 Canada, contact Analysis Editor Yvette Trancoso at Yvette.Trancoso-barrett@lexisnexis.ca or call 905-415-5811.