There’s no such thing as a free lunch. There is, however, such a thing as a court-ordered one, as two counsel in Birmingham, Alabama, found out in December 2024.
In McCullers v. Koch Foods of Ala. LLC, Chief U.S. District Judge David Proctor found one counsel’s conduct to be “wholly inappropriate”, “petty and uncooperative” in rejecting a short extension of time before the Thanksgiving holiday. In a scathing judgment, Judge Proctor characterised the refusal as “petty gamesmanship”, reminding both parties that “professional courtesy really costs nothing”.
In this instance, professional discourtesy did cost something: in an attempt to foster better relations between counsel going forward, Judge Proctor ordered the following:
“on or before December 31, 2024, counsel for both Plaintiff and Defendants are to go to lunch together. Plaintiff’s counsel will pay the bill; Defendants’ counsel will leave the tip. The parties will discuss how they can act professionally throughout the rest of this case. Within ten (10) days of the lunch, the parties SHALL file a joint report describing the conversation that occurred at lunch and the amount of the tip”
McCullers serves as a reminder to all legal professionals that civility and professionalism should be maintained at all times. Just because the relationship between lawyers’ respective clients may have deteriorated, those lawyers’ conduct should not follow suit.
The SRA code of conduct demands that all lawyers in England and Wales should treat colleagues “fairly and with respect” and not waste the Court’s valuable time. The Chancery Guide likewise obliges the parties to liaise and cooperate to promote efficient litigation, rather than wasting both the Court’s time and the clients’ costs by engaging in petty squabbles.
In the case of McCullers, the two counsel did go to lunch. Their filed joint report confirmed that “The discussion covered the practice of law, families, some big-ticket items for the 2024 holiday season, every one’s small town bona fides, and the plan for communication going forward in this matter”, and that “A healthy dialogue regarding professional norms ensued”. The bill came to $74: as ordered, this was paid by McCullers’ counsel, and Koch Foods’ counsel left a diplomatic and generous tip which also totalled $74.
Let us hope that those two Alabamian counsel are now getting along swimmingly. Looking closer to home, litigation in England and Wales is, in our experience at least, usually conducted on a civil and professional basis between the parties’ respective legal terms.
Nevertheless, we have a long list of lunch locations that we would like to visit, and so would encourage any opposition counsel who are feeling particularly intransigent to take their frustrations out on us as opposed to anybody else.
