Home › South Carolina › South Carolina Rules of Professional Conduct › Rule 3.2

Court Rules Network • courtrules.net

S.C. R. Prof. Conduct 3.2

Not legal advice. Verify against official sources before relying on this text in any legal matter.

Rule 3.2 Expediting Litigation

← Previous Rule 3.1: Meritorious Claims and Contentions Next → Rule 3.3: Candor Toward the Tribunal

Rule Text

A lawyer shall make reasonable efforts to expedite litigation consistent with the interests of the client.

Plain-English Summary (for reference only — not a substitute for the rule text above)

This summary is not the rule. The rule text controls.

Lawyers must work to keep cases moving forward without unnecessary delays. If a lawyer can push a case toward resolution faster while still doing right by their client, they need to do that instead of dragging things out.

This rule exists because slow cases hurt everyone. They cost more money, take up court time, and leave people waiting longer for answers. A lawyer cannot stall a case just to wear down the other side, run up legal fees, or gain some unfair advantage.

That said, the rule does allow lawyers to take the time a case actually needs. Some cases are complicated and require careful investigation, negotiation, or preparation. The rule does not punish lawyers for that. It only stops them from causing delays that serve no real purpose except to make things harder or slower for the other person involved.

Committee Notes

Comment:

[1] Dilatory practices bring the administration of justice into disrepute. Although there will be occasions when a lawyer may properly seek a postponement for personal reasons, it is not proper for a lawyer to routinely fail to expedite litigation solely for the convenience of the lawyer. Nor will a failure to expedite be reasonable if done for the purpose of frustrating an opposing party's attempt to obtain rightful redress or repose. It is not a justification that similar conduct is often tolerated by the bench and bar. The question is whether a competent lawyer acting in good faith would regard the course of action as having some substantial purpose other than delay. Realizing financial or other benefit from otherwise improper delay in litigation is not a legitimate interest of the client.

← Previous Rule 3.1: Meritorious Claims and Contentions Next → Rule 3.3: Candor Toward the Tribunal