Vt. R. Prof. Cond. 3.2
A lawyer shall make reasonable efforts to expedite litigation consistent with the interests of the client.
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 advocates. 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.
Vt. R. Prof. Cond. 3.2
The Comment to V.R.P.C. 3.2 is amended to conform to the changes in the Comment to Model Rule 3.2. The ABA Reporter's Explanation is as follows:
TEXT:
The Commission is not recommending any change to the Rule text.
COMMENT:
[1] The Commission concluded that the reference in the second sentence to indulging delay "merely for the convenience of the advocates" is too restrictive and modified it to recognize that there are circumstances where it is acceptable for a lawyer to request a postponement for personal reasons.