If you want, do sign in or sign up and>> follow the discussion
So here was the question:
How had the court's perception of pro se litigation improved
in recent years?
And here are many of the responses:
Greg Bobbs •
Darella,
I can only speak from my experience. If you walk in prepared, knowing the applicable law and rules, I have been treated the same as any attorney. After a couple of motions and hearing I have had judges ask when I retired as an attorney. they are more than a bit surprised to hear I have never been one.
One Partner in a law firm tried to hire me after a long and tough hearing on a motion to compel discovery (I won). She and her partner thought I was an attorney.
I have to say I have not been ever treated unfairly by a judge. In fact the opposite is true.
My first jury trial I made a procedural error on a document entering it into evidence, minor but the other side screamed like a wounded rabbit.the Judge said he would allow it into evidence " I was pro Se and deserved some latitude.
I also have had my butt chewed by Judges, but no worse than any attorney. Cant say it was not deserved as I was pushing pretty hard!
I think it is all in knowing the rules and law. show a judge you are equal to any attorney and they will treat you as one.
One advantage I have discovered as a pro se is you are a wild card to the other side. they can not predict what you will do--you want to win---not make billable hours.
For most attorneys it is a business, it is not about winning.
I can only speak from my experience. If you walk in prepared, knowing the applicable law and rules, I have been treated the same as any attorney. After a couple of motions and hearing I have had judges ask when I retired as an attorney. they are more than a bit surprised to hear I have never been one.
One Partner in a law firm tried to hire me after a long and tough hearing on a motion to compel discovery (I won). She and her partner thought I was an attorney.
I have to say I have not been ever treated unfairly by a judge. In fact the opposite is true.
My first jury trial I made a procedural error on a document entering it into evidence, minor but the other side screamed like a wounded rabbit.the Judge said he would allow it into evidence " I was pro Se and deserved some latitude.
I also have had my butt chewed by Judges, but no worse than any attorney. Cant say it was not deserved as I was pushing pretty hard!
I think it is all in knowing the rules and law. show a judge you are equal to any attorney and they will treat you as one.
One advantage I have discovered as a pro se is you are a wild card to the other side. they can not predict what you will do--you want to win---not make billable hours.
For most attorneys it is a business, it is not about winning.
Michael Henri; Glasgow •
I'm involved pro se w/ a suit against a city
police officer, and his perjured testimony, here in alaska.I've just
recently been made aware of private Party Attorney General.
a term, that should be researched, I did it's amazing!!
a term, that should be researched, I did it's amazing!!
Jurisdictionary ... •
Beware of the "private party attorney general"
scheme. The only attorney general with any "legal" power is the one
duly appointed by law ... not just anyone. It's so much easier and wiser
to LEARN "How to Win in Court" according to established rules, rather
than jumping at the first too-good-to-be-true sounding scheme you
discover on the internet.
http://www.Jurisdictionary.com
http://www.Jurisdictionary.com
albert clay •
well, years ago, I worked for a post conviction
project and was a lay person for the innocent and they let me sit and
help and explain motions, Fed court. Fed Magistrate Bradbury in Newport
News Va was by the book, the facts and law will prevail,(i.e. fair)
(that was only within the scope of what I was involved). However, in
South Carolina once "winning," going past my lawyers in Beaufort County
SC, the state court, after winning a case "fast" I have been prejudiced
and black balled, orders are made and mailed to opposing counsel, not
me, my name was forged to put me into a contract by Identity thieves,
who got themselves into a informant potion for the drug task force,
Clearly, this has been ex-parte among the "local" and being pro se has
been a problem, they want a lawyer, most play the game here "give you
away" so that lawyer will make sure you case and witnesses never get
heard. I have sat and watched, they'll let some who don't know the law
or what they are doing be heard, and "kindly" depose of them (and it's
usually correct because they have no case, or don't know what facts are
needed to win) If in this area, they treat you like something stuck to
the bottom of their shoe. I believe that most of the judges only know
the way things are done "and" don't know the "real" law very well. One
of the judges I had dealt with when she was an attorney, opposing, I
showed her how she could get a settlement without manufacturing perjury,
they used my suggestions then forced my insurance Co to kick in extra
money anyway, now this person is a judge. I know what she is capable of
first hand.
Art Hill •
I have to agree with Greg Bobbs. As long as a
lay person has done their homework and doesn't go at it unprepared, they
should expect to be treated fairly. However, Judges don't have time to
baby sit lay people who have no desire to learn and apply the rules of
procedure and local rules of the court. They can't help a lay person
win their case prejudicing the opposing side....that's just not fair.
However, lay people should always be aware that when they are not represented by an attorney, opposing attorneys can play tricks and some may be involved in ex parte communications with the judge. Assume that most judges and attorneys play by the rules. Judges should always be fair and neutral. Attorneys work for their clients and they're in it to win it. They will high a much higher degree of confidence against a lay person....but a lay person who appears to know what they're doing will reduce that level of confidence. The best defense is a good offense....and jurisdictionary provides an excellent resource for getting a lay person up to speed in a short period of time.
However, lay people should always be aware that when they are not represented by an attorney, opposing attorneys can play tricks and some may be involved in ex parte communications with the judge. Assume that most judges and attorneys play by the rules. Judges should always be fair and neutral. Attorneys work for their clients and they're in it to win it. They will high a much higher degree of confidence against a lay person....but a lay person who appears to know what they're doing will reduce that level of confidence. The best defense is a good offense....and jurisdictionary provides an excellent resource for getting a lay person up to speed in a short period of time.
Ken Pallante •
Darella, my experience has been that (if well
prepared) - you generally will get a decent shake from the judge. I have
prevailed in over 25 cases over the last 30 years. Many of these were
on behalf of others that I assisted. However, where pro se litigants are
at a distinct disadvantage is before you ever get to court. When it is a
criminal or traffic violation -- no DA or prosecutor on earth seems
to want to enter into plea agreement when you are representing yourself.
They are hell-bent on getting you to pay a fellow member of their
fraternity.
This happens every single month in the courthouse of my own, little, town: Lake Winnebago, MO. Five years ago I received a ticket for speeding (7 mph over the limit). BTW, our tiny town abuts a state highway and that highway is our city's cash cow. Anyway, one hour before court was to begin (once per month - municipal court) - I lined up at the office door of the "prosecutor" (which is a private attorney hired by the city) with all of the attorneys representing those folks charged with violations. One at a time they would speak with the prosecutor, come to a quick plea and leave the courthouse after paying a fine. When I stepped into the prosecutor’s office to make a "plea" deal, he said: "I don't recognize you, what is your Missouri bar number?" When I told him I was representing myself, he immediately said that I was not allowed to represent myself in plea negotiations! He refused to enter into a plea deal unless I hired an attorney. If I did not hire an attorney I would have to represent myself before the judge at trial.
Fortunately, I spotted a neighbor in the audience who was an attorney (insurance law). I asked, "Will you represent me in a plea?" He said yes and 5 minutes later I had pled down to a non moving traffic violation and paid a $75 fine. That the prosecutors do this is a well known fact here. That is wrong.
This happens every single month in the courthouse of my own, little, town: Lake Winnebago, MO. Five years ago I received a ticket for speeding (7 mph over the limit). BTW, our tiny town abuts a state highway and that highway is our city's cash cow. Anyway, one hour before court was to begin (once per month - municipal court) - I lined up at the office door of the "prosecutor" (which is a private attorney hired by the city) with all of the attorneys representing those folks charged with violations. One at a time they would speak with the prosecutor, come to a quick plea and leave the courthouse after paying a fine. When I stepped into the prosecutor’s office to make a "plea" deal, he said: "I don't recognize you, what is your Missouri bar number?" When I told him I was representing myself, he immediately said that I was not allowed to represent myself in plea negotiations! He refused to enter into a plea deal unless I hired an attorney. If I did not hire an attorney I would have to represent myself before the judge at trial.
Fortunately, I spotted a neighbor in the audience who was an attorney (insurance law). I asked, "Will you represent me in a plea?" He said yes and 5 minutes later I had pled down to a non moving traffic violation and paid a $75 fine. That the prosecutors do this is a well known fact here. That is wrong.
GranPa Chuck
http://nfpcar.org/Jurisdictionary/