Courtroom5

Personal Practice of Law is allowed! https://courtroom5.com/blog/the-personal-practice-of-law-empowering-pro-se-litigants-to-reclaim-the-courts/

Links

• Justice Legal Tech - https://justicetechassociation.org/about/

Podcast

• Natalie Knowlton, A2J Ventures - No access to justice, no functioning society - [1]. System was not designed to produce justice. Good stuff. Access not only to poor, but to higher up in society.
  • https://a2jventures.com/learn/
• Pro bono and justice gap - [2]
• A2J Tech - https://www.goa2jtech.com/. No code movement? Access to justice - access to courts (lawyers at affordable cost), legal education (making legal accessible), people understanding their rights. Mauricio is from Guatemala. Econ development etc. Social and economic development aspects are parts of access to justice. Access to full human development. Justice entrepreneur.
  • No code trend - such as advanced spreadsheets, or spreadsheets in FreeCAD. 2 benefits: reduces investment into startup; and makes changes easy.

How to Be an Effective Pro Se Litigant

• Preserve evidence obstruction by judge for appeal - [3]
  • Motion to compel. Claim duress from emphatic 'is that understood'. I shit my pants. Duress as affirmative response.
• Main points:

1. 1. Decide on strategy going backwards. For example, will you win outright on settled law, or will you wear your opponent down and force a settlement? Based on the answer, you’ll either collect the evidence needed to paint your opponent into a legal corner or set up your motions to bog him down on procedures.
   2. The time invested in learning legal research is priceless - learn one of free legal tools
   3. Actual form over substance - 'But I’ll let you in on a secret. There were times I didn’t actually know what I was talking about, yet the words and format I chose got me through.'
   4. Oral argument is pure theater - but with audience participation. Bring copies of every case you discuss, highlighting the important parts, and hand one to the opposing lawyer and the judge as you mention each case. The judge may pepper you with questions, and you’ll have your answers ready, but shut the lawyer down whenever he or she interrupts. Own the room. The judge will be entertained, but as a result, you’ll actually be heard.
   5. “Legal ethics” is an oxymoron because a lawyer cares only about winning. A lawyer will lie, cheat, steal, fabricate and destroy evidence, whatever is necessary.

• Pro Se? Get Pro Se-rious (from [4] - Our mission is to ensure every American is empowered to exercise their rights in court through the Personal Practice of Law.)
• [5]. "What you won’t see are articles on becoming an effective pro se litigant."
  • An effective pro se litigant is proactive. Whether plaintiff or defendant, we don’t wait for or react to the other side’s next filing. We anticipate it.
  • An effective pro se litigant is organized. Everything has its place where our case is concerned, whether its the filings, relevant case law, evidence or random notes.
  • An effective pro se litigant is restrained. We rarely use “legalese” unless it’s required, and we never pretend to know the meaning of a legal term when we don’t.
• Poor peoples' court - zealots, bureaucrats, reformers, and navigators (spinners) in family court ('deadbeat dad cases') [6]
  • 70-90% of people in poor peoples' court are not represented [7]
• Sometimes need to take an extraordinary measure. For instance, we may need to file an appeal in the middle of a case — win or lose — just to let a judge know we can. [8]
• The biggest lesson we’ve learned is that a little information often stood between us and victory.
• On forms - But here’s the rub: Most of what you file will have absolutely nothing to do with the main issues in your case. You’ll be fighting over whether the complaint is defective, whether certain evidence can be collected, whether a trial is even necessary, and whether this or that rule of procedure should be applied to your case. [9]
• 2 big points
  • judge does not figure out who is right or wrong, they just referee.
  • Litigation is not a business meeting. It is war.
• Their forms help judicial efficiency, not us to win cases. [10]
• Form over substance. Beware of forms: a form to respond to a summons. Costs $175 and doesn't let you answer much (meaning you are self-incriminating). The ideal would be a motion to dismiss, which is free. [11]. An unwary litigant, assuming the space was there for a reason, would use it to explain why he or she was admitting or denying each of the plaintiff’s allegations. But, is it also true that when writing, write with form, not substance? NO! That is not the point of this article.
• Check out good example of accord and satisfaction - [12]
• Preserve errors - you can preserve discovery errors for appeal.

Dismissal Issues

• suing for claims not recognized by law - cause for potential dismissal [13]
• courts are required to deem allegations in the complaint as true

Elements

Example: elements of tortuous interference.

• Elements of tortious interference

(1) An economic relationship that was likely to benefit the plaintiff; (2) The defendant’s knowledge of this relationship; (3) Wrongful conduct by the defendant; (4) Defendant’s intent to disrupt the economic relationship; (5) Disruption of the relationship; (6) Harm to the plaintiff; and (7) A causal connection between the wrongful act and the harm.

Facts vs Conclusions

Example of a difference: [14]

• Conclusion–“Defendant’s behavior constituted a breach of contract”.
• Fact–”The plaintiff and defendant had an exclusive contract in which the plaintiff’s pocket pants would be the only ones of its kind sold by the defendant. Yet, the defendant sold pocket pants made by other designers.”

Summary Judgment

• [15]. The widely accepted standard for granting summary judgment is twofold: (1) that no material facts are in dispute, and (2) that the moving party deserves judgment as a matter of law.
• One way to defeat is to show that an affirmative defense remains viable

Appeal Based on Legal Malpractice

• Pro se who hires a lawyer can appeal based on malpractice [16]
• Haines v Kerner - pro se pleadings and motions should be viewed liberally and held to a lesser standard than those drafted by attorneys
• Baldinger v. Ferri, No. 12-4529 (3d Cir. 2013), held that a pro se litigant’s repeated and willful discovery abuses did not require forgiveness and merited a default judgment

Appeal - 14% are reversed in Civil Court [17]

• There are many standards of review, but the most are abuse of discretion and de novo. An abuse of discretion standard determines if a discretionary ruling was unreasonable. When a de novo review is applied, the case is reviewed as if the lower court decision did not take place. Little deference is given to the lower court in a de novo review. [18]
  • Yes, you as a pro se litigant can suggest to the court the standard of review it should use for your case. The court then can decide whether to go along with your suggestion or use another standard.
• Additionally, we can file petitions for Writ of Mandate to the court of appeals for interim orders that are not appealable [19]
  • Can reconsider in civil court, or take it to supreme.