From the Los Angeles Times

Litigants become their own lawyers

Hiring an attorney isn’t cheap, so these days more people are navigating the justice system themselves. But courtrooms can be tough for amateurs.

By John Keilman

August 10, 2009

Reporting from Chicago — When Marsha and Larry Lipsky wanted to evict a troublesome tenant from their home in Arlington Heights, Ill., they consulted a few attorneys but couldn’t afford fees that ran from $500 to $5,000.

So they did what a lot of people with legal trouble are doing these days: They became their own lawyers.

“I was a nervous wreck,” Marsha Lipsky, 67, said after presenting her case to a judge and winning an order for the tenant to leave.

Legal service has never come cheap. But lawyers, judges and other experts say that for many people, the recession has made it a nearly impossible expense. So more litigants are navigating the often-bewildering justice system by themselves.

Advocates and court officials have responded with expanded advice desks, instructional websites, even plans to connect litigants with law students by computer. But the trend still alarms many observers, who say courtrooms weren’t made for amateurs.

__(’Read the rest of this entry »’)

From the Chicago Tribune:

Recession forces more to act as own lawyer

Observers warn that courtrooms aren’t made for amateurs

By John Keilman

Tribune reporter

August 5, 2009

I know this may be a bit beyond the scope of this blog but I ran across a new law review article that may be of interest to scholars who are interested in the right of self-representation.  I’m posting the abstract for the article.

Georgetown Journal of International Law
Spring, 2009

SELF-REPRESENTATION IN THE INTERNATIONAL ARENA: REMOVING A FALSE RIGHT OF SPECTACLE
40 Georgetown Journal of International Law 919 (2009)
Eugene Cerruti

Recent historical scholarship has demonstrated that the practice of self-representation at common law was developed and promoted not to secure a valued right to the accused but rather to compromise the defendant’s ability to present an effective defense–by denying him an effective right to be represented by counsel. The Supreme Court in Faretta v. California stood this history on its head in order to read into the Sixth Amendment an implied right to self-representation equal to the now preeminent right to counsel. The Faretta doctrine was carelessly adopted yet has been resolutely defended by the Supreme Court, to the almost universal chagrin of those most directly affected by its commands. The recent Supreme Court case of Indiana v. Edwards is only a modest retreat from the pointless imposition on the lower courts of a structurally and normatively incompatible right within the context of the contemporary counsel-driven system of criminal justice.

A putative right to self-representation silently entered international law via a back door at Nuremberg as a result of that tribunal’s near-wholesale adoption of the apparent rights and protocols of the common law adversarial system. It was subsequently adopted in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights as one of the standard “rights of the accused” but never actually put into effect in international law until the creation of the various war crimes tribunals of the last two decades. The right to self-representation has almost immediately replicated its experience in American law by creating a shameful series of disreputable prosecutions. It has become another example of a feature of the adversarial system, like that of the lay jury, which does not travel well–or at all–to the international arena. The structural and normative groundings of the international system make the right even more inapposite there than it now is in the common law system. This article calls on the International Criminal Court, the new standard-bearer of international criminal justice, to take advantage of the upcoming seven-year review of its rules and procedures to strike from its Articles a practice that has been reduced to little more than a perverse right of spectacle.

Article about assistance for pro se bankruptcy filers in Maryland:

DIY bankruptcy — with a little help from the state

By Eileen Ambrose

July 26, 2009

Many financial matters you can easily do on your own without professional help.

Filing for bankruptcy isn’t one of them.

But if you choose to do so, you’re no longer totally left on your own in Maryland to navigate the intricacies of bankruptcy. Thanks to a new Debtors Assistance Project, do-it-yourselfers can get a half-hour of free legal advice from a lawyer, who can answer questions or check paperwork.

“It’s not going to solve everybody’s problem on that day. That’s not what it’s designed to do,” says Jeff Sirody, a Pikesville lawyer who volunteers with the project. “It’s designed to give people an opportunity to speak with an attorney. Is there any easy solution? If not, what’s the next step? Where should they go to get help?”

__(’Read the rest of this entry »’)

Reprinted with the permission of the Missouri Lawyer’s Weekly:

Missouri Lawyers Weekly Copyright 2009 Dolan Media Newswires
July 17, 2009

Who’s using Missouri’s pro se divorce forms ? Most litigants have children, never called a lawyer.

Allison Retka
The litigants without lawyers stroll into the clerk’s office in tiny Dade County, plunk down thick packets of divorce forms and ask, “What in the world am I supposed to do with this?”

It’s a question Dade County Circuit Clerk Brenda Adams hears more each week, as pro se litigants trickle into her office in Greenfield, near Springfield. The litigants throw up their hands and ask for help, but there’s not much Adams and her clerks can do.

“We don’t have a law degree,” she said. “We’re sticking our necks out and helping them file these, and I don’t think we’re probably supposed to be doing that.”

__(’Read the rest of this entry »’)

LAW LIBRARY/SELF HELP CENTER CONSULTANT

The Second Judicial District Court of Nevada, in consultation with Washoe County government, is soliciting bids for a consultant to study and provide recommendations concerning the Law Library and the pro per Self Help Center.

Preface

As of July 1, 2009, the Second Judicial District Court (“Court”) assumed the responsibility for the finding and operation of the existing Washoe County Law Library (“Library”). The Court wants to consolidate its operation of a pro per Self Help Center (“SHC”) with the Library into a unified approach to legal information and access that will be designed and oriented toward future demands for the next ten to fifteen years.

Outline of Work

In order to provide the product and advice desired, the following tasks are anticipated with anticipated site visits occurring no later than August 15, 2009.

1) Inventory of current assets of Library and SHC, including personnel,

collected fees and collections.

2) Inventory of current services and public service events delivered

by Library and SHC.

3) Needs assessment from significant parties both “inside” and “outside” the current system.

4) Trends research as to futures of both libraries and pro per service delivery models.

5) Delivery and presentation of final report.

Contact:

In responding to this document, please include curriculum vitae and estimate on costs and/or proposed budget, and fees to accomplish this work.

All questions and correspondence shall be directed to the Court Administrator by July 31, 2009.

Howard W. Conyers

Court Administrator

P.O. Box 30083

Reno, NV 89520-3083

(775) 328-3119

(775) 328-3206 – fax

Article from the Vallejo Times-Herald describes the popular “Lawyer in the Library” program to help patrons handle their own legal problems:

The legal system is a baffling process for most, even before they walk through the front courthouse doors.For those with limited finances, resources can be thin locally — which is why attorneys here and nationally have tried to fill the gap between government-funded, legal-aid programs and those in need.

“Legal aid in this country has been emaciated,” Solano County Superior Court Judge Paul Beeman said. “If they don’t have legal aid and they don’t have money, they’re going to lose. It’s a terrible thing when you think about all the wealth and resources in this nation.”

In Vallejo, the Lawyer in the Library program, started by former Vallejo librarian Michael Senturia with help from Beeman, has provided free one-time legal advice and referrals for the past 13 years.

“Everybody thought it was a good idea from the beginning, but once it got started, it knocked your socks off because peoplemassively appreciated the help,” Beeman said. “For most lawyers, it was real simple advice that gave direction … and they were genuinely appreciative.”

__(’Read the rest of this entry »’)

The article in the Connecticut Law Tribune is password protected, but here’s the relevant part:

‘In light of Edwards, it is clear… that we are free to adopt for mentally ill or mentally incapacitated defendants who wish to represent themselves at trial a competency standard that differs from the standard for determining whether such a defendant is competent to stand trial,’ wrote Justice Richard N. Palmer, for the unanimous Connecticut Supreme Court.

‘We do not believe that a mentally ill or mentally incapacitated defendant who is competent to stand trial necessarily is also competent to represent himself at that trial,’ concluded Palmer.
Senior Assistant State’s Attorney Denise B. Smoker said it will be interesting to see how the trial courts apply the new standard adopted by the state Supreme Court. She explained that the new standard essentially allows judges to consider whether the defendant is competent enough to perform the skills needed to defend themselves, including composing questions for voir dire and witnesses.

The case will be reported in the Atlantic Reporter but doesn’t have a cite yet.  The Westlaw cite is 2009 WL 1941780.

My plan was to compile a collection of self-help bankruptcy sites from each state.  I realized that I would never have time to do all of the states at one time, which would mean I’d never get the thing done.  So, I’m going to do five states at a time and post them here.  When I’m finished, I’ll polish it up and create a page for it.

Keep in mind that bankruptcy is a federal matter so you don’t have to limit yourself to sites specific to your own state to get information.  You might find very helpful explanatory information on a site intended for another state.  However, if there is a site that provides forms for your state, you should probably use those unless you’re prepared to adjust them for your state.

If I miss any good sites, please let me know.  Meanwhile, here are the first five.

Alabama

Bankruptcy Court, Northern District of Alabama

Alaska

Alaskalawhelp.org

Bankruptcy Court, District of Alaska

Arizona

Bankruptcy Court, District of Arizona

Arkansas

Legalconsumer.com

California

Bankruptcy Court, Northern District of California

And another news item from the Wisconsin Law Journal:

As recession-related bankruptcy filings rise, courts are dealing not only with larger caseloads but also more time-consuming case filings. An increase in pro se litigants leads to a bigger drain on court resources, as well as bigger challenges for trustees.

Since the economic crisis began, Andrew N. Herbach has seen a steady increase in traffic at the Pro Se Help Desk for the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin in Milwaukee.

“We’re overwhelmed right now. It used to be that we’d get seven people that came in, and now it’s double-plus every week,” said Herbach, who practices with Howard Solochek & Weber SC in Milwaukee. Herbach was involved in developing the help desk in response to a request from a bankruptcy judge.

Filings are up around the state, although not quite as much as in the Milwaukee area, where records show a 30-percent increase in Eastern District Court bankruptcy filings from last year.

Follow the link for the whole story.

From the Wisconsin Law Journal:

Pro se bankruptcy filers may be a drain on court resources, but judges won’t be trying to mitigate the problem by appointing attorneys to represent them.

A June 24 opinion by U.S. Bankruptcy Chief Judge Margaret Dee McGarity denied a debtor’s request for appointment of counsel pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1915 (e)(1).

While some of the court’s reasoning is limited to the particular debtor, most of it would apply to all pro se debtors.

Follow the link for the whole story.

Interesting article here about the advisability of representing yourself when attempting to get a loan modification and avoid disclosure.  Admittedly, the author is in the loan modification business, but that doesn’t  negate what he has to say about the difficulty of the process.

For example:

The banks want you to work on the loan modification by yourself, so they can avoid dealing with a professional who knows the game. By all means, feel free to have a go at it if you wish. The truth is you are very likely to have a frustrating and unproductive experience. Look, banks lose money when they modify a loan—a lot of money. You just cannot expect them to make that process easy for you. What is going to happen is that the bank⁶ will “lose” your faxes, make you wait hours on the phone, require copious documentation, etc. And, ultimately, if you do not know the parameters and other criteria the bank is looking for, your request will either be denied or the bank will offer a modification that does not provide any real relief. In that case, you will have wasted a great deal of time and energy, you will still be vulnerable to losing the home and, worse still, you may have made it impossible for a professional to go behind you and clean up the mess.

I’m very excited to announce the addition of four new contributors to SHLEP:

Sharon Blackburn, Head of Faculty Services,

Texas Tech University School of Law

Amy Hale-Janeke, Head of Reference Services, 5th Circuit Court of Appeals Library

William Ketchum, Reference  & Faculty Services Librarian,

University of La Verne College of Law

Deborah Schander, Reference & Electronic Services Librarian,

University of La Verne College of Law

I have a few more people I’m waiting to hear from.

Here are some suggestions on how to make your trip to the law library for effective and more efficient.

Bring the paperwork with you.

Patrons often come to the library to seek help because they’ve been sued or charged with a crime.  When a statute is involved, we really need to know what statute in order to help you.  Even if no statute is involved, we need to know what the cause of action is.  If you have paperwork, bring it with you.  We won’t read every word but it will help if we see precisely what statute or issue is involved.

Spare us the intimate details.

Please don’t launch into a detailed story about what someone did to you and why they did it.  Just give us the gist of the matter and if we need more information, we’ll ask for it.  This is partly to save time but it is also because people tell us some pretty intimate things that we don’t need to know in order to help.  I really don’t want to know more about your personal life than I do about my best friend’s!

For example, just tell me that your ex-wife won’t let you see your kids and you want to know what to do about it.  I don’t need to know all the details about what a horrible mother your ex-wife is and how nasty her new boyfriend is, and how your ex-mother-in-law hates you.

Also, please try to stay calm while relating your problem.  We know these issues can be emotional, but remember that we didn’t have anything to do with the creation of your problem.  If you start getting angry or agitated, we will take a step further into professional detachment and probably be less effective in helping you.  If you really go over the top, we will have to call for security.

Understand that we can’t give legal advice, even if we’re lawyers.

I’m licensed in Maryland and Tennessee, but I work as an academic law librarian in California.  I didn’t study California law in my Pennsylvania law school, and I’ve never even taken the California bar, let alone passed it.  I haven’t practiced since 1988 and unless you’re dealing with a construction law problem, a real estate development issue, or a matter involving a cable TV franchise contract, your issue is probably something I’ve never handled before.

Most law librarians probably have a history like mine.  Some have law degrees; some don’t.  Some who have law degrees took and passed a bar exam and were admitted to practice; others did not.  Some have experience in practice; some don’t.  Our expertise is legal research, not any particular area of the law of the state where we work.

When you ask us a question that we’re not permitted to answer, we will tell you, “I’m sorry, but I can’t give you legal advice.”  Your response should not be, “I don’t want legal advice; I just want to know X.”  Trust us, we’ve already evaluated your question, and to tell you X would require us to give legal advice.

We can’t tell you what the statute of limitations is for your matter.  We can show you how to use the resources so you can try to determine for yourself.  We can’t tell you whether the Americans with Disabilities Act applies to your situation.  We can get you the Act and help you find secondary sources that might enable you to answer your question.  We can’t tell you what document or pleading you need, or tell you which form to use.  We can’t tell you how to fill-out a form.

Realize that the court clerk isn’t always right.

Patrons frequently tell us that the court clerk’s office told them they could get forms at the law library.  That’s both true and not true.

Patrons usually think of a form as something like their tax return.  All they have to do is fill in the blanks.  Some libraries will have forms like this because they’ve been created by the state court system or some other organization such as legal aid.  There might be forms like this for some matters but not for others.  We usually won’t have copies of the forms you can take with you.  We might have a book with these forms and you can make photocopies.  If an outside organization has created forms and helpful information, we might have a packet you can take.  (I’m thinking of the useful “simple divorce” packets that we had at the University of Nebraska law library, but they were prepared by a task force that included legal aid and the state court system, if I remember correctly.)

More likely, what we have is “form books.”  These are books for lawyers which contain samples of language used in different types of documents.  Lawyers use them to piece together a completed document.  They have to determine which pieces to use and how to use them.  They’re not intended to be used blindly without adjustment.  They can get you started and give you a framework that you can work with.  I can’t help you pick out the pieces you need and revise them to fit your circumstances.

Please don’t get angry with us because the court clerk told you we would have something that we don’t.

Remember that you might not be our priority.

If you go to an academic law library (one that is part of a law school), please remember that our priority is our students and faculty.  We often teach, so we might have to leave for class and hand you off to another librarian if one is available.  We might have to leave your side while we help students.  We’ll give you as much time as we can, but our students, faculty, and preparing for classes are our priorities.

And lastly, some advice from the best law librarian I know, Sharon Blackburn at Texas Tech University School of Law:

Understand that it isn’t easy and it’s going to take some time.

Lawyers get college degrees and then spend three years in law school learning substantive and procedural law.  Don’t expect to master your problem in mere hours.

Sharon tells the story of a patron who wanted to research federal income tax laws regarding charitable giving.  And he wanted it all in 30 minutes!

Don’t wait until the day before your answer is due or the criminal trial is scheduled to come to the law library.  If you know what you’re doing, expect to spend hours, if not days, preparing.  If you don’t know what you’re doing, plan to spend weeks, if not months.