Comments on: Canadian Judicial Council Issues Self-Representation Principles http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/shlep/2006/12/12/canadian-judicial-council-issues-self-representation-principles/ news, views and info on self-help law and pro se litigation Wed, 30 Sep 2009 23:11:37 -0400 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4 hourly 1 By: shlep: the Self-Help Law ExPress » Blog Archive » sutton’s “no-asshole-rule” works pro se, too http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/shlep/2006/12/12/canadian-judicial-council-issues-self-representation-principles/comment-page-1/#comment-698 shlep: the Self-Help Law ExPress » Blog Archive » sutton’s “no-asshole-rule” works pro se, too Sun, 18 Feb 2007 03:52:09 +0000 http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/shlep/2006/12/12/canadian-judicial-council-issues-self-r#comment-698 [...] Acting like a jerk in the courthouse (whether to opposing counsel or the other party, to the judge, or to court personnel) is contrary to the interests of the self-represented litigant — no matter how good it may make you feel momentarily, it can only hurt your case (and could get you held in contempt of court). As noted in our prior post, the Canadian Judicial Council’s recently-promulgated Statement of Principles on Self-Represented Litigants (Dec. 2006, 12 pp, pdf) explicitly state:  “Judges and court administrators have no obligation to assist a self-represented person who is disrespectful, frivolous, unreasonable, vexatious, abusive, or making no reasonable effort to prepare their own case.” [...] [...] Acting like a jerk in the courthouse (whether to opposing counsel or the other party, to the judge, or to court personnel) is contrary to the interests of the self-represented litigant — no matter how good it may make you feel momentarily, it can only hurt your case (and could get you held in contempt of court). As noted in our prior post, the Canadian Judicial Council’s recently-promulgated Statement of Principles on Self-Represented Litigants (Dec. 2006, 12 pp, pdf) explicitly state:  “Judges and court administrators have no obligation to assist a self-represented person who is disrespectful, frivolous, unreasonable, vexatious, abusive, or making no reasonable effort to prepare their own case.” [...]

]]> By: david giacalone http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/shlep/2006/12/12/canadian-judicial-council-issues-self-representation-principles/comment-page-1/#comment-527 david giacalone Fri, 12 Jan 2007 21:12:40 +0000 http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/shlep/2006/12/12/canadian-judicial-council-issues-self-r#comment-527 Madelynn, Thanks for the input and reminder. NSCS does indeed have a multitude of materials on pro se matters. That's why our SideBar has from the start had several links to NSCS resources in the Self-Help Gateways section -- including to your compilations of state-by-state pro se Forms, Centers, and Unbundling Rules. Madelynn, Thanks for the input and reminder. NSCS does indeed have a multitude of materials on pro se matters. That’s why our SideBar has from the start had several links to NSCS resources in the Self-Help Gateways section — including to your compilations of state-by-state pro se Forms, Centers, and Unbundling Rules.

]]> By: Madelynn http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/shlep/2006/12/12/canadian-judicial-council-issues-self-representation-principles/comment-page-1/#comment-526 Madelynn Fri, 12 Jan 2007 19:01:48 +0000 http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/shlep/2006/12/12/canadian-judicial-council-issues-self-r#comment-526 Orijit stated on December 12, 2006, "...it would be good to see a list of court created forms." The National Center for State Courts has created such a list. See the document: Court Forms: State Links" at: http://www.ncsconline.org/WC/Publications/StateLinks/ProSeCtFormsStateLinks.htm We have several other state-by-state documents relating to self representation such as Self Help/Information Centers State Links, and Unbundling Rules State Links. See: http://www.ncsconline.org/WCDS/Edu/ProseStateSum.htm Orijit stated on December 12, 2006,
“…it would be good to see a list of court created forms.” The National Center for State Courts has created such a list. See the document: Court Forms: State Links” at: http://www.ncsconline.org/WC/Publications/StateLinks/ProSeCtFormsStateLinks.htm We have several other state-by-state documents relating to self representation such as Self Help/Information Centers State Links, and Unbundling Rules State Links. See: http://www.ncsconline.org/WCDS/Edu/ProseStateSum.htm

]]> By: shlep: the Self-Help Law ExPress » Blog Archive » Manitoba judge helps pro se traffic-camera defendant http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/shlep/2006/12/12/canadian-judicial-council-issues-self-representation-principles/comment-page-1/#comment-521 shlep: the Self-Help Law ExPress » Blog Archive » Manitoba judge helps pro se traffic-camera defendant Thu, 11 Jan 2007 23:32:37 +0000 http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/shlep/2006/12/12/canadian-judicial-council-issues-self-r#comment-521 [...] See our prior posts “learning from Canadian judges” and “Canadian Judicial Council Issues Self-Representation Principles, as well as this posting on Australian and Queensland judges, and this one on Massachusetts judicial guidelines. [...] [...] See our prior posts “learning from Canadian judges” and “Canadian Judicial Council Issues Self-Representation Principles, as well as this posting on Australian and Queensland judges, and this one on Massachusetts judicial guidelines. [...]

]]> By: Kate http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/shlep/2006/12/12/canadian-judicial-council-issues-self-representation-principles/comment-page-1/#comment-406 Kate Sun, 17 Dec 2006 07:12:31 +0000 http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/shlep/2006/12/12/canadian-judicial-council-issues-self-r#comment-406 Great site! Wish I'd had more support when acting Pro Se. I began my case with great trepidation but was always looked down upon by the judges here in CA. Regardless of the fact that CA does have a self help site with forms -- the civil courts here [in my opinion ] definitely do not show any patience or latitude to unrepresented parties . I read somewhere that many judges attend seminars on how to deal with pro se litigants. However not in a way one might think. It was more on the line of how to rid their court of them as quickly as possible - How? By taking advantage of simple errors [to their disadvantage ] that could be easily corrected and allowing the opposing attorneys all the latitude possible to present their case - even if it lacks credibility. Appellate courts for pro se appeals are a joke. I lost appeal after court ruled that although the opposing party failed to address my opening brief headings --- my headings were inappropriate for my arguments. In other words -- They are out but so are you! Can you get your mind around that one? My interpretation of the word JUSTICE is Just Is ~ Kate Great site! Wish I’d had more support when acting Pro Se.

I began my case with great trepidation but was always looked down upon by the judges here in CA. Regardless of the fact that CA does have a self help site with forms — the civil courts here [in my opinion ] definitely do not show any patience or latitude to unrepresented parties .

I read somewhere that many judges attend seminars on how to deal with pro se litigants. However not in a way one might think. It was more on the line of how to rid their court of them as quickly as possible – How? By taking advantage of simple errors [to their disadvantage ] that could be easily corrected and allowing the opposing attorneys all the latitude possible to present their case – even if it lacks credibility.

Appellate courts for pro se appeals are a joke. I lost appeal after court ruled that although the opposing party failed to address my opening brief headings — my headings were inappropriate for my arguments.

In other words — They are out but so are you!
Can you get your mind around that one?

My interpretation of the word JUSTICE is Just Is ~

Kate

]]> By: shlep: the Self-Help Law ExPress » Blog Archive » “pro se pothole” awards? http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/shlep/2006/12/12/canadian-judicial-council-issues-self-representation-principles/comment-page-1/#comment-396 shlep: the Self-Help Law ExPress » Blog Archive » “pro se pothole” awards? Fri, 15 Dec 2006 19:32:58 +0000 http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/shlep/2006/12/12/canadian-judicial-council-issues-self-r#comment-396 [...] If we had the resources, we would turn shlep’s burning spotlight on Pro Se Potholes — on court systems in counties or states that put obstacles in the way of litigants appearing in court without counsel, or which have failed to promulgate or put into effect guidelines or adequate training for judges and court staff, regarding the treatment of pro se parties.   [...] [...] If we had the resources, we would turn shlep’s burning spotlight on Pro Se Potholes — on court systems in counties or states that put obstacles in the way of litigants appearing in court without counsel, or which have failed to promulgate or put into effect guidelines or adequate training for judges and court staff, regarding the treatment of pro se parties.   [...]

]]> By: Orijit http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/shlep/2006/12/12/canadian-judicial-council-issues-self-representation-principles/comment-page-1/#comment-389 Orijit Tue, 12 Dec 2006 23:28:40 +0000 http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/shlep/2006/12/12/canadian-judicial-council-issues-self-r#comment-389 As far as I know, David, only 17 states have any sort of funding through their court system for self-represented litigants. Which means the large majority of states use non-government (non-court) arenas to provide resources like forms to pro se litigants. Like you said though, it would be good to see a list of court created forms. I am currently working on compiling a spreadsheet of state funding for pro se programs, which I hope to have available sometime in the next few weeks. As far as I know, David, only 17 states have any sort of funding through their court system for self-represented litigants. Which means the large majority of states use non-government (non-court) arenas to provide resources like forms to pro se litigants. Like you said though, it would be good to see a list of court created forms. I am currently working on compiling a spreadsheet of state funding for pro se programs, which I hope to have available sometime in the next few weeks.

]]> By: david giacalone http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/shlep/2006/12/12/canadian-judicial-council-issues-self-representation-principles/comment-page-1/#comment-388 david giacalone Tue, 12 Dec 2006 19:49:57 +0000 http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/shlep/2006/12/12/canadian-judicial-council-issues-self-r#comment-388 Many American courts (a very good example is California) have taken the lead in creating libraries of simplified forms. Perhaps a law librarian or two could provide us with a list of which court websites have simplified (or Plain English) forms and instructions for the self-represented and which merely post the pre-existing legalese forms. Many American courts (a very good example is California) have taken the lead in creating libraries of simplified forms. Perhaps a law librarian or two could provide us with a list of which court websites have simplified (or Plain English) forms and instructions for the self-represented and which merely post the pre-existing legalese forms.

]]> By: Orijit http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/shlep/2006/12/12/canadian-judicial-council-issues-self-representation-principles/comment-page-1/#comment-387 Orijit Tue, 12 Dec 2006 18:29:40 +0000 http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/shlep/2006/12/12/canadian-judicial-council-issues-self-r#comment-387 I wonder how the Candian Judges and court administrators feel about being charged with developing forms for pro se litigants. It seems like that responsibility is commonly taken by legal aid providers here in the US. Interesting take on the issues of responsibility though, it is good to see the Canadian courts recognizing self-representation as a key component in equal access to justice. I wonder how the Candian Judges and court administrators feel about being charged with developing forms for pro se litigants. It seems like that responsibility is commonly taken by legal aid providers here in the US. Interesting take on the issues of responsibility though, it is good to see the Canadian courts recognizing self-representation as a key component in equal access to justice.

]]>