shlep: the Self-Help Law ExPress » News Items

Los Angeles Times: Litigants become their own lawyers

TerryConaway — Tue, 11 Aug 2009 16:42:09 +0000

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.

“In a complex domestic-relations dispute or commercial dispute, it’s kind of like trying to do surgery on yourself,” said Bob Glaves of the Chicago Bar Foundation, which funds numerous legal assistance programs. “If you’re not trained in these things, you have no chance.”

Anyone facing jail time for a criminal offense is guaranteed legal help, but that is not true for civil cases, which include foreclosures and lawsuits over unpaid credit card bills.

Many low- and middle-income people have been left to square off against professional attorneys who represent banks, collection agencies and other deep-pocketed organizations.

Cook County Associate Judge Thomas More Donnelly, who until recently ran a courtroom for those fighting wage garnishments and frozen bank accounts, said such contests were often stark mismatches.

He recalled cases in which defendants didn’t know about a state law that allows debtors to keep up to $4,000 safe from creditors.

He would tell them about it, but if they didn’t understand what he was saying, he would have to drop the matter because he had to remain impartial.

“It would be so distressing to me,” he said. “There are things that are known to everyone in the courtroom except the debtor.”

The Chicago Legal Clinic, which runs a free advice desk for people facing foreclosure, has seen its clientele explode over the last two years. Wait times to see an attorney have risen to about two hours.

Anntoinette Brown, 47, had to take the entire morning off from her job as an administrative assistant to ask which opaquely titled piece of paper she needed to file to stave off the loss of her home: Was it a “verified answer to complaint to foreclose mortgage” or an “appearance and jury demand”?

It would have been an easy question for a lawyer — the answer, she was finally told, was to file both — but Brown said: “As soon as you call an attorney, they want this and that. If I had the money, I could have used it to pay the mortgage.”

Many people have no choice but to go it alone, but the Internet can help.

Four years ago, Illinois Legal Aid Online established a website to educate people entering the system. Traffic has increased steadily, and the site has as many as 80,000 visits a month.

The website will evolve in September, when volunteer law students will be available for online chats, Executive Director Lisa Colpoys said.

The organization also has helped establish computer-driven self-help centers around the state, where law librarians and others answer queries.

Many people, however, are still learning about their rights and proper court procedures from the judge hearing their case.

Carol Butcher, unable to afford a lawyer, represented herself in a lawsuit against an insurer she said wasn’t offering enough money to replace her stolen car.

The case went to trial last month, and though Judge Thomas Roti was patient with Butcher’s occasionally rambling narrative, his tolerance ended when she interrupted him several times.

“I’ve shown you how to lay a foundation in the case,” he said.

“I’ve bent over backward for you. I’m not going to give you a law school lesson on evidence. You argue with me continually. . . . If you were an attorney, you would be in contempt of court.”

Butcher won the case, but the jury awarded her only $50. She had been seeking $10,000.

As any lawyer would, she said she might appeal that amount.

jkeilman@tribune.com

TerryConaway — Thu, 06 Aug 2009 15:48:05 +0000

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

When Marsha and Larry Lipsky wanted to evict a troublesome tenant from their Arlington Heights home, 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 since yesterday,” Marsha Lipsky, 67, said after presenting her case to a Rolling Meadows judge and winning an order for the tenant to leave. “I was so afraid. … But we survived. The judge, she was fair about it.”

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. That has created a surge of litigants who must navigate the often-bewildering justice system by themselves.

Advocates and court officials have responded with expanded advice desks, instructional Web sites, 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.

“In a complex domestic relations dispute or commercial dispute, it’s kind of like trying to do surgery on yourself,” said Bob Glaves of the Chicago Bar Foundation, which funds numerous legal assistance programs. “If you’re not trained in these things, you have no chance.”

Anyone facing jail time for a criminal offense is guaranteed legal help, but that’s not true for civil cases, which include everything from foreclosures to lawsuits over unpaid credit card bills.

That leaves many low- and middle-income people squaring off against professional attorneys who represent banks, collection agencies and other deep-pocketed organizations.

Cook County Associate Judge Thomas More Donnelly, who until recently ran a courtroom for those fighting wage garnishments and frozen bank accounts, said such contests are often glaring mismatches.

He recalled cases in which defendants didn’t know about a state law that allows debtors to keep up to $4,000 safe from creditors. He would tell them about it, but if they didn’t understand what he was saying, he would have to drop the matter lest he cross the line separating impartial judge from advocate.

“It would be so distressing to me,” he said. “There are things that are known to everyone in the courtroom except the debtor.”

The imbalance is hardly new — a study 20 years ago showed that low-income people in Illinois received no help for 4 out of 5 legal problems — but as the downturn floods courts with hard-luck cases, advocates say it has become more obvious than ever.

The Chicago Legal Clinic, which runs a free legal advice desk in the Daley Center for people facing foreclosure, has seen its clientele explode over the last two years. Consequently, wait times to see an attorney have risen to about two hours.

Anntoinette Brown, 47, of Calumet Park had to take the entire morning off from her job as an administrative assistant to ask which opaquely titled piece of paper she needed to file to stave off the loss of her home: Was it a “verified answer to complaint to foreclose mortgage” or an “appearance and jury demand”?

It would have been an easy question for a lawyer — the answer, she was finally told, was to file them both — but Brown said: “As soon as you call an attorney, they want this and that. If I had the money, I could have used it to pay the mortgage.”

Other legal advice desks are swamped too. The non-profit group Coordinated Advice and Referral Program for Legal Services, which guides low-income people facing such misfortunes as wage garnishment or eviction, has seen demand for its services rise nearly 40 percent over the last year.

Patricia Wrona, the program’s director of legal services, said many clients come in after trying to handle things on their own.

“It is our view that to have an attorney review the situation for a client is a critical step,” she said. “Part of the [self-representation] problem is people thinking, ‘I can get some forms from a clerk and fill them out’ — and that is often not the case.”

Many, though, have no choice but to go it alone, so some efforts use technology to improve a novice’s courtroom odds.

Four years ago, Illinois Legal Aid Online established a Web site to educate people entering the system. Traffic has increased steadily and is now up to 80,000 visits a month.

Executive Director Lisa Colpoys said the site will evolve in September, when volunteer law students will be available for online chats. The organization also has helped establish computer-driven self-help centers around the state, where law librarians and others help with queries.

Today, though, many people are still learning about their rights and proper court procedures from the judge hearing their case.

Carol Butcher, unable to afford a lawyer, represented herself in a lawsuit against an insurer she said wasn’t offering enough money to replace her stolen car.

The case went to trial in Rolling Meadows last month, and though Judge Thomas Roti was patient with Butcher’s occasionally rambling narrative, his tolerance ended when she interrupted him several times.

“I’ve shown you how to lay a foundation in the case,” he said. “I’ve bent over backward for you. I’m not going to give you a law school lesson on evidence. You argue with me continually. … If you were an attorney, you would be in contempt of court.”

Butcher won the case, but the jury awarded her only $50 — far less than the $10,000 she had been seeking. Like any good lawyer would, she said she might appeal that amount.

Other litigants, though, have found that as helpful as it might be to have an attorney, it’s even better to be lucky.

Gerard Castor, 49, of Dolton was at the Daley Center to ask for relief from a wage garnishment of $299 every paycheck. He ran up debt opening two clothing stores in an Evergreen Park mall — stores that faded quickly, he said, when one of the mall’s anchor tenants moved out.

He had come to court with little more than a plea for mercy. But the attorney for the debt collector wasn’t there, and Judge Patrick Sherlock agreed to lower Castor’s payments to $175.

“It’s better to have a lawyer,” Castor said outside the courtroom. “But it worked to my advantage that the other [attorney] didn’t show up.”

Freelance reporter George Houde contributed to this report. jkeilman@tribune.com

Bankruptcy assistance in Maryland

TerryConaway — Tue, 28 Jul 2009 15:24:25 +0000

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?”

The need for the program grew out of changes to the bankruptcy law in 2005. Congress made it more difficult for people to erase debts, piling on new requirements and paperwork. Lawyers raised their fees because of the extra work. And many courts across the country started seeing a rise in so-called pro se litigants, or debtors who file on their own often because they can’t afford a lawyer.

Pro se cases tend to take more time as court staffers try to steer novice litigants through the complicated process. Judges, too, have their hands tied when they come across a struggling pro se filer because they are supposed to be neutral and not give legal advice, says Chief Judge Duncan W. Keir of the bankruptcy court in Baltimore.

The big risk is for debtors. “They lose rights, privileges and property that they otherwise could protect and preserve if they had legal counsel,” said Mark Sammons, clerk of the court in Baltimore. Worse, pro se filers’ mistakes could cause their case to be dismissed.

Nationally, the number of pro se cases accounted for 6.5 percent of all bankruptcies filed in the 12 months ended March 31. During that same time, Maryland reported 1,889 pro se cases, making up nearly 10 percent of its bankruptcies.

Most of Maryland’s pro se filers seek relief under Chapter 13, a more complex filing where debtors repay all or some of their debt over several years. Last year, nearly one out of five Chapter 13 bankruptcies in Maryland was from do-it-yourself filers.

A year ago, the bankruptcy court in Maryland started looking at what programs were available here and around the country to help pro se litigants, particularly Chapter 13 cases where filers have more to lose if they make a mistake.

“Those were the cases that people were trying to save their houses,” says Bankruptcy Judge Robert A. Gordon.

Low-income debtors filing under Chapter 7, or liquidation, can qualify for free – pro bono – legal representation through long-running programs by Legal Aid or the Maryland Volunteer Lawyer Service. But there wasn’t much available for those wanting to file under Chapter 13 or earned a little too much to qualify for pro bono programs, says Jessica Vollmer, the court’s pro bono coordinator.

The result was the Debtors Assistance Project, a clinic on the eighth floor of the federal courthouse in Baltimore. The clinic opened in March in Baltimore, and another was launched last month in Greenbelt.

The clinics are open to any pro se litigants, no matter their income. They operate from 10 a.m. to 2 p.m. Thursdays in Greenbelt and usually on Mondays in Baltimore. To make an appointment, call 410-962-3813.

Lawyers volunteer for two-hour sessions, spending a half-hour with each debtor. “Usually, 30 minutes is more than enough time for those attorneys to give [debtors] an idea of what they are getting themselves into, whether bankruptcy is right for them, what chapter they should be filing and to help us get them the resources if they think they can’t do it by themselves,” Vollmer says.

The court has created a list of lawyers who agree to reduce their fees for debtors who earn too much for free legal representation but still not enough to hire a lawyer. The amount of the discount is up to each lawyer.

Eric Walker of Edgewood had about $40,000 in debt and creditors hounding him when he decided to file for relief under Chapter 7.

He called around to find an affordable lawyer with little luck. The least expensive attorney would charge $1,200, including the filing fee – money he didn’t have. The 30-year-old called the bankruptcy court about his plight and was told of the Debtors Assistance Project. He met with a lawyer last month.

“She had patience. I’m new to it. She had a lot of knowledge,” says Walker, a customer account representative at a rental store. The lawyer gave him information that he says he would never have been able to find on his own.

He wishes, though, that the program offered longer sessions. “You have to cram a lot of stuff in a half-hour,” he says.

Pikesville lawyer Sirody has volunteered twice so far. “Invariably in every pro se case mistakes are made. There is so much involved,” he says.

In one case, a woman came in wanting to file under Chapter 7, unaware that if she did so, her house would be quickly sold off by the trustee to repay creditors. As it turns out, she decided not to file for bankruptcy at all.

And one man came in with papers from the court, which showed he failed to undergo the required credit counseling before filing. His case was dismissed. The man will be able to file again, although he’ll need to take an additional step as a repeat filer if he wants to keep creditors at bay for more than one month. Sirody told him how to do it.

Join Eileen for an online chat on bankruptcy at noon Tuesday on the Consuming Interests blog. She and bankruptcy attorney Jeff Sirody will answer your questions. You can submit your questions in advance to 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.”

Six months after the Missouri Supreme Court formally approved a set of do-it-yourself divorce forms, circuit clerks report mixed reactions about adjusting to new procedures for the state’s pro se population.

As to how big that population is, no known statewide statistics were available. But in St. Louis County Circuit Court, where do-it-yourself divorce forms have been available for years, pro se litigants filed 23 percent of the petitions for dissolution of marriage handled by the court last year.

Some clerks in outstate circuits, like Adams, still struggle with confused litigants touting incomplete forms who grow angry when clerks can’t answer their questions. Others maintain things are running smoothly.

And thanks to a survey more than 3,000 potential pro se litigants have completed since July 2008, a picture of a typical pro se litigant in Missouri emerges. She’s high school educated, makes less than $11,000, has kids and has been married less than five years. She never contacted a lawyer about her divorce because she thinks it’s too expensive to hire one.

But college graduates who make more than $50,000 also downloaded the forms. Twenty people with doctorate degrees surfed through the state’s Web site for self-represented litigants. St. Louis County Associate Circuit Judge Dennis Smith has turned away divorcing pro se litigants trying to divvy up millions of dollars in property.

“I told them to get lawyers,” Smith said.

Solo and small firm attorneys initially protested the expansion of court resources for pro se litigants, citing concerns that it would cut into their business. Others feared the litigants would harm themselves by filling out the forms incorrectly.

To Karl Timmerman, a solo attorney in Holden, the statistics about potential pro se litigants confirm both fears. Timmerman reviewed a set of data prepared by the Office of State Courts Administrators about the people looking at divorce forms at www.selfrepresent.mo.gov. Some of the figures stunned him, he said.

A majority of the people considering self-representation had children. Nearly half were married more than five years, which is more than enough time to accumulate marital property, he said. Half the survey respondents make $20,000 a year or more, which in many cases is more than enough money to hire a lawyer, he said.

“These are our clients,” Timmerman said. “What the data shows is you have upper-middle-class folks deciding, after not talking to a lawyer, that they’re going ahead and representing themselves in cases that involve children. I think that’s alarming.”

Liberty attorney Susan Long reviewed the figures and said she was shocked that 42 percent of pro se litigants reported the divorce forms were easy to use.

“They think they can handle it themselves,” said Long, a family attorney with Blessing & Long. “I don’t think they understand the complexity involved in dividing retirement or the documents necessary to transfer real estate.”

Mary Lou Martin, a Springfield attorney who heads up the Solo & Small Firm Practice Committee, said there’s the possibility wealthier people are using the forms to avoid having to pay an attorney. Some financial planners are telling clients about the do-it-yourself divorce forms, she said.

It’s also possible people are using the forms to set up advantageous post-divorce arrangements away from the prying eyes of lawyers, she said.

“If one spouse can negotiate their own agreement with a spouse, neither spouse has an attorney overseeing whether that’s a fair agreement or distribution of property,” Martin said.

Smith said he’s had to be vigilant about people trying to sneak “sweetheart deals” into divorce judgments. One man divorcing his wife of 40 years had a substantial pension that he should split with his wife. Instead he offered her just $2,000 a month in maintenance, Smith said.

“Some judges look at these less closely,” he said. “If you have a courtroom full of people, things can still slip through.”

Like court clerks, judges also are facing questions from confused pro se litigants looking for advice.

Leading up to the Solo and Small Firm Conference in the Ozarks, Martin’s secretary conducted an informal survey of every county in the state, asking if the courts have encountered problems with pro se litigants. Clerks in Knox and Worth counties said courtrooms can get tense as judges try to assist pro se litigants without offering them legal advice.

“Most of them want me to help them fill out the forms,” said Associate Circuit Judge David Munton, who serves the 28th Circuit. “I tell them I can’t do that. They want someone at the courthouse to do it for them and not charge them anything.”

Munton said he’s turned away litigants who failed to properly fill out their paperwork. In Martin’s survey, Dallas County reported its judges rejected the forms offered by nine out of 10 pro se litigants for the same reason.

“Anytime you’re dealing with a pro se litigant, it gets time-consuming,” said Jim Gibbons, circuit clerk in Knox County, in northeastern Missouri. He said a pro se litigant with a small claims case takes up more time and resources than a full-blown circuit court case.

Couples with few assets and no children use the forms just fine, he said. But when people with more complicated cases stride up to his desk, Gibbons issues his standard response.

“I left my magic wand and magical dust at home; you probably need to do some research,” he said.

In Holt County, in the northwestern corner of the state, Circuit Clerk Vicki Book declared the pro se forms a success.

“I’m thrilled so far,” she said. “I did not think it would work that well.”

Book sends anyone struggling with the forms to Mitzi Alspaugh, one of the two attorneys with offices in Holt County. Alspaugh said in Holt County and Jackson County, where she also practices, pro se litigants seem competent and professional in front of judges.

Smith, the St. Louis County judge, has dealt with more problematic litigants. He’s handled divorce forms scribbled on in pencil or covered with food stains. Litigants have misspelled the county they live in or neglected to mention children they had with other women.

“Probably 30 percent have something wrong,” he said of the forms submitted to him.

Smith heard a recent pro se case from a woman who had five children with five different men during her marriage.

The judge also has heard cases from pro se litigants who paid for the state’s free divorce forms, handing over between $25 and $300 for the papers. It’s upsetting that already poor people are forking over money for free forms, but the documents aren’t copyrighted, Smith said.

“We can’t stop them,” he said.

The pro se forms are a work in progress, said Allan Stewart, a St. Louis attorney and member of the Supreme Court Committee for Access to Family Courts, which created the forms. The committee is completing work on an educational DVD that will be issued to every circuit clerk’s office. The film shows litigants where to find the pro se forms and repeats a message repeated on the court’s Web site: It’s best to hire a lawyer.

“It’s our standard mantra,” Smith said. “People should not be representing themselves. That’s a bad idea. But you have the right to do it. If you do it yourself, these are the forms you have to use.”

“Lawyer in the Library” program in Vallejo, CA

TerryConaway — Tue, 21 Jul 2009 15:49:09 +0000

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.”

The service, offered at the John F. Kennedy Library, is in high demand. At least 25 residents often settle into chairs lining a library lobby at least an hour before the twice-monthly events — and that’s just in hopes of signing up.

Vallejo resident Tom Boruta said at one session, he was surprised to learn he would have only up to 20 minutes with an attorney.

“What I want him to explain, there’s no way

he can do it in 20 minutes,” Boruta said.Nearby, Jaime Valle was a third-time visitor to the program. He said his questions had previously taken about 12 minutes to answer. Valle added that he could not imagine how much an attorney would charge for the same service.

The local program’s attorneys are often hit with questions that run the gamut of legal specialties, said Nancy Atkins, the reference librarian who now leads the program. She said she tells participants that the attorneys are only theirs for the length of the appointment.

“We are a beginning for people who need legal services … It does happen that problems are solved,” Atkins said.

Vallejo criminal law attorney Amy Morton said she volunteered regularly for the program until about four years ago.

“The bureaucracy is really hard, and they don’t know who to turn to,” Morton said. “I can’t even imagine what the lines must look like now.”

Morton said one difficulty for her was answering civil law-related questions, like landlord/tenant disputes, disability issues and divorce law — specialties she does not practice.

“I’m not trying to pass the buck, but if more civil attorneys in the area would donate one day every six months, it would help out tremendously,” Morton said.

The Vallejo office of federally funded Legal Services of Northern California serves as the more in-depth version of Lawyer in the Library. That office is restricted in whom it serves and for what issues, and is staffed by only two full-time attorneys for the entire county, Managing Attorney Bob Stalker said.

Stalker said the number of eligible applicants have increased in the past year, as local unemployment and foreclosure rates have risen. Attorneys’ pro bono work and the Lawyer in the Library program help — but are only a “drop in the bucket” compared to the need, he said.

“A lot of times, the majority of people that need legal assistance are just not going to get help,” Stalker said. “A lot of what our office does is give advice, resource material, self-help material. It’s really kind of a triage approach — we’re like a legal emergency room.”

Contact staff writer Jessica A. York at (707) 553-6834 or 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.

No appointed counsel for Pro Se bankruptcy filer

TerryConaway — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 15:24:10 +0000

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.

9th Circuit holds that pro se patron didn’t knowingly waive counsel

Tammy Pettinato — Wed, 11 Jul 2007 05:44:31 +0000

On July 6, the 9th Circuit held in United States v. Forrester that Mark Forrester did not knowingly waive his 6th amendment right to counsel where the trial court judge did not adequately explain the charges against Forrester or the possible penalties he faced.

According to the Metropolitan-News Enterprise, Forrester had been charged with “conspiring to manufacture and distribute” Ecstasy. A year into the case, Forrester filed a motion to defend himself. From the Metropolitan-News:

At the hearing on his motion, U.S. District Judge Thomas J. Whelan of the Southern District of California repeatedly warned Forrester that defendants who represent themselves rarely succeed.

His remarks included the admonishment, “I want to unequivocally tell you and strongly recommend to you that you don’t do this. In most cases it’s a disaster.” He also told Forrester that “in all cases it is not a good idea for a nonlawyer to oppose a lawyer in a criminal trial.”

Though he did offer caveats, Whelan did not inform the defendant of the charge against him. He also told Forrester incorrectly that he faced a mandatory minimum sentence of ten years to life in prison when, in fact, he faced no minimum sentence and a maximum of 20 years behind bars.

After Forrester gave repeated assurances that he was “coherent,” “literate,” and aware of the consequences of self-representation, Whelan granted his motion to appear pro se at trial as well as at some of the post-trial proceedings.

At a follow-up hearing in March, the judge addressed various concerns pertaining to Forrester’s self-representation, but again did not talk about the charge against him. Nor did he correct his previous error about the potential sentence Forrester faced.

The Court noted the high burden placed on the government in waiver of counsel cases and found the fact that the trial judge did not specify the charges particularly damaging. The Court also found it irrelevant that the trial judge had actually overstated the possible penalities that Forrester faced.

Debt collectors and consumerist.com

Tammy Pettinato — Fri, 29 Jun 2007 21:32:27 +0000

While trolling the news for useful information to post on shlep, I came across this blog post at Consumerist.com. It advises people who are being pursued by debt collectors to make sure that the company who is trying to collect really owns the debt that it’s claiming the person owes. They also point to this great article offering tips for people being sued by debt collecters over at Alabama Consumer Law Blog.

I have heard about Consumerist before, but today was the first time I visited their web-site, and I highly recommend it. They analyze new products, discuss the customer service of various companies, and as the above article indicates, offer useful tips for consumers who are dealing with various sorts of problems related to buying and selling. It’s a great web-site for all things related to consumer rights.

A quick perusal of the archives showed pages dealing with debt collection, early termination fees, fraud, and identity theft, and much more. You can also send them tips when a company treats you unfairly. Check it out.

Bank of America kicks off new pro bono initiative

Tammy Pettinato — Wed, 20 Jun 2007 17:35:26 +0000

nbsp;EARTHtimes.org is reporting that today Bank of America expanded a pro bono effort it has been working on since 2005 by

partnering with Sanctuary for Families, Neighborhood Entrepreneur Law Project, Volunteers of Legal Service, New York Family Court, Volunteer Lawyers for the Arts, and several major law firms to help ensure the legal needs of the city’s underserved and vulnerable are met.

The project will be centered in New York City. In developing the program, Bank of America consulted with its New York Legal Department for information about issues and causes of interest as well as time constraints on the lawyers.

Of special interest to shlep readers: One project that Bank of America lawyers will be participating in is the Self-Represented Legal Services Project at Brooklyn Family Court, covered by shlep previously here and here.