3 ms·
Going through a family court case now and your take is spot on. > reasonable support for pro se representation in court I've sat and watched about 100 cases.
by breck 3y ago
Going through a family court case now and your take is spot on.
> reasonable support for pro se representation in court
I've sat and watched about 100 cases. I've noticed if both parties are pro se, judges are usually reasonable.
If one party is pro se and the other is not, well I've never seen the pro se party get even a fair chance.
> lawyers win when people fight, and the more they fight, the more complicated the law and the case, the more wealth is transferred to the legal profession
A friend is a Federal Judge and told me they have a term for it the "Family Law Cartel". He said he can describe Family Law Court with one word: "Cesspool".
- _kbh_ 3y ago> If one party is pro se and the other is not, well I've never seen the pro se party get even a fair chance. Depends what you mean by a fair chance, a lot of the pro se stuff I have seen the judges effectively hold the hands of the pro se litigant and effectively interpret everything they say very favourably. Being pro se doesn’t mean you get to just chat with the judge to litigate the suite it’s meant to mean that you take on the role of a lawyer and are held to the same standards.
- throwaway7070 3y agoThis whole "pro se" being treated well by judges is not the reality I have experienced. I have been involved in a few cases over the last several years as a pro se litigant and I lost almost every motion I filed, despite the other (represented) side's position being obviously frivolous. However, I also ghostwrote motions for attorneys in those cases as well, and when those motions are signed by an attorney they succeeded every single time. It seems like unless a lawyer signs a filing it will be outright ignored by many judges.