Mistakes to Avoid as a Pro Se Litigant
Lawyers often make mistakes against pro se litigants, but their mistakes rarely cost them the case. Even when they do things that are clearly wrong, unethical, or even criminal, lawyers seem to slide right out of it. In fact, bad behavior on behalf of their client is considered part of a lawyer’s job.
Conversely, pro se litigants who make mistakes lose day in and day out, even with minor infractions. This is most often due to lack of knowledge, but judicial bias and lawyer tricks add another layer of peril. Lawyers know how to avoid default judgments, dismissals, and summary judgments. Pro se litigants rarely do. Lawyers skillfully “handle” pro se opposition. Most pro se litigants don’t handle lawyers or their own cases with the skills needed to come out on top. In the end, most pro se litigants lose and they do so very quickly.
Get Our Free 5-Day Course to Your Inbox
We hate spam too. We'll never share your email.
To stay alive, avoid these 6 common mistakes pro se litigants make.
#6. NOT TAKING CHARGE OF YOUR CASE
Oftentimes, self-represented litigants become reactive when there’s a lawyer on the other side. Instead of getting ahead of things or running their own case, they let the lawyer take the lead. They spend so much time responding to discovery requests, summary judgment motions, motions to dismiss, and other filings that they don’t formulate a strategy of their own. They don’t do their own discovery or object to certain requests because they’re swamped and often intimidated. So, they’re always behind and in a constant reactive state. If a wise opponent sees how reactive you are, they can walk you right into an error. So, take control of your case. Never let a lawyer think that he’s in charge of it.
#5. LETTING LACK OF CONFIDENCE RULE
This is similar to the previous point. In a post, What Kind Of Pro Se Litigant Are You?, I discussed five types of pro se litigants. The least effective is one lacking in confidence. Many pro se litigants lose early by simply not showing up for court. Many more lose at the first hearing. With a lawyer on the opposite side and a robed judge on the bench, the average person is bound to feel as if they can’t succeed. Don’t let that feeling rule your actions. Lacking confidence, you might be tempted to ask the advice of your opponent’s lawyer. He’s not your friend. Where a judge is concerned, ask for clarification about a ruling, not for advice about your case. In the face of uncertainty and fear, don’t give up. Keep going and learn. Simply getting to the next step, the next hearing, or the next motion is a victory. The longer you stay in, the more confident you’ll be.
#4. FAILURE TO BRING A COURT REPORTER
Let’s say you go to court and a court reporter is not present. You argue very strong points against an attorney with weak ones. Despite both the law and facts on your side, you lose. Think an appellate court will understand what went wrong and overturn the ruling? Probably not. Appellate courts will find many excuses not to overturn a lower court ruling. Without a court reporter’s transcript, an appellate court will say that the lower court was in the best position to evaluate the arguments made. Then, they’ll let the lower court decision stand. A court reporter, on the other hand, creates an official record of proceedings that can be sent to the appellate court. In the lower court, the simple presence of a court reporter greatly curtails judicial bias and bad behavior from lawyers. With that, you have a better chance of getting a fair hearing. To learn more about the effect of court reporters on judges and lawyers see, A Court Reporter Stops All Foolishness.
#3. REACTING TO LAWYER CRAP
Remember this phrase: Litigation Privilege. The phrase has a formal meaning, but in layman’s language, it means that lawyers can do just about anything, especially to a self-represented litigant, to protect their clients. They can lie, steal, cheat–and kill if they could get away with it–to win. Lawyers don’t always need tricks to defeat pro se litigants, but they try them anyway. They can scare defendants into paying more than they owe or settling for far less than they deserve. They’ll use a request for admissions to make pro se litigants “admit” to undeserved liability by not answering. Some will even attempt to keep away your court reporter by lying to you or to your court reporting agency. So keep your eyes open when you’ve cornered a lawyer. Chances are, there’s a trick coming, and when it does, don’t let your emotions get the best of you. Stay focused on your case. Reacting in anger by moving for sanctions, writing letters to the judge, reporting lawyer behavior in a hearing, or moving to disqualify a lawyer makes thinking and strategizing difficult. That’s not to say certain issues shouldn’t be addressed. If you must take an issue head-on, like moving for sanctions, do it strategically so you’ll get the most out of it. Otherwise, only address lawyer antics and judicial bias when it hurts your case, not when it hurts your feelings.
#2. NOT DOING RESEARCH
One of the biggest mistakes pro se litigants make is not doing research. Lawyers count on pro se litigants’ ignorance of the law to win cases. The less a pro se litigant knows, the shorter the litigation process will be. A lawyer can buy a $7000 debt for $700 and pay a $100 fee to sue. Thirty or so days later, he wins a default judgment or a one-hearing judgment. He then has the right to collect the full $7000, the $100 court fee, and case-related costs. He’ll have to collect the money himself, but lawyers wouldn’t buy debt if the practice never paid off. Facing a pro se litigant in court pays off for lawyers almost all the time. Whether you’re a plaintiff or a defendant, you don’t want to get knocked out early because of a lack of knowledge. Learn the laws relevant to your case. The more you know, the longer you’ll stay and the less chance a lawyer will have a windfall at your expense.
#1. (FALSE) BRAVADO
The BIGGEST mistake pro se litigants make is thinking they know more than they do, as a way of overcompensating for lack of confidence. False bravado can lead you into mistakes #2, #3, and #4 on this list and a whole lot more. You don’t bring a court reporter because you don’t feel you need one. You don’t do research because you don’t have time, and you think you know enough. You react to or challenge every lawyer trick because you believe, without any evidence, that it’s the best thing to do. You talk about admiralty law, not because you know anything about it or where it fits into your case, but because you heard someone talk about it. You file the wrong motions in the wrong situations. It’s important to know what you don’t know and act accordingly. Instead of talking about sovereign citizenship, talk about and use civil procedure. Rather than reacting to lawyer antics, judicial bias or a sense of unfairness, focus on your case. Learn it backwards and forwards, and then bring your court reporter. That’s how you win. See Sovereign Citizens Make Pro Se Litigants Look Silly for more about the “problem” with sovereign citizens.
——–
Pssst! Hey, you there, struggling to win your case. Isn’t it time you gave Courtroom5 a spin? Our specialists publish articles like this to help you level the playing field, but it’s sometimes too late to save your case. Stop trying to catch up; instead, get the insight that you need to succeed. Get ahead of the game and start driving your case to the judgment you deserve. See how it works today!
More Like This:
Are You Prepared For Court? Take The Quiz
If You're A Pro Se Plaintiff, This Manual Is For You
Thinking About Going Pro Se? Let Me Help You Out
31 Affirmative Defenses And How To Assert Them
How To Write A Motion--A Guide And Sample Motions…
Best Blog Posts For Pro Se Litigants — The 2018 Edition
Tricks Are For Lawyers: A Guide For Dealing With Bad…
Negotiating A Settlement You Can Live With
Richard Ferguson says
I’ve filed and served a request for admissions which the Defendant”s attorney failed to answer within the 30 day period allotted by rule here in Oregon. The rules also state that a failure to answer the request will result in admission of the answers requested. From what I can glean from the rules, I now need to file a “Motion To Determine Sufficiency”. If I fail to file such a motion, can I simply ask the court to declare, at the outset of trial, that the defendant, by failing to answer the admissions request, has in fact admitted certain facts which I no longer must prove at trial?
Brian Vukadinovich says
Hi Richard,
Before I answer the essence of your question, the Oregon Rules of Civil Procedure states and requires that “The request for admissions shall be preceded by the following statement printed in capital letters in a font size at least as large as that in which the request is printed: “FAILURE TO SERVE A WRITTEN ANSWER OR OBJECTION WITHIN THE TIME ALLOWED BY ORCP 45 B WILL RESULT IN ADMISSION OF THE FOLLOWING REQUESTS.” I will presume that you complied with that requirement when you submitted your requests for admissions as the rule states that it “shall” be done in this manner. Sometimes things can sound nit picky but if a party fails to do something that it is required to do and fails to do so, it gives the opposing side ammunition to attack the relief you are requesting that you feel you are entitled to. You are correct, since the opposing side failed to answer your request(s), you now need to file a “Motion to Determine Sufficiency”. You should advise the court in your motion that the opposing party has failed to answer your requests and ask the court to order that each of the matters are admitted. A motion to determine sufficiency is generally geared toward answers that were submitted but possibly not sufficient and parties then move the court to order the party to provide a “sufficient” answer, but since the opposing party failed to provide any answers in your case, you should advise the court of this fact in your motion and that you would like the court to issue an order deeming the matters as admitted. I presume when you say that the opposing party “failed to answer” you mean that the party didn’t answer at all. There is a difference between “failing to answer” and submitting an insufficient answer. Be clear to the court which one it is, if the party failed to answer, so state it, but if the party provided answers that were insufficient, you need to address it in that manner and ask the court to order the opposing party to provide sufficient answers. Be sure to include a copy of the requests for admissions that you served as an exhibit to your motion for the court’s ready reference. Also, under Oregon’s Rule 46A(4) you may apply for an award of expenses incurred in relation to the motion.
Richard Ferguson says
Thank you Brian,
I did in fact include the notice advising the defendant’s atty of the consequences of the failure to answer the request, as stated in the ORCP 45 Rule. The 30 days allotted by 45 B have elapsed and I have received no response at all, either admitting, denying or objecting to the request. I’m preparing the Motion To Determine Sufficiency, and I will follow your counsel by including a copy of the Request For Admissions, even though I filed a copy with the Court, along with proof of service, on the day I served the request to the defendant’s lawyer. If the Judge grants the motion, issues an Order… well, my case is halfway won. And, I won’t have to drag a handfull of witnesses into court, against their will, to testify. Many times I’ve felt overwhelmed by this, ready to fold my hand even though I know the defendant’s lawyer is bluffing, trying to intimidate me into giving up. Thank you very much for your knowledge, your advice, and your encouragement. I’m thinking I may very well prevail afterall.
Brian Vukadinovich says
Hi Richard,
It sounds like you are on the right path and are doing things correctly. Since the defendant hasn’t complied with the rules and has failed to either admit, deny, or object to your requests, it seems clear that the judge will not have much other choice other than to issue an order deeming the matters as admitted under ORCP Rule 45. And congratulations for submitting requests for admissions, many pro se’s make the mistake of not submitting requests for admissions in their litigations. Requests for Admissions can be very crucial to a case and it is a mistake not to submit them to the opposing party. Hopefully the judge in your case will follow the governing rule and issue an order deeming the matters from your requests as admitted. That will certainly help you prove your case and as you said, will also potentially alleviate your having to drag some witnesses into court against their will to testify. Good for you for holding your own and overcoming the “overwhelming” factor and resisting folding your hand. And good for you for not allowing the defendant’s lawyer into bluffing you and trying to intimidate you into giving up. This is what unscrupulous lawyers try to do, and unfortunately, it works many times. It sounds like you are doing a great job holding your own. You are doing a great job on how you are handling the requests for admissions issues. Keep up the good work! I wish you the best!
Brian Vukadinovich says
Hi Richard,
The answer to the last part of your question when you ask that If you fail to file such a motion, can you simply ask the court to declare, at the outset of trial, that the defendant, by failing to answer the admissions request, has in fact admitted certain facts which you no longer must prove at trial. By failing to file the motion as the rules require you would be jeopardizing your right to this relief. At trial the defendant’s lawyer will almost assuredly object by stating to the court that you have waived this argument since you didn’t file the motion per the Oregon Rules of Civil Procedure and in all likelihood the judge would probably agree and sustain the objection. There usually isn’t much, if any, wiggle room when it comes to compliance with the stated rules. Whenever you fail to follow a stated rule you are giving the opposing side’s lawyer ammunition to attack your argument. It would behoove you to file the motion to determine sufficiency and request a ruling deeming the matters as admitted since the defendant failed to answer.
A.J. DAgostino says
Great advice! Every point you have made about lawyers and their tricks, I have experienced. One of the greatest failures of the lower courts is the acceptance of inadequate documentation because they go unchallenged. The court is not going to do your work or come to your rescue as you may think. If the document is a not original or is forged, it is up to you to make the case. Even if the judge can see that a document may have an obvious forgery, you must still make the case against it.
Richard Ferguson says
You sound like a lawyer. Your response is nonresponsive.😆
Debra Slone says
Good points, A.J. In particular, your statement, “The court is not going to do your work or come to your rescue as you may think” is so spot on.
Sara says
What do you do if you can’t afford a Court Reporter? There are microphones everywhere for recording purposes, so would that suffice instead, and would I have access to that for transcription purposes?
I have lost two attorneys so far, and well past depleted my funds.
Debra Slone says
Hi Sara,
Good question. Some jurisdictions supply court reporters. All you’ll have to pay for is a transcript if you need it. However, most other jurisdictions don’t supply court reporters.
Find out what your jurisdiction does. If they don’t have them, it’s worth it to bring your own. If a hearing means anything to you, the money you shell out for a court reporter will pay back in spades. If it’s difficult to pay for a court reporter, try to stretch those hearings out as long as you can. If you’re in a multi-year case, you might have a hearing only 3 times per year anyway. If you find you’re having more and can’t afford it, prioritize them. This also helps you think strategically about your case.
There may be microphones or cellphones available, but the only official record of a court hearing is that of the court reporter/stenographer.
Sonja Ebron says
Sara, you can also draft your own transcript or write up a summary of the hearing. Share it with other parties and negotiate a stipulation for what happened at the hearing. When the parties agree, you can file a stipulated transcript or hearing summary into the record. It’s every bit as valid as a court reporter’s transcript.
Sara says
Thank you, Debra and Sonja.
Both of your suggestions are very helpful. It seems that if I were to appeal, it would not be for my upcoming Motion to Dismiss, because I understand that would be an ‘interlocutory’ appeal, and therefore not allowed. I also understand your point about the Judge & OC taking a pro se litigant much more seriously and cutting the nonsense by the very presence of a court reporter. In that respect, it makes a lot of sense in that a reporter may make an appeal unnecessary if the court decides to be reasonable and fair:)
John Johnson says
What would happen if you could not afford depositions?
I’m the Plaintiff in a civil suit against two large corporations and at $750 or more a pop, there is no way that I can pay out of pocket for multiple depositions. So how would this work exactly? Just subponena all of them instead?
I was a member of Courtroom5 but had to cancel because I wasn’t using it. I plan to re-enroll again if the case doesn’t settle.
Debra Slone says
Hi John,
Yes, depositions can be very expensive. That’s one reason I try to get all the discovery I can via 3 written instruments, the Request for Admissions, Production, and Interrogatories. When I do depositions, I make sure that the person(s) I depose is the person I’ll get the biggest strategic advantage and most useful information from.
I wish you good luck in digging up the information you need. Go get ’em!
Andy Mcphee says
Does Courtroom 5 cover the State Colorado Laws and rules of Evidence?
Sonja Ebron says
Hi Andy,
Courtroom5 doesn’t really ‘cover’ the laws and rules of any state, but the tools and other services are appropriate for use anywhere in the United States. See all the details at https://app.courtroom5.com/services/courtroom5-membership/, and reach out via chat with any questions.
Edwin Mancia says
This article has effectivly refueled me as I prepare for my next appearance in court. I have been litigating this case since November 2017, I am moving the court to vacate this Void judgment, I believe in our Judicial system, but I don’t trust the many tyrants,sitting behind the bench.
Debra Slone says
Edwin,
Glad that the article refueled you! I totally agree and understand any frustration you might have with the people “behind the bench”. In those situations, just keep going. You’re doing something right because you’re still there after months of litigation. Kudos.
Learned Hand says
Pitting pro se litigants against lawyers as if lawyers are enemies does far more disservice to your clients. I looked at your website, and I see that you toe a fine line between practicing without a license and simply giving pro se litigants enough rope to hang themselves. I understand that it’s a gimmick to make money for yourselves, but the nobler thing to do would be to direct these people to pro bono services instead of guiding them to shooting themselves in the foot by acting like the opposing party’s lawyer is out to get them and that what they don’t understand about the practice of law is somehow a trick or deception.
Sonja Ebron says
Really appreciate your comment. We’re always on the lookout for pro bono services to recommend, but I’m not aware of one in the country that’s able to serve a tenth of the people who need them. If you know of some with spare capacity, please do share.
I’m assuming you’re a lawyer, my friend. So I’m curious about your language and the notion that our commentary here represents “far more” of a disservice to pro se litigants than do lawyers. You’ve got a pretty low opinion of your profession.
We’re pro se litigants, and we talk to other pro se litigants all day every day, probably more than any lawyer does. I can tell you no one needs to “pit” pro se’s against lawyers; you guys have that covered. Perhaps if you all would take more seriously your obligation to deliver access to justice, we wouldn’t need to stand in for you. Thanks again for the comment.
Traci says
Oh my Lord Sonja, you’re my new hero! I went at it with an attorney on Avvo; I asked a legal question and he more or less belittled me for thinking that I had a case and then for thinking that I could actually handle it on my own. This guy was a real jerk! l know I have a winning case but there are not many lawyers in my area that are familiar enough with the statutes to take it pro bono and therefore take the risk. Even the legal opinions that I’ve read say the case law is sparse. Thank you for standing up for pro se litigants and setting the record straight.
Sonja Ebron says
Appreciate the affirmation, Traci. As pro se litigants, we are all our own heroes. Thanks for taking your case in your own hands.
Learned Hand says
“I’m assuming you’re a lawyer, my friend. So I’m curious about your language and the notion that our commentary here represents “far more” of a disservice to pro se litigants than do lawyers. You’ve got a pretty low opinion of your profession.” See, this is exactly the kind of crap I’m talking about, and what’s worse is that you can literally read the entire entry that I wrote and see that I did NOT write that the commentary here represents more of a disservice to pro se litigants than lawyers do a disservice to pro se litigants. However, this entire article is rife with misrepresentations. You give a false definition of litigation privilege. You call normal parts of litigation lawyer’s tricks, like requests to admit (which are in state rules of civil procedure, and pro se litigants can send requests to admit, too). What you call lawyer’s crap in negotiations is just what you have to expect in a negotiation whether or not you’re a lawyer. Your description of stare decisis is deceptive: appellate courts don’t “give excuses” for not overturning lower court’s decisions. I mean, I get it: if you didn’t feed this David-and-Goliath complex, you wouldn’t have a marketing angle. I don’t think that pro se litigants can’t handle small cases that don’t require a lot of discovery or witnesses, and when the facts are on their side, why not? And yes, you should always have a court reporter if possible, but if you plan to make an appeal, you should also know what to say, particularly what to object to on the record, for an appeal. I don’t think that encouraging paranoid beliefs about litigation and lawyers is helpful. From this side, dealing with a pro se litigant who has a chip on their shoulder, thinks everything the lawyer does is to hurt them personally, that the fact that we don’t break attorney-client privilege simply because they want us to is shady business, that upholding our duty to represent our clients is a personal attack and such makes me think that you don’t know what you want. Do you want to go to court acting as your own lawyer, thus being treated like a lawyer and held to the same standards and dealing with the same things new lawyers deal with (even if you screw up. Ask lawyers about their first court appearances), or do you want to not be treated as a lawyer and have the rules bent just for you?
Learned Hand says
Also, I don’t know what this obligation is to give access to justice that is apparently on the shoulders of individual lawyers. I only know of the 6th Amendment right to an attorney for defendants in a criminal trial, in which case any lawyer could be appointed to represent a defendant; I know of no other obligation to make legal services available to everyone on demand. But you can’t seriously tell me that you don’t pit pro se litigants against lawyers and publish the articles you do. I know some lawyers who are pretty burnt out dealing with pro se nonsense, and I know some who are more generous to those who play lawyer for themselves, but when your opposing counsel is a pro se litigant who can’t distinguish you from your client, or doesn’t understand why you’re representing your client vigorously and then goes on the defense, you wish you could just tell them what is obvious to you: it’s not about them. For example, I might be hesitant to encourage Tanya here to represent herself since she doesn’t seem to understand the difference between pro bono and contingency and statutes and case law, and that she hasn’t actually found any case law yet before deciding to pursue her lawsuit on her own and presenting what may be a matter of first impression, but that’s not my business…
Debra Slone says
“But you can’t seriously tell me that you don’t pit pro se litigants against lawyers and publish the articles you do. ”
Uh, yeah, I can tell you that. By the time most pro se litigants find us they’ve already explored and dismissed, for whatever reason, the notion of hiring a lawyer.
The thing is, there are thousands of posts from lawyers lamenting the presence of pro se litigants in courts. As a profession, you’ve had your say, over and over again. Your rant here just adds to the muck. You’re not saying anything new, surprising, or overly intelligent.
Still, no matter what you and your fellow lawyers say, people will continue to represent themselves in court. It’s a right they apparently embrace. Very few sites focus on helping pro se litigants do better in court. Courtroom5 is one of them, and we’re proud of it.
MaRee Smith says
Self-Representation.—The Court has held that the Sixth Amendment, in addition to guaranteeing the right to retained or appointed counsel, also guarantees a defendant the right to represent himself. this a right the defendant must adopt knowingly and intelligently; under some circumstances the trial judge may deny the authority to exercise it, as when the defendant simply lacks the competence to make a knowing or intelligent waiver of counsel or when his self-representation is so disruptive of orderly procedures that the judge may curtail it. the essential elements of self-representation were spelled out in McKaskle v. Wiggins…
6th amendment apparently promises our access. to legal actions.. but so many courts keep the information under lock stock and barrel and it is not fair. I have never had to have an attorney because I have done it myself. The one time I had an attorney she was playing a game and it wasnt my game. bu alterior motives for sure,. She was fired and I moved forward and still won the case.
Debra Slone says
MaRee,
First, kudos on fighting back. Congratulations on winning.
Yes, there are circumstances in which people are unable to represent themselves, but the vast majority of people are like you and me. With a little knowledge, we can competently represent ourselves in court. The obstacles placed in our way because we don’t or can’t hire a lawyers are what frustrate things.
Thanks for your comment and insights.
Kathleen says
I am a member iPod this website and a Pro Se litigant. I do not feel pitted against opposing counsel at all. I have four attorneys representing defendants in my suit. I can clearly see those ethically defending their clients to the best of their ability and I also see two of them reverting to sneaky tricks, underestimating me as a Pro Se litigant and not following the law. The articles on this site that you seem to think are misguiding people are very helpful in understanding the behavior of those, less ethical, of your colleagues than you may be! This is a resource for people with sixth amendment rights. If you would like to represent me, pro bono, in my multi million dollar defamation suit, please contact me!
Debra Slone says
Kathleen,
Unfortunately, your experiences with lawyers sound familiar. Thanks so much for sharing and sounding in.
Lucash White says
What are the rules on discovery?…..in the following case:
a. A lawyer agrees to get discovery in a case. Names of Complainants. et. al..
b. He sends an e-mail to the Opposition writing that “I have been provided with all discovery.”
c. When confronted he argues that the Opposition didn’t furnish the discovery demanded. “I was simply stating that I had been provided with all the discovery…that the Opposition would furnish.”
Sonja Ebron says
Hi Lucash,
Thanks for the comment. I hope that’s not your lawyer, but if so, sounds like you’ve got a mess on your hands there. I doubt the rules will be much help until you’ve handled your lawyer. Good luck!
Lena D. Thompson says
Does Courtroom5 apply to Ilinois ? I’m trying to accept the Judges recommendation fir division of property in a divorce case and avoid trial but my lawyer is trying to go to trial to Tim up the fees … I know I can dismiss lawyer but how do I tell the judge that I want to accept her recommendation for division of property ? Do I 1st file pro se and attach a motion to it simply telling the judge this ? My lawyer is telling me that the judge may not let me out of the case, etc. to discourage me. I need this case to close. No children are involved and this case resulted from a Bifurcated Divorce. I need to get some advice as soon as possible and feel confident about filing the documents. Trial is set for June 2019.
Lena D. Thompson says
I also read that I can file my Motion and ask for fees at the same time ? Their is an estate attached that has been used for legal fees throughout the case. But my goal is to close this case. I thinking I need to subscribe but want to be sure that I can get the right help at this site.
Sonja Ebron says
Hi Lena, Courtroom5 has members in every U.S. state working on a wide variety of civil cases. We don’t offer legal advice, but we can help you find the answers you need to handle your case on your own. Feel free to chat with us (big green button bottom right here) for more information, or sign up at https://get.courtroom5.com/join at your convenience.
Lena Thompson says
I’m at the end of my case / cases … waiting for written answer from District Court regarding insurance claims, (already done via lawyer). I need help with filings and Response to filings; which shouldn’t be that many up to this point as my opponent wants to close the case too. Can this site help me ?
Debra Slone says
Hi Lena,
It’s not clear exactly what you need, but generally speaking, we help people represent themselves better in court.
At this point, you might do well in our community where you can benefit from the experiences of other pro se litigants.
Or
You might simply need to use one of our Document templates in our toolset.
Or
You might benefit from a live workshop where you can resolve questions in a single afternoon.
Good luck in your case.
Mike Jackson says
My question is: Can I serve my soon to be ex-wife a Discovery request even though I’m pro se and representing myself? I was served with a request from her attorney after our hearing for temporary alimony and child support and I want to counter act with a request as well. Her attorney is taking full advantage of my pro se circumstances and incompetent knowledge of divorce law as she should. I don’t want this to be an easy win for her when I have evidence that can work in my favor. I just need to find the best way to get it in front of the judge without being bullied in the court room. I don’t know my rights as a pro se litigant and I need as much advice as possible. I picked up her financial affidavit from the clerks office and she’s leaving out a lot of income that needs to be uncovered in my case. The issue is being overwhelmed by all of her attorney deadlines and demands which sidetracks my course of action to respond in my defense appropriately.
Debra Slone says
Hi Mike,
Thanks for your comment and question. As I point out in the article, it’s important to send out your own discovery in a case. Otherwise, your opponent or his lawyer will think they’re running the show.
We don’t offer legal advice, but we can help you find the answers you need to handle your case on your own. Feel free to chat with us (big green button bottom right here) for more information, or sign up at https://get.courtroom5.com/join at your convenience.
Pat Burdette says
Hi, I’m a pro se plaintiff in a case against my son, who is attempting to steal my equity in a house I enabled him and his new wife to own. We had a quasi-contract with a sunset of 15 years in which I would receive the $130,000.00 in equity I have in the home, but I allowed my son and daughter in law to have the full benefit of home ownership by not putting my name on the mortgage or deed. I have gotten past the dismissal on that count, but have also claimed “Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress” since my son has alienated me as the only grandparent of my 2 granddaughters. Since defendants have caused plaintiff the loss of his loved ones, I have included that complaint hoping to expand the purview to support the quasi-contract and unjust enrichment complaint. My question is – can I depose myself as I depose my son and daughter in law?
OneAngryWoman says
Great article! I want to sue my ex divorce lawyer for malpractice. Quick background: Married 16 yrs, very abusive marriage, have not worked since marriage (Ex wouldn’t allow it) but put all of my savings into the marriage enabling us to purchase investment property and a marital home, disabled, 1 child, ex makes 6 figures, I could only afford a “flat-fee “divorce lawyer who refused to request temp and post divorce spousal support for me, this put me on public assistance. He forced me to sign agreement waiving everything-retirement accounts, support, everything except child support-he told me my fee was used up and he was now working for free and that we had to wrap this up. He also said I would have to give him 10K up front if I didn’t sign, and told me that my child would continue to be abused so I should sign to appease my ex, and that I could always change it later so I signed. At one point he was even yelling at me, I became intimidated. This all happened right before inquest at the courthouse. He also imputed an income of 20K for me on the agreement, even though he knew I had no income for 16 years and could not work. He said it was required, which I found out later was fraud. I dismissed him after inquest, then tried to change it on my own but judge abandoned divorce and denied my motion due to my ex not filing proper papers. My ex suddenly was pro se during inquest, then back with his lawyer again after. I’m convinced this was a trick. Anyway, ex restored case to the calendar, new judge said only for final judgement and again disregarded my motion. After 6 years divorce was finalized. Surprisingly, ex’s atty told me to sue my ex attorney for malpractice. Question: Since I tried to get support on my own as a pro se litigant, does that mean my lawyer whom I fired cannot be held liable for his refusal to request support for me and for his lies and fraud since successor counsel has an obligation to fix outgoing counsel’s mistakes? Does that mean as pro se I was successor counsel, and does that mean I cannot sue him for malpractice? I REALLY want to sue him. He’s damaged me and my child greatly. Thanks.