Judge Karen Cole of Florida’s 4th Judicial Circuit told a group of young lawyers something many believe but won’t say out loud: Pro se litigants are crazy.
Speaking to a group of 50 new lawyers recently, the judge didn’t mince words:
Cole said it’s her experience that people who represent themselves in court generally fall into one of two categories: those who aren’t represented by an attorney for financial reasons and those who are “unbalanced.”
“If they’re in the second group, be polite, but don’t expect to build any bridges. If they’re in the first group, think about if you went into surgery not knowing anything about it,” she said.
We’ve all heard it. People go to court without a lawyer and spout a bunch of nonsense. We make ridiculous claims and argue silly legal positions. We represent ourselves with no understanding of the way courts operate or the way judges decide cases.
We get angry when opposing lawyers misrepresent the facts and when judges rule against us. Far too often we file motions to disqualify either the judge or the opposing lawyer. Bailiffs stay close, on alert in the event we need restraining.
No one is surprised when pro se litigants act like madmen.
Judicial bias is real, and there are reasons for it. The most obvious reason is that judges assume we’re not prepared and they don’t want us wasting the court’s time. They prefer to deal with lawyers who speak their language. That’s one of the hazards of representing yourself in court.
This wasn’t always the case. In the early days of the United States, the average free man could go to court without much preparation and ask a judge to address his conflicts with another man. Often, neither party was represented by a lawyer. This was not only common but expected. Judicial bias against people representing themselves was rare.
As time went on, two developments changed this.
Lenders got bigger, greedier, and meaner. In the early days, they rarely took their customers to court. When a debtor couldn’t pay, they took a loss and moved on. Now, as part of the business model, banks take their customers to court in droves. So not only are there more pro se litigants in court, many have been dragged kicking and screaming to pay as little as a few hundred dollars. The legal representatives for these companies have the ear of judges, who are disinclined to receive the arguments of self-represented defendants.
In parallel, lawyers have flooded the market for their services.Stephen Magee, a professor of finance and economics at the University of Texas says there are 40 percent more lawyers than needed in the U.S. Yet law schools keep cranking them out, and the legal system accommodates them in ways it doesn’t accommodate pro se litigants.
Imagine you’re a judge, and on a daily basis, you see or hear about promising law school graduates who are unemployed. You take the bench for a hearing, and standing next to a group of sharply-dressed young lawyers is a bedraggled self-represented litigant struggling to make an argument. How patient can you be?
Judicial bias exists. And since it does, we as pro se litigants must maximize our knowledge, our preparation, and our persuasive skills to level the playing field.
And when we do, we’ll force the courts to respect us no matter how broke or crazy we are.
More Like This:
Are You Prepared For Court? Take The Quiz
If You're A Pro Se Plaintiff, This Manual Is For You
Best Blog Posts For Pro Se Litigants — The 2019 Edition
Did You Come To Appease Or To Conquer? The 5 Types…
11 Things To Consider When You Need To Sue
6 Of The Biggest Mistakes Pro Se Litigants Make
Thinking About Going Pro Se? Let Me Help You Out
31 Affirmative Defenses And How To Assert Them
Jill says
please help me- My ex stole ALL of my marital assets- – he had help through my attorneys assistance- my ex stole over $800,000 in assets and the court is letting him get away with it. I can’t find an attorney due to no one will take the case because it will throw my attorney “under the bus”. I just had a Judge not even listen to my pro se plea.- He rendered an immediate ruling that did not look at any of my evidence. I do have proof all this happened- AND the Florida bar BLATANTLY was prejudicial during my claim because the attorney that did this to me worked as a mediator IN THE ACAP office- the Bar refused to even let me mediate against him. Please help me find someone who will help me sue my ex to get back what he ILLEGALLY stole…My ex enslaved me during our marriage and was abusive to me throughout including rape, physical and mental abuse. PLEASE help me find some one who cares… I feel like a total piece of shit an damm very depressed…I have proof of everything
Albert J. D'Agostino says
Left out of this article as a cause harming the judicial process was the creation and ultimate takeover of the legal system by the American Bar Association. It made sure that every state, with the exception of Arizona, had a law stating only certified lawyers can plead cases of another person. Pro se litigants are OK, though they are much maligned. The Constitution forbids any entity from making a law that inhibits or removes basic constitutional rights from any individual. These laws barring a non-lawyer from pleading the case of another is illegal and in direct contravention of the constitution and hundreds of years of tradition.
Previous common law allowed a person before the court to choose ANYONE whom they wanted to represent them. It could be a knowledgeable person, your uncle, or the bartender at a local watering hole. The ABA put a stop to this freedom and the states went along with it. I encountered this when I represented my wife in a foreclosure action. The bank’s lawyers tried to shut me down knowing full well that my wife was incapable of defending herself. I filed a motion using Supreme court cases, constitutional law, and other state decisions on the matter. The judge, although somewhat sympathetic, was afraid to step out of his comfort zone and ruled against me, but brought me in through the back door by adding me as a defendant.
When, at the motion hearing, I stood up and asked if the court thought it was fair that my wife, knowing absolutely nothing of the law and also being shy and timid,
be faced with taking on all of the lawyers who were members of the foreclosure mill we were fighting? My punchline was, “Is this what you call justice?” You could hear a pin drop. The judge, opposing lawyers, and all of the people in the court were stunned. I was met with thundering silence.
If the pro se litigant files motions that are well researched on principle, the language does not have to be eloquent, it forces the court to pay attention.
I am presently working on a website and a crowd funding plan to organize a group, with the aid of a certified lawyer, that will help or represent some of the more than 300 foreclosure cases in the county, most of which go undefended.
All help and suggestions are welcome.
Brian Vukadinovich says
This is a very eye opening piece about a Florida judge who made no bones about the fact that she harbors a bias against pro se litigants. Debra makes some excellent points in discussing the issue. The Florida Judge, Karen Cole, actually had the gall to publicly state at The Jacksonville Bar Association Young Lawyers Section’s annual “Afternoon at the Courthouse” CLE program to a group of new attorneys that it is her experience that people who represent themselves in court generally fall into one of two categories “those who aren’t represented by an attorney for financial reasons and those who are “unbalanced”. This brazen and outlandish prejudicial public statement reinforces the very real fact of the existence of judicial bias against pro se litigants. This judge violated the judicial conduct codes when she made such a brazen and outlandish public statement against pro se litigators. The Preamble to the Code of Judicial Conduct For the State of Florida explicitly states “Our legal system is based on the principle that an independent, fair and competent judiciary will interpret and apply the laws that govern us. The role of the judiciary is central to American concepts of justice and the rule of law. Intrinsic to all sections of this Code are the precepts that judges, individually and collectively, must respect and honor the judicial office as a public trust and strive to maintain confidence in our legal system.” This judge’s brazen and outlandish public statement calling pro se litigators “unbalanced” certainly undermines the public trust and diminishes public confidence in our legal system. Canon 1 of the Florida Code of Judicial Conduct states “An independent and honorable judiciary is indispensable to justice in our society. A judge should participate in establishing, maintaining, and enforcing high standards of conduct, and shall personally observe those standards so that the integrity and independence of the judiciary may be preserved.” Calling pro se litigators “unbalanced” certainly doesn’t demonstrate “high standards of conduct”. Canon 2 of the Florida Code of Judicial Conduct states “A judge shall respect and comply with the law and shall act at all times in a manner that promotes public confidence in the integrity and impartiality of the judiciary.” Calling pro se litigators “unbalanced” certainly doesn’t promote public confidence in the integrity and impartiality of the judiciary” by any stretch of the imagination. How could this particular judge be considered to be impartial when she is publicly denigrating pro se litigants as “unbalanced”? Canon 3 B (5) of the Florida Code of Judicial Conduct states “A judge shall perform judicial duties without bias or prejudice. A judge shall not, in the performance of judicial duties, by words or conduct manifest bias or prejudice, including but not limited to… socioeconomic status..” This judge clearly demonstrated her bias and prejudice against a socioeconomic status of people by publicly calling pro se litigants “unbalanced”. Canon 4 of the Florida Code of Judicial Conduct states “A judge shall conduct all of the judge’s quasi-judicial activities so that they do not: (1) cast reasonable doubt on the judge’s capacity to act impartially as a judge; (2) undermine the judge’s independence, integrity, or impartiality; (3) demean the judicial office”. Publicly calling pro se litigants “unbalanced” people clearly casts reasonable doubt on this judge’s capacity to act impartially as a judge and undermines this judge’s independence, integrity and impartiality in a big way. The fact that the Florida judicial officials did not take any action against this judge, Karen Cole, in light of her blatant bias and prejudicial public statement against pro se litigants calling this class of people “unbalanced” speaks volumes as to the lack of integrity by the judiciary who creates rules of judicial conduct that their judges are supposed to follow, and yet when evidence demonstrates that the stated codes of conduct have been violated, the judicial officials look the other way and do nothing. This is unacceptable. This judge. Karen Cole, should not be presiding over any cases involving pro se litigants. Pro se litigants who encounter such biased judges should look at the state rules of judicial conduct of the particular state that their litigation is taking place in and take steps for the recusal and removal of such biased judges in their cases by filing appropriate motions with citation to the rules of conduct and demand that such biased judges be recused and disqualified from the case. I for one, as a pro se, take personal exception to this judge’s inappropriate sweeping statement against pro se’s. In March 2016, I represented myself, pro se, in a 5 day federal jury trial in Indiana against my former employer, a public school corporation, and its 5 attorneys of record in the case from 2 different law firms. I had a hostile judge that I had to deal with, he even told me at a settlement conference that he didn’t think I would win the case at trial and even threatened that he may sanction me if I didn’t win. I ooked him in the eye and told him that I didn’t accept his hollow threat of sanctions since I had beaten the corporation’s motion for summary judgment and could not be sanctioned for exercising my right to present my case at trial. And there were plenty of other issues going on as well as to his hostility against my pro se status. He was very condescending and very helpful to the corporation’s team of lawyers. This was after I beat the corporation’s motion for summary judgment. On March 11, 2016, the jury awarded me $203,840.39 and I was additionally awarded several thousands of dollars in costs in addition to the jury award. As a pro se I beat a team of corporate lawyers in a federal jury trial with a hostile judge presiding over my case. So for this insensitive and obviously biased Florida judge, Karen Cole, to make such an outlandish public statement that pro se’s are “unbalanced” people speaks volumes to her lack of personal and professional character. In my opinion, it seems that it is this judge who is the “unbalanced” one for making such an irresponsible and prejudicial statement which calls into questions her own fitness to be a judge. And if I would ever happen to see her anywhere, I would tell her that to her face. And if this unbalanced judge would ever like to debate me on this issue in a public forum, bring it on! Debra was absolutely right when she so eloquently stated in her writing that “we deserve judges who haven’t made up their minds about who we are.”