• Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar

Courtroom5

Be Your Own Lawyer

  • How It Works
  • Legal Tips
    • Access To Justice
    • Affirmative Defenses
    • Discovery
    • Dismissal
    • Legal Research
    • Litigation Strategy
    • Summary Judgment
  • Sign Up
  • Sign In

December 19, 2019 By Debra Slone 20 Comments

Did You Come To Appease Or To Conquer? The 5 Types Of Pro Se Litigants

Are you the kind of pro se litigant who’s lost in the courthouse wilderness? Or did you come to conquer it?

This is Not a Test or Quiz

Before we start, let’s get something out of the way. This is not one of those tests where your result is something you adore, like a labrador retriever, a daisy, or a BMW.

In fact, this isn’t a test at all. It’s a way for us as self-represented litigants to analyze and understand our capabilities, our readiness to represent ourselves in court.

It isn’t scientific, but understanding your type allows you to assess the current strengths and weaknesses of your approach to litigation, and do something about it if need be.

So, what kind of pro se litigant are you now? And what kind of pro se litigant would you like to be?

Our analysis is not based on personality types but levels of confidence, knowledge, skill, experience, and emotion. Change goes in one direction: up.

Let’s take a look at the different types of pro se litigants — the Appeaser, Aggressor, Magician, Gangster and Conqueror.

The Five Pro Se Litigant Types

    

THE APPEASER

The Appeaser is defined by fear, confusion, and lack of confidence.

They are reluctant litigants. Appeasers are usually defendants who only appear in court because they fear what might happen if they don’t.

They don’t know how to begin to defend themselves and will often seek help from judges, clerks, or people who don’t have their best interests in mind, like the lawyer for the other side.

Appeasers are the most likely of all pro se litigants to be passive in court. They will often apologize for things they shouldn’t in order to appease.

Many self-represented litigants start out as Appeasers, and it’s okay to start that way. What’s important is the willingness to learn and move up.

THE AGGRESSOR

The Aggressor is driven by anger and false bravado. There may also be a strong distrust of the legal system, expressed as a disdain for lawyers. So it’s not likely they’ll ask for help from a lawyer on the other side.

The Aggressor’s desire to fight back and win is visceral, but they’re not sure how to go about it. They’re more confident than the Appeaser, yet they lack knowledge, experience, skills or persuasiveness.

They’re assertive and have a legal position they’re willing to advocate. They take a trial and error approach to litigation that, like other trial and error situations, is replete with error.

They manage to win sometimes just by staying in the case and learning as they go.

THE MAGICIAN

Magicians know a little more about the law than Aggressors and can be very persuasive. They know the issues on which the judge needs to be persuaded, but not enough law to argue those issues properly.

They can read cases but often don’t know how to convince a judge on a legal issue.

Magicians are less emotional than Appeasers and Aggressors, so they rarely harm their cases with hasty mistakes. They rely more on commonsense arguments than legal authorities and are often surprised when they win using common sense. It’s like magic to them.

With a little effort, a Magician can easily move up.

THE GANGSTER

The Gangster displays a brute force kind of approach to litigation. Like Aggressors, Gangsters are – well – aggressive, but with a lot less emotion.

Unlike the Appeaser, they’re brimming with confidence. They have a legal position and they’re able to argue it aggressively. They can write and craft a good argument and do legal research to support it.

They’re also adept at civil procedure and may have prior litigation experience. But unlike the Magician, they don’t know how to persuade. They believe they can win with brute force, and they often do. In fact, they win more often than the Magician.

With just a little more work, they can master the courtroom.

THE CONQUEROR

The Conqueror, our best of breed, has a strong legal position and can articulate it well.

Conquerors can write and craft a legal argument. They conduct thorough legal research. They argue aggressively in court and recognize both the judge’s discretion and the need to persuade.

When necessary, they argue not just fact and law but persuasive public policy. (“Judge, if you hear this case with an appeal pending, you will have spat in the face of the appellate court!”)

Conquerors have high levels of confidence, knowledge, skill and courtroom experience. They have low levels of anger, fear and other harmful emotions.

Even when they’re given a raw deal — judicial bias against pro se litigants is real — they take it on the shoulder and live to fight another day.

The Five Pro Se Litigants In Action

To help understand the differences between the five types of self-represented litigants, let’s examine them in context using three scenarios.

SCENARIO 1

A pro se litigant has sent discovery requests, but the other side has not answered within the allotted time. Here’s what each type is most likely to do under the circumstances: 

Appeaser – Call the clerk’s office for instructions and advice on what to do next.

Aggressor – Seek sanctions for failure to respond to discovery.

Magician – Write a letter to the judge complaining of the failure to respond to discovery

Gangster – Write a motion to compel the other side to respond to discovery.

Conqueror – Remind the other side of missed deadline for responding to discovery.

ANALYSIS –  SCENARIO 1

A good faith effort to resolve the issue is often required before moving to compel discovery, so what the Conqueror does by reaching out to the opposite side is ideal. In some states, the Gangster’s motion to compel may also be acceptable for a pro se litigant.

Success on this issue fades as we look further down the list of pro se types.

The Magician’s letter – unlikely. The Aggressor’s motion for sanctions – highly unlikely. Clerks can’t and won’t offer legal advice, so the Appeaser’s telephone call would be a waste of a dime.

SCENARIO 2

A self-represented litigant is in court for a hearing, but the court reporter they hired is not present. Here’s what each type is most likely to do:

Appeaser – Ask the judge, the opposing attorney or court staff for instructions.

Aggressor – Leave the hearing, or stay and consider yourself doomed because a hearing without a court reporter can be biased.

Magician – Proceed with the hearing without a court reporter.

Gangster – Demand that the hearing be rescheduled for a time when a court reporter is available.

Conqueror – Ask the court (judge) for a few minutes to locate any court reporter who can attend the hearing.

ANALYSIS –  SCENARIO 2

Again, the Conqueror’s respectful request to wait for a reporter is ideal. The Gangster’s request to postpone the hearing is also a good move, but the judge has discretion in these situations. He or she may not want to wait or reschedule.

Notably, both the Gangster and the Conqueror are loathe to have a matter heard without a court reporter. They recognize the need to have all hearings recorded. The other three pro se litigant types lack the knowledge or skill to stop the proceeding.

SCENARIO 3

A self-represented litigant is asked for the most useful information one can have about a judge. Here’s how each type is most likely to respond:

Appeaser – The judge is wise and helpful.

Aggressor – The judge may be biased against non-lawyers.

Magician – The judge will listen to reason.

Gangster – The judge is as fallible as any other human being.

Conqueror – The judge has some discretion but is not the final arbiter.

ANALYSIS –  SCENARIO 3

Only the Conqueror properly understands the role of a judge, a technician of sorts whose decisions can be appealed.

The Gangster sees the judge as being human and fallible and therefore beatable. He or she might understand the judge’s role but believes the judge’s fallibility is more important.

The Magician believes the judge will listen to reason, hence their reliance on commonsense arguments.

The Aggressor, in his or her bravado, is inclined to see the judge as biased. This belief might negatively affect his decision-making.

Finally, the Appeaser considers the judge to be untouchable, the benevolent One with the last word in whom their reliance is justified.

How to Become a Conqueror

Some of us take a certain delight in the sort of confrontation one faces in litigation. You know the kind. That friend who didn’t pay their mortgage but waits with impish anticipation to be served a summons so they can dish out some misery on the bank.

For the rest of us, a courtroom is not where we want to be.

Litigation is tough. It can seem overwhelming. But when we keep our cool and increase our knowledge of the process, we can become the kind of pro se litigant that wins.

If you’re an Appeaser now, aim for the confidence of an Aggressor. Learning enough to stay in the game will build your confidence.

If you’re an Aggressor, tone down the bravado and put the energy of your anger into legal research and arguments meant to persuade. With more knowledge and less emotion, you can become a Magician in no time.

If you’re a Magician, ditch the reliance on commonsense arguments. Instead, learn how to craft a cogent argument supported by legal authorities. But keep your ability to persuade because you’ll need it when you become a Gangster.

If you’re a Gangster, you’re almost there. You already have more knowledge, experience, skills, and confidence than the lesser types. Just realize that you can’t always win with brute force. Add persuasion to your skill set, and fill gaps in your knowledge of protocol and procedure. That way, you won’t need to rely on brute force. That’s how you become a Conqueror.

If you’re a Conqueror, bravo. And thank you for blazing a path that the rest of us can follow.

So what type of pro se litigant are you? Share in the comments below.

—–
Pssst! Hey, you there, struggling to win your case. Isn’t it time you gave Courtroom5 a spin? We 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. Get ahead of the game and start driving your case to the judgment you deserve. See how it works today!

More Like This:

  • Test Your Readiness For CourtTest Your Readiness For Court
  • If You're A Pro Se Plaintiff, This Manual Is For YouIf You're A Pro Se Plaintiff, This Manual Is For You
  • Best Blog Posts For Pro Se Litigants — The 2019 EditionBest Blog Posts For Pro Se Litigants — The 2019 Edition
  • 6 Of The Biggest Mistakes Pro Se Litigants Make6 Of The Biggest Mistakes Pro Se Litigants Make
  • 11 Things To Consider When You Need To Sue11 Things To Consider When You Need To Sue
  • Thinking About Going Pro Se? Let Me Help You OutThinking About Going Pro Se? Let Me Help You Out
  • Negotiating A Settlement You Can Live WithNegotiating A Settlement You Can Live With
  • 7 People You Want On Your Legal Team When You Represent Yourself In Court7 People You Want On Your Legal Team When You…

Tagged With: attitude, emotions, legal skills, pro se litigants

About Debra Slone

Debra Slone is a co-founder at Courtroom5. Through legal sorcery, she can find case law to support any position she wants to take in court.

Reader Interactions

Comments

  1. Jaclyn says

    August 19, 2016 at 10:52 pm

    Wow! I need some of your magic. I’m somewhere between the Magician and the Conquerer, but I’ve been beat up by being blindsided by both unethical (and downright illegal) tactics in the courtroom . How do I connect to some of your mojo ??

    wow I

    Reply
    • Debra Slone says

      August 23, 2016 at 10:24 am

      Hi Jaclyn,
      Good prep for litigation is hard work, like reading cases and statutes and writing concise, precise and persuasive motions and pleadings. Even then, the “tactics in the courtroom” you mention can still go on. So, mentality can be just as important as hard tangible work. Understand that lawyers want to win too, and they’ll do whatever they think it takes to do so. Cutting the ethical edge is just a day at work for some of them. Your job is to not get up in your feelings about any of that stuff. I know that’s difficult to do, and I struggle with it all the time, but it does not help you win. Do the work, understand your arguments and stay on point.

      Reply
      • Daisy says

        July 15, 2020 at 2:41 pm

        I’m mostly the Aggressor. I have been brutally by unfair justice. I relied solely on my lawyer to take care of me, he was taking care of me alright as he drove the nails in my coffin. Almost ten plus years, it has been pain staking, but I see the error’s on the face of many pleadings and petitions filed on my behave. Being coached to “know” what was going on.

        After extensive reading and studying i’m the Conqueror. Articulation is something that comes with experience and knowledge.

        Knowledge is Power.

        Reply
  2. Alex says

    January 10, 2018 at 12:58 pm

    For sure I’m a mixture of all. For start, when initially I read defendants’ court filing, I totally lose it and think like an Aggressor. I continuously stop reading the document to prove a particular paragraph to be baseless. So unintentionally, it takes me 4-5 days to really read the defendants’ document.

    Later, when time comes to my response, like a bipolar, I keep jumping from Magician to Conqueror and then crave badly to be act like an aggressor. I end up changing my response over and over and over again, until I get the Aggressor out of my system. Then I do my best to mix Magician—common sense—approach to reach a Conqueror-level response document.

    Each time it is a struggle.

    Reply
    • Debra Slone says

      January 10, 2018 at 1:20 pm

      I understand. One of the biggest challenges in litigation is to keep emotions at bay. Strong anger or fear do nothing but bring you down. Thinking methodically through the process works much better for me.

      You seem to understand your weaknesses, and you’re willing to learn. Those two things will take you a long way to being a good litigator.

      Reply
  3. Laurena says

    December 22, 2019 at 8:34 pm

    I need to find out how a person should react to having their deposition taken (as a Plaintiff) from a well-seasoned attorney. Can anyone help me?

    Reply
  4. Harry Wait says

    December 22, 2019 at 9:42 pm

    Love the post. As a pro se litigant, I went 20 months on a civil forfeiture case with a complicit judge and dirty prosecutor until my case was dismissed with prejudice.

    Can I repost? Of course I will acknowledge your efforts.

    Reply
  5. Mike W. says

    March 28, 2020 at 1:56 pm

    “Pro-se litigant bias is real”, one of the most salient statements in this article! I’m a magician aspiring to be a conquerer, but how do you mitigate the disdain some judges have for pro-se folks?

    Reply
  6. Pelin Munis says

    August 28, 2020 at 7:03 am

    Thank you Courtroom5. First I love the term self-represented litigator. That alone gave me a boost in confidence and removed the stigma of being pro se. Many of us are between a magician and conqueror, I am as well. My weak point is the legal knowledge and I think your platform in just the 24 hours I’ve been on has helped tremendously. I look forward to delving further. The missing piece for me is the assistance of someone who can write these motions for me as I learn more – because right now in my case, time is of the essence and learning just takes time. Do you or Courtroom5 have writers that your members can engage for support?

    Reply
  7. Donald Taylor says

    December 26, 2020 at 12:39 pm

    I believe in Christian-Justice {its referred to as Common Law, not case law from judges that are not just} Most of these irregular decisions are appealed sending back to lower court or over ruled, etc.

    I live in a small town in the Texas Hill Country, Fredericksburg, Texas. It is not what it seems, upon having a neighbor file multiple police reports, example: six months after the first filed sheriff’s complaint. I was accused by Sean Goiffre sales broker manger of BootRanch.com; accusing me of stating to Sean that I was going to blow up his house, and shot him. I the same report, his wife stated to deputy that I was beating my wife. Filed False Police Report with Sheriff’s Office, DA WIlke would not prosecute, as understood Sean is protected by other CLAN; example: a group of close-knit and interrelated families (especially associated with families in the Scottish Highlands).
    • a family, especially a large one: the Kennedy clan gathered for the celebration. NOT members of KKK. A significant amount of small cities in Texas are of same structure, believe it or not.

    NOTE: I am a VET USAF, Security Police NATO bases, Honorably Discharged w/Full Benefits.
    TO READ MORE: goto to: BootBootyRanch.com an its not finished yet, furthermore, you can search for { Gillespie COUNTY CORRUPTION } on YOUTUBE for a 26 minute recording of when I was in Gillespie County Sheriff’s office to pick up reports an video tapes of additional false police reports filed by Sean.

    NO one should have to go through such emotional harassment, period. Yes this one of my cases for a later date. They destroyed not only my video tapes, reports; each time I was interviewed, I asked TWO QUESTIONS: Are you recording this an will you write a report; each time each deputy responded: YES.

    By the way, additionally you have. right to call 911 ask for Manager/Supervisor an request copies of 911 call. These two items along are very beneficial to everyone..

    Secondly, I saw a movie back in late March 2020 called “Most Wanted” this is where I learned of WestLAW. Meantime, I discovered a site that has been hidden, USVOURTS.GOV, https://www.tsl.texas.gov/ref/abouttx/secession/2feb1861.html, etc.

    DA not prosecuting is not a law, rule it is something from the late 18th century that protects CLAN Members..

    Using US Courts Case filed can not make any arguments, or list cases on compliant. The burden on Judge is: RULE OF LAW

    As understood you can present arguments, and cases later on; furthermore, if you think JUDGE has discriminated your ‘Civil Rights’ you can file a compliant and request case be sent to a State Count in Texas, not sure about other states…

    [I]f you need a MSDS sheet goto: MSDSONline.com for an unaltered sheet…

    Finally, prior to a workers comp accident working part time at Auto Zone, I was a Property N Casualty (PNC) insurance adjuster. Accident caused loose of over half my vision due to a bottle of Griot’s Speed Shine spray nozzle came loose and bottle dropped back into box splashing contents on face an eyes. I lost over half my vision in left 20/70 an right 20/50. The manufacture hide MSDS sheet ingredients from public. Contents of product consists of: 2.5 OZ of each: Acetic Acid which burnt my left eyes oil glands an face, a polymer (binding agent) and Amens COCO Alkali – this substance with burn a whole into your skin. My type size is set at 24, so I can read.

    Had it not been for VA’s help I really don’t know what I would have done. Auto Zone in Texas is self insured, Arbitration is mandatory. In Texas its called NON-Participating Entity, just a corrupt way to abuse ones rights>/!

    This is where it get out of control, Auto Zones lawyer submitted false or fabricated documents to Arbitrator, changing the dynamics of hearing. Filed complaint against lawyer over a month ago with Texas Bar.

    Summary, finding this site raises my confidence level even higher.

    I start January 1, 2020 as my first case regarding Auto Zones lawyer filing false documents in near.

    Hope the above helps others, Cheers

    Reply

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Primary Sidebar

Get Our Free 5-Day Course to Your Inbox

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

We hate spam too. We'll never share your email.

Popular Articles

  • 31 affirmative defenses 31 Affirmative Defenses And How To Assert Them
  • biggest mistakes pro se litigants make 6 Of The Biggest Mistakes Pro Se Litigants Make
  • How to Write a Motion How To Write A Motion--A Guide And Sample Motions For Pro Se Litigants

Popular Tags

access to justice affirmative defenses answer appeal bias Brian Vukadinovich case analysis Case Manager civil legal aid complaint constitution court costs court reporter Courtroom5 criminal discovery elements of a claim eviction evidence hearing how to win in court I Am Not A Lawyer judicial bias jurisdiction Lawyers We Love legal analysis legal argument Legal Bits legal research litigation litigation strategy motion for summary judgment motion to dismiss podcast pro se litigants pro se litigation Richard Zorza rules of civil procedure self-representation self represented litigant settlement Sonja Ebron summary judgment trial unbundled legal services
Follow @Courtroom5Legal
Courtroom5
Courtroom5 @Courtroom5Legal
17 minutes ago
Justice is the antidote to chaos. Happy Martin Luther King Day 2021. #accesstojustice https://t.co/Bspn62idc5
View on Twitter
0
0
Courtroom5
Courtroom5 @Courtroom5Legal
4 days ago
Thanks to @WRAL for naming Courtroom5 a finalist in this year’s Voters Choice Award for most innovative local startup. #WRALVCAs https://t.co/Vde2rnxfQQ
View on Twitter
0
0
Courtroom5
Courtroom5 @Courtroom5Legal
4 days ago
Yes, still true. #accesstojustice https://t.co/D0PgmjNwDr
View on Twitter
Open Hands Legal Svc @openhandslegal
https://t.co/X4xw9pYT1w
1
2
  • Facebook
  • Instagram
  • Twitter
  • Terms
  • Privacy
  • About Us
  • Contact Us

© 2021 Courtroom5 | A Techstars Company · My Account
No legal advice offered · No substitute for a lawyer

We use cookies to ensure the best experience on our website. If you continue to browse Courtroom5, we assume this is okay for you.OK