Self representation

Status
Not open for further replies.
W

winston1425

New Member
I have decided to represent myself [pro-se] in an employment discrimination and defamation case against me. I have the following questions as I have no idea where to find the answers:

1. What do you call your opponents strongest points of argument [documented in this case], I hope break these points one by one and proof that they were falls or falsified to build a case against me.

2. How do I pre arrange[ ordered] to have people on the opponents sides questioned [interrogated]in court.. These people have contributed to documented evidences against me. In my case I plan to question about five of them from my opponent's side?

3. Is it possible to produce surprise documental evidence or evidences during my interrogation session of a witness or witnesses? These are cards I would like to play during my interrogation session.

4. What are requirements to prepare my "exhibits" and Items for over head projection etc in terms of sizes, how big, Transparences or plain paper for over-head presentation? Whom I shout ask for such requirements?

Thank you, in advance.
 
1. I would call them their strongest points of argument... or perhaps their allegations.
2. Issue subpoenas.
3. No.
4. Contact the court in advance to make any special arrangements for exhibits you might have. It will probably be easier to simply make photocopies that you can distribute.
 
I have to ask the question that is the elephant in the room.

WHY???????????

You can bet the company is going to have lawyers. Why would you go into battle with a VW when your opponent has a tank?

If you have a probable winnable case for a decent amount, you should be able to find an attorney to take your case on contingency.
 
Pat,

I have checked out a few attorneys of whom my friends recommended and I can bet I can to lot better then them. I know the issues and I am almost one year ahead of any attorney who can represent me at this point besides I don't like to do the leg work for them while they are getting paid handsomely.

I have been also a juror recently and I know what they like to hear. I have also watched a super-lawyer as juror, I like his style and I am sure if I can do 20% of what he did in court with my preparation I can win my case. I think I have right cards to play

All I am asking are the court basics because I am not an attorney by profession, you can see that from questions. I have always proved that I was right for people discouraged me
So you won't be the first one!
[
 
Winston,

Pat and I are attorneys and I can tell you without any doubt that you need an attorney. No offense but you could be trying to argue that the sky is blue and any good attorney could tie you up so tightly with legal procedure that you would have a hard time making your point.

Let me put it simply, if you don't want to pay the judgment, get an attorney. You can't do better on your own. If you truly think so then you are sadly misled.

I won't help you massacre yourself.

Merry Christmas
 
Pat,

Read his post carefully. The suit is AGAINST HIM. I can't imagine someone defending themselves on a case like that.
 
I missed that, JHarris.

Thanks for the compliment, but I'm not an attorney. I do agree, though, that unless you're in a small claims situation, ANYBODY being sued needs an attorney, no matter how smart and prepared they are. If for nothing else that working through the court procedural stuff.
 
Dee_dub is an attorney, I thought you were too. Oh well, your advice is excellent.
 
If our OP insists on representing himself when he doesn't know the rudamentary processes of litigation he may need to borrow some of your common sense.

To the original OP. No one here, least of all me, wishes to down you. I would tell you the same thing if you told me you were going to take out your appendix to save the doctor bill. What you are doing is NOT as easy as you think.
 
Sorry who is being sued here?
It is I who is suing for discrimination and defamation.

Unfortunately it is the good attorneys have got it all backwords,
I have studied and researched my case well and I have plenty of evidences that the Jurors will love to hear. As I said I was Juror not too long ago and I have built up lot confidence from that experience. I am professional but not an attorney. I wish I went to law school. My daughter is in good law school and she thinks the same way like you folks. Basically I have nothing to lose but lot to gain from this. If I have the time and money I will definitely consider an attorney but I don't have both. So I am going to give it a shot with all the confidence I have.

There are two things I don't have or know very much
1. Basic Court procedures.
2. and how to present well

When I was juror I took plenty of notes watching a man is known as the Super Lawyer I did not know him first but I learned about his reputation later…I think that I have learned a lot from him on the opening as well as closing statements and the whole 9 yards.

All I am asking from this forum is the basics, the exhibits, the over heads, the subpoena the small stuffs. As I said I have nothing to lose in this case but lot to gain.
!

You can help me if you wish other wise I can find it myself else where
 
You don't know basic court procedures or how to present, but you think it will be easy to go into court and represent yourself because you took a lot of notes as a juror.

No, you don't have anything to lose. Only the entire case. Regardless of whether you are the plaintiff or the defendent, you are ASKING to lose if you don't know what you're doing. And taking notes as a juror is not a substitute for three years of law school. If it were, your daughter could save a lot of money on tuition fees.

A brief tutorial from a message board is not a substitute for law school either. A message board cannot teach you what you need to know.

And I am not a lawyer either.
 
CBG,

Unfortunately I know what I am doing. Only thing do not have is the court experience to present well. I have prepared my case very well and I have done plenty of research in the law library. I believe in me that I can win this case. I have also observed a few cases and wondered how this man made it through the law school!

When you have the right evidences' to prove your case clean cut even the greatest attorney cannot do much. This one also I have learned in a court room.. May be he can challenge in a alternate court or courts until you no longer have the money, man power and time to fight it by your self. If you had the experience like me as a juror, you would know what they would like to see proven out there

Take people like Mr. B. Gate for example, he never went 5 yrs of Engineering School but he has done millions of engineers out there. There are al millions of BG out there who can out smart an engineer who had 5 yrs of engineering school.

If you are not an attorney and if you cannot help, please do not discount or/and discourage others.

One thing you ought to know if you believe that you know your case well, then there is no attorney in the world can work harder than you and fight harder than you.
 
Everyone is trying to be nice to you. While I am a nice person, I am also blunt.

Going into court without an attorney to manage a convoluted and intricate case is akin to dousing yourself in meat tenderizer and then jumping into the lion's cage.

After calling that big lion in the corner a sissy.

You will only get one bite at this apple. Judges have remarkably little patience for shade tree attorney's with "Gotcha" evidence and a lack of basic court etiquette and procedure.

There is a reason why lawyers go to school for years to learn this stuff. It simply can't be learned by sitting in a courtroom alone ... or else every bailiff in the country would be an attorney as well.

You are going to get barbequed... badly. This is really not very smart.

To put it another way, like lighting a match to see if there is gas in the tank... like jumping off a cliff to see if you bounce... like running through a moving propeller to see if you can sneak through... like testing if the electricity is off by sticking your finger in the socket...

There is an old saying... An attorney that defends himself has a fool for a client. You are proving that axiom's worth.
 
Oh, and Bill Gates is smart enough to know that he needs attorneys... as was Albert Einstein, Thomas Edison, Bill Clinton (a lawyer in his own right), etc.
 
In response to your substantive questions in your original post, moose answered those as best as they're going to get answered on this forum. The details of civil procedure vary from one jurisdiction to the next. No-one here is an expert in the rules and legal niceties of your particular location, so no-one will be able to provide you better answers than you already have on how to run your case.

The fact that you are even hoping to surprise witnesses with secret documents at their depositions (or examinations for discovery, or whatever they happen to be called in your jurisdiction) suggests you are approaching this wrong-headedly. Most civilized countries have pre-trial disclosure precisely to AVOID surprises, so that each side can know how strong the respective cases are, and come to a reasonable settlement.

I would echo the advice of the other posters: get a lawyer. If you haven't found a lawyer that you think can do it better than yourself, then you need to look at some better lawyers than the ones your friends recommended.

If you don't, good luck to you. You'll need it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Share this page

Get a free case review from a lawyer
Back
Top