Preparing for a Lawsuit
(With this 2015 update, I've noted when links
that I previously gave no longer work.)
In APRIL of 2003, just shortly before the trial, we were in a courtroom observing another case. We heard the judge say, "We lawyers have a tight union." (We sure found THAT to be true!)
There's something terribly wrong with a system that controls so many people's lives, yet it has such complex, esoteric rules and procedures that if everything isn't followed to a "T," you lose. (That only applies to pro se litigants; lawyers can break every rule in the book, even commit crimes, and they get away with it. ) And there are volumes upon volumes of "rules." Lawyers often don't follow the "rules" either, but the judges are likely to let them get away with it, whereas in defending ourselves, it felt like traps are being set for us. One thing that we definitely learned is the "justice system" is corrupt to the core.
What I wrote back then: I am still passionate about the law. However, my passion has taken a direction different from the one I originally envisioned. I am going to work hard for beneficial change in the legal system that we MUST have. One of the ways I can help (and you, too, if you wish) is through J.A.I.L. for Judges, which is the Judicial Accountability Initiative Law. Their statement:
"Our goal is to return accountability of government to the people through citizens' Grand Jury oversight of the judicial branch.
"Organized in a state-by-state effort, we shall enact citizens' initiatives and legislation throughout this country that will enable redress against willfully corrupt judicial behavior. Successfully implementing J.A.I.L. in the states will pressure Congress to enact J.A.I.L. for the federal judiciary."
Click HERE to read an e-mail I received from Ron Branson, the founder of J.A.I.L. for Judges. His letter was a response to a letter I wrote him during our lawsuit. (In his letter, Ron set me straight about my "enthusiasm" for the law.) If you have never been involved in the legal system, you may be surprised to learn of the corruption and incompetence that is the norm, where honest lawyers are often disbarred for fighting for the truth, as explained in Ron's letter.
Stated on the J.A.I.L. for Judges web site: "The need for the passage of J.A.I.L. is urgent. Lives and finances are being ruined, properties are being lost, innocent people are going to jail, and families are being torn apart and destroyed."
Note: Harry and I are divorced and I believe the lawsuit was a major contributor. It just made me stronger, but it was devastating to Harry.
Here's a MUST-WATCH VIDEO that shows even lawyers are arrested when politely and legally challenging a judge. Judges are the Ku Klux Klan with black robes and immunity.
And here are two important links given in the video: http://familylawcourts.com/ and http://www.familyinnocence.com/
Some of what I wrote, and my feelings about this lawsuit, don't apply today. My passion for the law evolved into my passionate detest of the corruption of it. But I'm including my earlier comments instead of deleting them so you'll have a better idea of the entire process and how deluded the naive are about the law.
Now, in 2015, I still consider this lawsuit was a gift because of the awakening it initiated. I have continued to gain awareness about the corruption.
By the way, medical malpractice suits are almost impossible to initiate--or in which to prevail if you are able to initiate one. Insurance companies have bought from our politicians very strict law in their favor in the form of "The Medical Liability and Insurance Improvement Act of Texas," enacted in 1977. (Improvement for whom?) Just a few provisions are: (1) an injured party must give 60 days' written notice to the doctor(s) that he intends to sue; and (2) within 90 days of filing the suit, the injured party must either (a) post a $5,000 cost bond for each physician or health care provider being sued, or (b) file expert testimony from another doctor. (I wonder how easily one could elicit testimony of one doctor against another?) In addition, this act already includes a $500,000 limit for civil liability. For these reasons, contrary to what we're being told, a medical malpractice suit against a doctor is hardly likely to be "frivolous." (Now the insurance companies are trying to get even tighter strangulation on remedies for injured parties.)
I had a link to the law mentioned above, but it no longer works. Now I can't find anything about the particular law on the internet. However, I am SURE that it has not been repealed, but rather renamed and made even more restrictive against wronged patients by doctors.
Soon after Dr. Nichols sued us, I quickly signed up for a paralegal correspondence course with Professional Career Development Institute. (This link no longer works.) I paid the entire fee up front so I could get all my books and lessons at once. My choice of a "specialty" within the course was just what I needed, "civil litigation." The course is excellent, well written and laid out, and it has been invaluable to us.
And as for learning to be a paralegal, I couldn't possibly have a better scenario. I have a REAL LIVE case to work from beginning to end. Plus I don't have a lawyer directing me or speaking for me. I consider that an advantage, not a liability.
I've found that the law is very orderly and logical. Sadly, even though the law is designed to protect those who learn it and use it properly, I've discovered that some lawyers distort what the law really says in order to suit their own purposes. (Nope, the law is written to confuse lay people and make sure lawyers stay employed.) A travesty of justice occurs when judges let the lawyers get away with it, and that happens all too often. (I sure found that to be true!) In our case, one of the lawyers even committed forgery! (This is not conjecture--he even admitted it! You'll read more about this later.)
Just about everything is written down. You just have to look for it, and you may go down one rabbit trail after another until you find what you need. But I consider that to be challenging and fun, not frustrating. A lawsuit is like a chess game, and ferreting out the information you need is like a treasure hunt. (It would have been challenging and fun IF the judges were unbiased and IF the lawyers were not allowed to corrupt the entire process.)
I'm convinced that everything that happens in life has a purpose and that every situation contains a gift. The gift in this lawsuit is that if Dr. Nichols hadn't sued us, I might never have become aware of my passion for the law. I'm finding it absolutely fascinating. Harry and both I are energized about the learning process. And we are fortunate to have access to the U of H Law Library and the Harris County Law Library. (These two links no longer work. And during this case, the only passion for the law I developed was a disgust for it.)
In our experience, finding a good attorney (who also specializes in the area of law that relates to your case) is a very difficult task. And if you don't know anything about legal procedure or the legal statutes and cases as they relate to yours, your attorney may lose your case for you and you'll never know the real reason of why you lost. Just with my limited experience so far, I've observed mistake after mistake made by attorneys, both in procedure and judgment. And as you'll see, some of them are not above criminal acts as well.
One thing you must be aware of--handling your case pro se will require a tremendous amount of your time and scrupulous attention to detail. You'll have to learn both procedure and law and how the law relates to your case. If you don't have the time, or if you aren't willing to devote the time, then by all means hire a lawyer. But in that case, I strongly advise you to make numerous trips to a law library and research the law and court cases that relate to your situation. (Employees in the libraries will help you.) Otherwise, you'll probably have no idea if your lawyer is doing what he/she should be doing for you. (Doing some research at the law library before even hiring a lawyer would help you make a better informed decision when you interview lawyers, too.)
If you do have the time and the drive to handle your own case, your advantage is that no lawyer--no matter how clearly you would explain the details--will know the intricacies of your case as well as you do. We are convinced that we will do a better job with our case than any lawyer would do. After all, we are handling one case, not many. We care about our case more than any third party ever would. And we are committed to handling it in the most professional manner possible. (We did handle it in a professional manner; the lawyers and judges did not.)
We have received personal encouragement from Gerry Spence, the famous lawyer who has spent his lifetime representing the poor, the injured, the forgotten and the damned against what he calls "the new slave master," mammoth corporation and mammoth government. He says, "My intent is to tell the truth as I know it, realizing that what is true for me may be blasphemy for others." In our lives, my husband and I are also committed to telling the truth as we know it.
A MUST
read for pro se litigants is the site, "Welcome
To Caught! The Public list of judicial misconduct, prosecutorial
misconduct, ethics violations, civil rights violations and legal misconduct in
Rhode Island.
Although this site is from Rhode Island,
it contains critical information and links for anyone who represents himself in
court.
For example, their link to "The Pro Se Way," was headed (at the time) by: "Warning! Courts around this country are ruling against Pro Se's regardless of how legally correct they are. I regret to say Pro Se's are best approaching their litigation with the goal of meticulously documenting their injustice; otherwise they may be sorely disappointed." Be sure to thoroughly explore this site!
Note in 2015: We meticulously documented our injustice but it didn't do a whit of good. Except for this web site. Now I can expose the corruption.
When you handle your own case, you must think and act objectively, not subjectively. Don't act from anger or "ego." Do the very best you can and then let the chips fall where they may. If you lose, you may be able to file an appeal. But before your first trial, be sure to know what would enable an appeal to be granted. And by then, you've learned a lot more than you knew in the beginning. Indeed, in an article from the site above, the author says, "Remember, case law is made by litigants questioning Judge's decisions. There may be times that lower court procedure and trials become a formality in order to get the higher courts to rule on your issues." (Also be aware that an appeal means starting all over and it will require even more money and time. Plus, see Ron Branson's letter in which he has found that the appellate courts are even more corrupt.)
This same author says, "Morality, common sense and fairness may be elements in the drafting of laws, but the implementation of law may not favor morality, common sense or fairness as these terms are generally defined."
You may not be welcomed by the court system when you represent yourself. Read another article from the above site, "Bias Against Pro Per Litigants: What It Is. How to Stop It." One quote from the author is: "Court clerks withhold information from non-lawyers that they routinely give to lawyers. If a lawyer's office calls to ask about a particular scheduling procedure, for example, the clerk provides all sorts of answers without thinking twice. But let a self-represented person ask for the same (or even much less) information, and it suddenly becomes 'legal advice'." (We experienced this bias numerous times.)
According to the author, this bias exists in direct contradiction to the Supreme Court's ruling in Faretta v. California that everyone has the constitutional right to proceed without counsel. That means that the courts must offer a level playing field for the represented and unrepresented alike, consistent with the basic principles of fairness. (Whether they "must" or not, they don't.)
More and more, politicians and judges have started to respond to the growth in self-representation. For example, some courts have created fill-in-the-blank court forms tailored to the types of documents a pro se litigant is most likely to need. In other courts, "pro se advisors" are available in the courthouse to give free advice to people representing themselves. Here are some of the states I found on the internet that offer help to pro se litigants:
Well, since my original writing, of the links below, the link for South Carolina is the only one that continues to work. Evidently the others have decided they don't want to give information to pro se litigants.
South Carolina - http://www.scd.uscourts.gov/Docs/PROSE.PDF
Western District New York - http://www.nywd.uscourts.gov/document/Guidelines2001.pdf
Northern District New York - http://www.nynd.uscourts.gov/prose.htm
King County Washington - http://www.kcba.org/srvpub/proseupdate.PDF
New Jersey - http://www.kcba.org/srvpub/proseupdate.PDF
United States Courts for the Ninth Circuit - http://www.ce9.uscourts.gov/web/sdocuments.nsf/5c4ce0b43c6af95c882567e6006ac61c/$FILE/HANDBOOK.pdf
In one of our books, "Represent Yourself in Court," the authors say that the number of people representing themselves in court cases continues to grow. While they can't give exact statistics because few courts track the percentage of pro se litigants, one study in Idaho indicated that during a seven-year period, 87% of civil defendants in that state were self represented. The authors give a web site, Judgelink, "where judges work together to further justice." (this link no longer works so apparently there aren't any more judges wanting to "further justice.") The title says: "Meeting the needs of self-represented litigants: a consumer based approach." Many civil court administrators and judges estimate that the number of pro se litigants has increased by at least 50% over the last five years.
If you consider going "pro se," the first book you need to buy is "Rules of Court" for your particular state. I bought "Texas Rules of Court" (both state and federal editions) from The West Group for about $40.
Or even better, which we found later in the lawsuit, are O'Connor's Litigation Series by Jones McClure Publishing. For example, O'Connors' Texas Rules of Civil Trials has annotated the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure with case law.
You will also need your local rules of court, which you can obtain from the courthouse, or online in many instances.
Here are some links you may find helpful :
Right here in Houston, Show Me the Law. (This link no longer works. This was a local group in Houston was dedicated to helping people learn about the law in order to represent themselves in court. Evidently they learned the effort was fruitless and disbanded.)
As of my 2015 update, most of the links in the following paragraph no longer work.
Also: Whistleblower Society of America; People Before Lawyers (this guy, Marc Perkel, has an extensive web site and it is another "must" read for anyone considering representing himself; just be forewarned that Marc's language sometimes includes "four-letter" words; Texas Judiciary Online; Texas District Court Local Rules; Findlaw; 'Lectric Law Library; Southern District of Texas Rules; The Supreme Court of Texas, Rules and Procedures; The Texas Statutes Search; The Texas Statues (including the Texas Constitution); Texas Rules of Civil Procedure; Legal Information Institute of Cornell Law School (Federal Rules of Civil procedure and other useful information here).
Also, using the search engine "Google" will give you a lot of information on different legal subjects, including forms, actual pleadings, etc.
I will give other useful links later, as I find them.
Go to Page 4 - Nichols Didn't Collect a Dime!
You may write me at iamfree@asia.com