Appeals are usually based on matters of law. It’s not a chance to re-argue the merits of the case. the original trial judge has done that. If the judge chose to believe that A was truthful and B was not, the appeal court will not reverse that.
The appeal points out where the judge erred in matters like interpreting the law to address the facts of the case. In these situations, the usual process also involves digging up similar or analogous court decisions that help guide the interpretation of the applicable laws and legal principles.
I’m thinking someone who makes this their life’s work, and has done it for years and has trained asistance (multiple assistants) to help find good precedent and who understands the nuances of the legal principles, probably has a much much better chance of winning.
I guess the real test would be to show the summary of a bunch of cases to legal pros, see who they think should win, and then see if the pro se litigants of “winnable” cases are in fact losing too easily. It might also be argued that those who represent themselves are simply arguing cases wheregenerally they can’t find legal help, not even pro bono, because any lawyer they talk to says “why bother, it’s a no-win?”
Apparently they do things differently in Indiana. When I have appeared against a litigant-in-person, the Courts have fallen over themselves to assist the litigant.
A quick point which I don’t think anyone seems to have picked up on: If pro se litigants were just as succesful as those represented by lawyers, then why the hell would anyone employ a lawyer in teh first place?
You have stated some important truths about what happens in the courts. In Georgia, we see a lot of the same things happening. No, it is not right, yes, it does violate our rights.
Federal Courts in GA are very unfair to pro se, as are Superior Court, State Court, Probate Court, and Magistrate Court. Then when you appeal,…We won’t even go there.
The problem with going to US Supreme Court, is that once you get there, you get past the clerk that checks to make sure you complied with all the rules, and everything is complete and in order. Your brief is passed to the law analysis clerk, who double checks to make sure that the brief has merits and is proper as far as citing caselaw, and other issues concerning the legal arguments. Then, you are passed up to the waiting area with anywhere between 141 and 700 other cases. They take 1% of what gets that far. And there are businesses, well known appellate attorneys, etc. 1%. Out of 141, they took 1. Out of 660, they took 7. The promise that we would all get to take our case to the highest court in the land is a fairy tale, a Grimms Fairy Tale.
Have you considered attempting an interlocutory appeal, or recusing the judge? It is not right that the judge is omitting you a response time to motions. It is also not right for a judge to rule on ex parte motions, while ignoring your motions.
I have represented myself successfully in two cases in small claims court, one in California and one in Pennsylvania. At the time of the California case, around 1993, the law required petitioners to reperesent themselves, but defendants had the right to an attorney. In Pennsylvania I was told of no such rule.
I know of no state in the U.S. in which a civil defendant is entitled to counsel. In Ohio, you may hire an attorney at your own expense in a small claims case, but are not required to, and are certainly not entitled to one regardless of whether you’re plaintiff or defendant.
Huh? Everyone else’s cases are heard in the highest court of the land. It must be something personal against you that prevents them from hearing yours.
Wow, I must wonder if yall are from America, or you grew up somewhere else. And just in case…the highest court of the land is the US Supreme Court. How many times you been there, Muffin?
Again, appeal courts are there to decide points of law and whether proper procedure was followed in a trial. They are not there to re-hear the case and decide, “unlike the trial judge, we give more credibility to witness A”. It’s more to decide whether the law as written applies in this case in the following manner, etc. I.e. “A jude saying such-and-such in the jury charge is not instructing the jury properly” or “the judge erred in disallowing this evidence” or “based on the law, yes, the following behaviour does cosntitute discrimination”.
Therefore, you only will get a chance to have your appeal heard if you can explain where in procedure or application of the law the original trial judge erred. The only guarantee is that everyone has a right to submit an appeal - there’s no guarantee the appeal court will do much more than read the written appeal and say “these are not sufficient grounds to look deeper into this case”.
Nitpick: in very limited circumstances the appellate court may be a trier of fact. For example, administrative courts typically do not have jurisdiction to consider constitutional claims, so they can be raised at the trial level to preserve them for appellate review but no evidence will be adduced.
It was the Court of Appeals, not Circuit/Superior, but here’s a case from last month where a pro se litigant won a reversal in a published opinion against a bank represented by one of the biggest, most prestigious firms in the state.
For trial court records, you can always go here and poke around yourself. I don’t know of a good way to search for pro se cases, but every docket reflects who the counsel is, or if the party is pro se. I know there are a few cases in there where a pro se litigant has won a judgment against a represented party but I’m not sayin’ which ones
Generally speaking, courts grant routine, procedural motions (extend a deadline, reset a hearing, etc.) without waiting for a response. They’re not supposed to (and technically, opposing counsel is supposed to state in their motion whether it is opposed or unopposed) but it happens sometimes in the hustle and flow of a busy courtroom. And when they do and the other side files something saying “Wait, no, I was going to respond,” they will usually hear the objecting party out. In my experience, pro se litigants get more procedural leeway, not less.
Finally, the Justices of a state Supreme Court are jurists, not research assistants. That may be why no one got back to you. Nothing personal, they’re just busy doing their jobs.
“Whooshed” is a Board term for someone who misses a joke, takes it seriously instead of realising that the other person was joking. Figuratively, from the whooshing sound as it goes over the person’s head.
muffin was using sarcasm to respond to your statement that “The promise that we would all get to take our case to the highest court in the land is a fairy tale, a Grimms Fairy Tale.” It has never been the case that everyone gets to take their case to the Supreme Court of the United States; no such promise has ever been made. muffin was sarcastically suggesting that since everyone else’s case got there, it must be something personal against you. It was a joke, to highlight an error in your statement.
