Pro se litigation Strategy1

Bringing down the house of cards

one Pro Se at a time.

Pro Se Litigation Strategy I

Source: Yahoo Group, Legal_Self_Representation

Although it would be nice to get a ruling in your favor based on the substance: facts and the law you can't really depend on such an outcome. You need to prevail reliably by means of breaking the opposing side's will and/or the ability to fight (whoever /whatever they may be). That is accomplished by driving up their legal costs(while Pro Se incurs none) to the levels they either cannot afford to pay or are unwilling to pay. Individuals usually at some point cannot/won't pay the legal costs and businesses /corporations are in business to make money.

They won't waste their money on lengthy litigation; they either drop or settle cases quickly. Governmental Agencies who are perfectly willing to expend unlimited funds fighting you, can easily be made to account for wasteful spending, they would be especialy vulnerable when they can no longer cost justify their misguided legal perseverance - I know that from experience. Complaints against their wasteful spending can be sent to the Office of Inspector General(sometimes State Comptroller) either State or Federal accordingly depending on whether you are fighting State or Federal authorities. US Department of Justice has its own Office of Inspector General findable on Net.

Cost imposition in combination with capitalising on their misconduct always works. Yes you have to go with the flow, make your arguments, cite caselaw and such but keep in mind this Game Plan. Think about it this way; how are case resolved - when one of the parties can't or won't fight any more (usually they can't or won't pay anymore or the consequences of their lawyer's misconduct are dooming their case). It's not the adverse court ruling that defeats a party, but rather the loss of will to fight - so you need to wear them down with costs and deliver finishing blows based on misconduct - that will break their will/ability to fight. If that will is there one can fight for years.

One example; Exxon has been ordered to pay $5 Billion for an oil spill in Alaska. As far as I know they never paid anything and the case has been floating about in the appellate courts for 19 years. Exxon can afford to fight indefinitely if it's worth it for them ($5 billion judgement makes it worth it to them to spend tens of millions in legal expenses, if Exxon was litigating against you over $10,000 they would not spend more than $2000 and would try to either drop or settle it), I doubt that their opposition can.

As far as Cost Imposition is concerned don't file anything frivolous or resort to dilatory tactics just use all the normal opportunities accorded by the Process and hang in there until they break. If a Summary Judgement is taken against you - no problem: Appeal and file a Motion for Stay pending Appeal. If that motion is granted (in many jurisdictions it's automatic) you are well on your way to winning because you can be in appeals for a very long time and they can't do anything except bear ever mounting expenses.

I always suggest to open a second line of appeals by means of filing a Motion to Reconsider based on new evedince or newly discovered misconduct by the adverse party (think of something, anything) adverse ruling on that can be appealed doubling the pressure on the opposition. As far as Misconduct is concerned there is a Folder in Links on that.

Cost Imposition needs to be pursued in conjunction with capitalising on the opposing lawyer(s) inevitable serious misconduct when they are dealing with a supposedly ignorant Pro Se. Add to that the ability to sow mistrust and disrupt the relationship between the opposing party and their lawyer, such as by means of contacting the opposing party directly over the head of their lawyer "to settle the case" as their lawyer "does not seem to have a built in interest in settling this", then letting that lawyer know in passing that you are negotiating behind his back etc, etc.

The bottom line is that the Cost Imposition and Misconduct Capitalising strategy delivers every time, it may sound paradoxical and extreme but facts and the law are almost irrelevant compared to Cost and Misconduct. Yes you need to argue the facts and the law to stay in the game, sometimes you can even win, but it's the Cost and Misconduct that will deliver. If you pursue the opposite approach and insist on trying to outdo a fully trained lawyer in legal arguments I can only wish you good luck - most of the time you are going to need it and it (luck) will be in very short supply for you.

DISCLAIMER:The author is not an attorney and is not rendering legal ,financial, or other professional services. The information contained on this web site is the author opinion based on his personal experience. If you need legal advice, consult a competent attorney.

Bringing down the house of cards

one Pro Se at a time.

Pro-Se-info

Bringing down the house of cards

one Pro Se at a time.

Pro-Se-info