---

December 2006

'Jailhouse Lawyer' Lectures Harvard Law Students

Thomas 'Chris' O'Bryant Seeks to End the Types of Legal Mistakes that Landed Him Behind Bars for Life

By Gigi Stone & Mary Harris, ABC News

12-18-06 -- Students at Harvard Law School learn from some of the finest legal minds in the world. But they can't always learn in a classroom the concrete ways their future work as attorneys may affect people's lives. . . . That's why they are riveted by a perspective in Professor Charles Ogletree's class delivered by a guest lecturer by speakerphone. He is speaking to them from prison, where he will remain for the rest of his life. . . . The voice belongs to Thomas "Chris" O'Bryant, inmate 124004 in the Florida Department of Corrections, who is a "jailhouse lawyer." . . . He taught himself the law so well that when he sent a handwritten submission to the Harvard Civil Rights-Civil Liberties Review, its editors were blown away by his legal acumen. They published his article earlier this year. . . . Now he lectures law students about what "life inside" is like, and how justice is actually administered. . . . "You see the newspaper about prison life, but I think it's probably different actually hearing from someone who's dealing with it on a day to day basis, " O'Bryant says.

---

Abramoff Opts for Self-Defense in Latest Suits

Anna Palmer, Legal Times

12-17-06 -- After paying for a high-priced criminal defense by Chadbourne & Parke's Abbe Lowell in the government's corruption probe, former uber-lobbyist-turned-jailbird Jack Abramoff is taking a different approach in two lawsuits filed against him by Indian tribes. . . . This time around, Abramoff is representing himself against former client Louisiana Coushatta Tribe and the Alabama-Coushatta Tribe of Texas. . . . So far, Abramoff has piggybacked on motions filed by lawyers for former Christian Coalition head Ralph Reed and former Abramoff associate Michael Scanlon in the Texas case. Lowell did not return calls. . . . Abramoff may be using the law library from the minimum-security federal prison in Cumberland, Md., where he is serving almost six years for a fraud conviction separate from the corruption probe.

---

Best Notice of Appeal Ever

From Above the Law Blog

It would be hard to find a court filing more boring than the notice of appeal. For all you non-lawyers, it's the document by which a losing litigant gives notice of her intention to appeal. The notice of appeal gets filed with the court and served on the opposing party. . . . Usually the notice of appeal is a formulaic, bare-bones document that just identifies the decision being appealed from, the court being appealed to, etc. But this one is a bit more colorful:*

---

November 2006

How often we hear, "He who represents himself has a fool for a client."
To that I say, "He who is represented is usually taken for a fool."  
Read some of our history regarding self representation.-- Richard Wayne

Every American A Lawyer

by Ralph Warner, Publisher
Copyright © Nolo Press

Almost 400 years ago, the great American democratic experiment began. Almost from the first day--and despite the contrary views of a succession of English monarchs--it assumed that an educated citizenry had no need of lawyers to write its laws or solve its disputes.

Lawyers were actually banned outright or faced tight restrictions in many colonies for much of the 18th century. Especially in Puritan New England, Quaker communities in Pennsylvania and Dutch settlements in New York, colonists firmly believed that disputes were best solved within the community, often by church-sponsored mediation.

The "Body of Liberties" adopted by the Massachusetts Bay Colony in 1641 expressed the typical attitudes of the time:

"Every man that findeth himselfe unfit to plead his own cause in any court shall have libertie to employ any man ..., provided he give him noe fee or reward for his pain."

In the late 17th and early 18th centuries, after English kings reasserted direct political authority over the colonies, England's common law system--complete with courts, juries and lawyers--crossed the ocean. Even so, most citizens did not rely on lawyers for legal information. Historian Eldon Revere James found that between 1687 and 1788, not a single legal treatise intended for lawyers was published in America. During that period, all the legal treatises were for laymen.

One of the most popular self-help law books of the time, Every Man His Own Lawyer, published in London, was already in its ninth edition in 1784. Another, Every Man His Own Attorney, by Thomas Wooler (1845), which apparently was widely and effectively used for many years, contains a lament that could have been penned yesterday:

"Much has been recently done, to simplify ... practice in the courts; something has been gained in point of expedition; but little, if anything, in the reduction of the expense ... Useless proceedings are still required, apparently for no other purpose than to extract money from pockets of the unfortunate suitors. Forms, the pretenses for which have been long exploded, are pertinaciously adhered to ... and while this is the case, legal proceedings will remain characterized by an uncertainty of result, a loss of time, and a ruinous expense, which should induce every one to learn as effectually as possible to guard against a seduction into its labyrinths, or, if entangled in them, to make the most easy and expeditious escape."

The strong tradition that each American should be able to master the laws probably peaked in the years between Andrew Jackson's inauguration in 1825 and Abraham Lincoln's death in 1865. Most states enforced few if any restrictions on non-lawyers appearing in court on behalf of others--as Lincoln himself did before he talked a judge into granting him attorney status.

Given America's long tradition of discouraging lawyers, it's surprising that in the 20th century the legal profession so successfully sold Americans on its favorite public relations slogan, "A man who represents himself has a fool for a client." And it's even more surprising that without great opposition, the American Bar Association convinced states to pass "unauthorized practice of law" statutes in the 1920s and 1930s, which effectively gave lawyers a monopoly over the sale of legal information.

It is less surprising--at least to everyone who isn't an attorney--that in the last two decades many Americans--battered women, small businesspeople, landlords, inventors and disenfranchised fathers, to mention just a few--have begun to assert their historical and constitutional right to participate in the legal decisions that affect their lives.

Unfortunately, the Bar--despite the fact that its leaders concede that at least 100 million Americans can't afford lawyers--continues to resist this powerful democratic trend. The fact that lawyers won't voluntarily relinquish their legal monopoly goes far to explain why the profession is ridiculed by so many Americans.

---

UTAH  

More people choosing to skip lawyers

Self-representation on the rise, courts want litigants to be more informed

By Stephen Hunt, The Salt Lake Tribune

11-27-06 -- If it's true, as the saying goes, that a person "who is his own lawyer has a fool for a client," then Utah's courts see plenty of fools. . . . Thousands of people appear every year in Utah courts without lawyers, according to a survey conducted for the state Judicial Council. . . . In 2005, 47 percent of those filing for divorce opted not to pay attorneys to help them, according to the survey. . . . And in cases involving protective orders, stalking, small claims and guardianship, the majority of the parties were self-represented. . . . The purpose of the survey was to identify the needs of the so-called pro se (by oneself) litigants, whose ranks are growing, and find solutions to help them.  . . . "It's a major national movement right now," said Mary Boudreau, of the Utah Administrative Office of the Courts. . . . Court authorities will be asking the Legislature for $107,000 to fund a pilot project to place an experienced attorney in two courthouses, one rural and one urban, to provide legal information - not legal advice - to self-represented litigants. . . . "It is difficult for a lay person to effectively participate in Utah's courts because of the complicated nature of the law, and the complex rules of evidence and procedure," according to a summary of the survey presented to the Judicial Council, which formulates court policies.

---

October 2006

FLORIDA

Rape Suspect Acting As Own Attorney Gives Closing Arguments

10-23-06 -- An accused Brevard County rapist, who has been acting as his own attorney, gave his own closing arguments Monday. Carlos Rhynes is currently on trial for four of the ten rapes he's charged with. . . . During his closing argument, Rhynes said he is innocent because none of the victims could positively identify him and that investigators falsified evidence. He's representing himself on two of the rape counts and has a defense attorney representing him on the other two counts. . . . If convicted, Rhynes could face life in prison. . . . During the trial, Rhynes faced his accusers, but he was very limited in the questions he could ask them on the stand. . . . The state gave its closing first Monday morning. The prosecutor argued Rhynes went to each one of his four victims’ homes, put fear in them and battered them.

---

Tax Revolt: Plaintiffs File Coordinated Cases Against IRS

Emma Schwartz, Legal Times

10-13-06 -- Michael Stephens hates the Internal Revenue Service. He believes it steals his money, and he won't stand for it. . . . "That's all we are, is slaves," says the 49-year-old truck driver from Georgia, who sued the agency. He claims he is entitled to damages through the Taxpayer Bill of Rights for alleged misconduct in tax collection by the IRS. . . . Stephen's complaint -- which Judge Ellen Huvelle of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia dismissed in June -- might simply be a footnote in the flood of pro se cases that pour into the courthouse each year, except that Stephens isn't alone. His complaint is one of 108 nearly identical cases filed since last fall by plaintiffs from Oregon to Florida. . . . The effort hasn't seen much success; so far, 40 have been dismissed because of the plaintiffs' failure to exhaust their administrative remedies. But the cases managed to pique curiosity in judges' chambers. . . . So who's behind this effort? . . . Stephens won't say. Nor would more than two dozen other plaintiffs, who either did not return calls or declined to answer questions. . . . Seattle's Heidi Broward, whose husband Paul had his claim dismissed in July, says the suits are a coordinated effort by people who met through "various things over the Web and from years and years of networking."

---

PRO SE QUESTIONS PRESENTED TO THE SUPREME COURT

05-1431
Kathrien v. McGrath
PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI
TO THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
Filed May 8, 2006

PETITION DENIED October 10, 2006

WEBSITE: Judges Are Above the Law

Click for links to Petition: Judges are Not Above the Law

---

September 2006

ILLINOIS  

Courts critic ordered to pay attorney's fees

By Judy Masterson

Annette Zender of Woodstock half expected to be thrown in the hoosegow during a court appearance Wednesday. . . . But Lake County Circuit Judge Jorge Ortiz only ordered her to pay attorney Gary Schlesinger of Libertyville $125 per month. . . . Zender, one of a growing number of women in Illinois and across the nation who are battling a court system they argue awards custody to fathers despite evidence of domestic violence, was slapped with a gag order Aug. 30 by Associate Judge Joseph Waldeck. She visited the Lake County News-Sun later the same day to publicize what she considers a violation of her constitutional right to free speech. . . . The ban was urged by Norman Kurtz, attorney for Thomas Boettcher of Minnesota, who gained sole custody of his child with Zender in 2001 — and Schlesinger, guardian ad litem in the ongoing custody dispute. . . . More than a dozen women, all embroiled in battles over custody and child support in Lake County, showed up to lend Zender support. All wore purple gags around their necks. . . . Two of the women, Catherine Campbell of Gurnee and Erin McRaith of Glenview, last year filed suit against officials of Lake County Circuit, alleging a pattern of discrimination against women who act as their own attorneys in child custody and divorce cases. . . . The suit was dismissed by a federal judge in March. An appeal is pending, McRaith said.

Zender is the founder of the
Illinois Coalition for Family Court Reform

---

Government urges review of parents' IDEA role

Posted by Lyle Denniston

The Justice Department on Wednesday urged the Supreme Court to clarify when a non-lawyer parent of a disabled child may file a lawsuit, without a lawyer, to enforce the child's rights under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). The Court had asked for the government's views in an order last May 15. The complete brief filed by the Solicitor General is available here. . . . Filing in the case of Winkelman, et al., v. Parma City School District (docket 05-983), U.S. Solicitor General Paul D. Clement said "the Court should grant the petition...and decide to what extent, if any, parents of children with disabilities may proceed pro se in a federal court action pursuant to IDEA. As several courts of appeals...have expressly acknowledged, the circuits are divided on that question." . . . Clement went on to argue that the Sixth Circuit Court ruling at issue in the case, barring parents from pursuing pro se lawsuits, "is inconsistent with the plain language, structure, and purposes of IDEA....The ability of parents to proceed pro se in federal court may facilitate the accomplishment of Congress's goals in enacting IDEA." Clement added that 2004 amendments to the Act "reaffirm that Congress intended to permit parents to proceed pro se in IDEA actions."

---

OHIO

Chief justice decries trend of litigants representing themselves

Business First of Columbus - by Kevin Kemper

9-15-06 -- Over the next year, Ohio's courts will be working to reduce the number of pro se litigants that appear before the court, while also attempting to implement an electronically linked, statewide case-management and docketing system. . . . Delivering his annual state of the judiciary address Thursday before the Ohio Judicial Conference, Ohio Supreme Court Chief Justice Thomas J. Moyer said an increasing number of people choose to appear in court without a lawyer. . . . "Too many of our citizens who should have legal representation go without it," Moyer said. . . . A person who chooses to represent themselves in court is known as a pro se litigant. Moyer said the number of pro se litigants is increasing in all courts across the state, in part because of economic factors and also because of an aversion to attorneys. . . . "At this year's meeting of the National Association of Court Managers, a demographic composite depicted the pro se litigant as female, high-school educated and poor," Moyer said. "She typically believes she cannot afford an attorney or chooses not to pay one, in part because she does not trust lawyers."

---

August 2006

FLORIDA

David v. Goliath

8-14-06 -- Approximately 65 percent of initial filings in domestic cases involve pro se litigants, and 80 percent of post-judgment proceedings, for the most part involving child support, involve at least one unrepresented litigant. . . . The courts have attempted to help this situation by providing "unbundled legal services," which consist of self-help forms and self-help services. However, unless versed in legalease, an average person cannot understand these forms or the court process to use them. These forms certainly do not provide guidance in court proceedings in terms of how to present evidence, how to examine/cross examine a witness or courtroom protocol. . . . This lack of experience is taken advantage of by attorneys who then wipe the floor with the pro se litigant. . . .Florida family law allows judges to consider any factor necessary to provide justice as part of judicial discretion. The fact that one litigant cannot afford an attorney should not make a difference.

---

Do-it-yourself divorcers get online aid

Mo. Bar, Supreme Court studying pro se trend

By Nora Lockwood Tooher and Scott Lauck

8-13-06 -- In an age where you can go to Lowe's to learn to build a retaining wall, or start your own media company via a blog, is it any wonder that divorces are becoming do-it-yourself projects?

Courts in as Arizona, California, Maryland, Washington, Utah and other states have developed a range of Web-based legal forms and instructions to help pro se litigants fill out forms for divorces, child custody orders and restraining orders.

And while Missouri isn't quite there, the state Supreme Court and the Missouri Bar are working to get the legal community ready. About four years ago, the state Supreme Court and the Missouri Bar formed a commission to study the pro se phenomenon. Its work is due out by the end of the year.

Lori Levine, an attorney at Carson & Coil PC in Jefferson City, Mo., and co-chair of the state's Joint Pro Se Implementation Commission, said the idea is to help lawyers, judges, court administrators and litigants figure out the best way to handle the do-it-yourself trend.

"We don't want to encourage people to go pro se, but we know they are. So we're trying to help the courts," she said.

Self-help trend

According to a recent report by the National Center for State Courts (NCSC) in Williamsburg, Va., courts have seen a "tremendous increase in self-represented litigants over the last 10 years."

Research indicates the majority of parties acting on their own behalf are women between the ages of 18 and 34 appearing in family law cases.

The main force driving pro se litigation is money. Attorney fees can range from about $1,500 for a simple divorce to tens of thousands of dollars for more complex cases. In contrast, the cost of a do-it-yourself divorce typically ranges from $250 to $500.

"Certainly, more and more courts are working on standardizing their paper forms and making those forms available online electronically," said Richard Zorza, a Washington attorney, author and consultant on access-to-justice issues.

"What's behind it," he said, "is simply that the legal system is hard to navigate, and that a majority of the people who have to go to family court can't afford lawyers."

In some cities, do-it-yourselfers make up the vast majority of divorce applicants.

In San Diego, for example, the number of divorce filings involving at least one pro se litigant rose from 46 percent in 1992 to 77 percent in 2000, according to the administrative office of the courts in California.

Statewide, the pro se rate in California family law cases averages 67 percent. In restraining order cases, litigants are reported to be acting pro se more than 90 percent of the time.

In Maryland, about 67 percent of divorce and custody cases have at least one self-represented litigant. In the city of Baltimore - which has one of the highest poverty levels in the state - the percentage of these cases involving at least one self-represented litigant jumps to 85 percent.

Missouri does not keep statewide statistics, according to the Missouri Office of State Courts Administrator. However, some courts, such as the circuit courts in Jackson and St. Louis counties keep their own local statistics.

In Jackson County Circuit Court, the number of pro se divorce cases was 22 percent in 2003, 24 percent in 2004 and 19 percent in 2005. In St. Louis County Circuit Court, the number of pro se cases filed in the last four years has ranged from as low as 8.3 percent to as much as 19.2 percent, with an average of 13.3 percent.

Breaking down courtroom barriers

To expedite pro se divorces and other family law cases, many courts provide legal forms online, with detailed information to help litigants fill out the forms. Several states go further, with self-help centers staffed by paralegals or attorneys to assist pro se litigants.

According to Madelynn Herman, a research analyst with the NCSC, the most recent trend among court systems is online document assembly that produces court forms ready for filing.

In most states, pro se petitioners still have to file the forms in person with a court clerk. Electronic filing systems for pro se petitioners are still a rarity in state courts, according to Ronald W. Staudt, a director of the Center for Access to Justice and Technology at Chicago-Kent College of Law.

"It's a huge re-engineering problem," he said. "States don't have a consistent way to do these things and manage the cases and dockets."

But the NCSC predicts that eventually, e-filing by pro se litigants will be commonplace.

Such forms are available online in some Missouri circuits, including St. Louis and Jackson counties. In fact, the St. Louis County court maintains a resource center for pro se filers, which opened in September 2002.

Circuit Judge Dennis Smith, who handles the bulk of the circuit's pro se cases and is, along with Levine, a co-chair of the state's pro se commission, said the center's statistics have shown some interesting trends. Only about a third of the forms distributed by the center end up getting filed.

Smith noted that many people who pick up the forms eventually decide to get lawyers - meaning that the self-help trend isn't all "doom and gloom" for divorce lawyers.

"The forms would make them realize that it's not that simple," he said.

Unbundling legal services

Like it or not, attorneys have to understand that more and more people are going into court without lawyers, said William Hornsby, staff counsel with the American Bar Association's Standing Committee on Legal Services.

"One of the really important points for lawyers to realize is that they're not the ones who decide whether or not people proceed pro se," he said. "We can prefer people be well-represented and develop models that will enable them to be well-represented, but if they choose not to, that's the circumstance to which we must react."

With so many going it alone in family law matters, he said, attorneys have to find a way to help consumers by "unbundling" their legal services.

"Lawyers and the parties can partner in such a way that the work is divided among them," Hornsby said. "It could be as simple as reviewing a marital separation agreement, or as complicated as appearing on behalf of a person for a restraining order."

"There are plenty of divorces that people can't do themselves to keep us divorce lawyers busy," he said.

---

June 12, 2006

ILLINOIS

Man who represented self gets 20 years for robberies

By Brett Nauman

A Bloomington man has been sentenced to 20 years in prison for robbing a pair of banks with a BB pistol in 2004. . . . David Silas, 34, was convicted of robbing Bank One, 413 E. Washington St., and National City Bank, 1332 E. Empire St. during a trial in which he represented himself. . . . While Silas denied committing either robbery during his trial in April, he told Judge Ronald Dozier on Tuesday that his addiction to drugs led him to hold up the banks. . . . DNA found on clothing worn during each robbery was used to link Silas to the heists. Moreover, the bank manager from National City told jurors she was positive Silas was the man who robbed her bank.

---

WEST VIRGINIA   

Supreme Court backs help for 'pro se' plaintiffs

By Steve Korris - Statehouse Bureau

Douglas Cottrill could have overturned a $9,504.25 child support order with no help from an attorney, if he had known about the statute of limitations. . . . Now the West Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals has cancelled Cottrill's debt, ruling that Harrison County Circuit Judge Thomas Bedell should have accommodated his lack of legal expertise. . . . Under the state Constitution, "the right of self representation in civil proceedings is a fundamental right ..." . . . Still, those who appear "pro se" -- for self -- run a risk of missing legal points on which they might have prevailed. . . . Twenty years ago the Supreme Court of Appeals held that a trial court must "strive to insure that no person's cause or defense is defeated solely by reason of their unfamiliarity with procedural or evidentiary rules." . . . Cottrill turned into a perfect example.

---

March 29, 2006

PRO SE FILES FEDERAL APPEAL AFTER ATTORNEY REFUSES

2nd Circuit Criticizes Attorney for Failure to File Notice of Appeal

Mark Hamblett, New York Law Journal
An attorney who fails to file a notice of appeal is constitutionally ineffective even where the defendant waived his right to appeal in a plea agreement, according to the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. . . . In Campusano v. United States, 04-513-pr, a three-judge panel said that a defendant makes out a claim for ineffective assistance under this scenario despite the attorney's good faith belief that the appeal would be frivolous. . . . The case was decided by Judges Sonia Sotomayor and Rosemary Pooler, and Eastern District of New York Chief Judge Edward Korman, sitting by designation. Sotomayor wrote the opinion. . . . Jose Campusano pleaded guilty on Nov. 7, 2001, before Southern District of New York Judge Shira Scheindlin to one count of distributing and possessing with intent to distribute 27 grams of cocaine in violation of 21 U.S.C. §841(a)(1) and (b)(1)(B). . . . The plea agreement signed by Campusano stipulated that he would not challenge the prison sentence ordered by Scheindlin as long as it fell within the range of nine years to 11 years and three months. The judge later imposed a sentence of nine years. . . . But in April 2003, Campusano filed a pro se motion to vacate, set aside or correct his sentence under 28 U.S.C. §2255 on the basis of ineffective assistance of counsel. . . . He claimed that, despite his promise not to appeal the sentence, he twice asked his lawyer to file a notice of appeal -- but his lawyer did not.

---

MASSACHUSETTS

Handbook to help people represent selves in Mass. courts

(AP) The state's chief justice wants to make it easier for people to represent themselves in civil cases. . . . A how-to handbook for people who choose to represent themselves will be made available on the Web and at public libraries, Supreme Judicial Court Chief Justice Margaret Marshall said on Saturday.

"Like courts around the nation, ours face a crisis of affordability," Marshall said in an address to the Massachusetts Bar Association. "Increasingly, those with middle incomes, as well as the poor, are unable to afford lawyers to represent them in court." . . . The handbook will advise people about "courtroom demeanor, personnel and procedure," she said, as well explaining the benefits of hiring a lawyer.

---

NEW HAMPSHIRE

N.H. lawyers can provide affordable, limited advice

In a move designed to make it easier for people to afford legal advice, the state Supreme Court has amended its rules to let lawyers provide limited services. . . . Lawyers in civil cases no longer have to handle a case from beginning to end under the new rules, which were adopted permanently last week for the state's district, superior and probate courts. . . . Previously, once a lawyer agreed to take a case, the attorney was bound to see it through unless the client or judge gave him permission to withdraw. Now, lawyers can provide legal advice only, help draft a particular motion, or appear in court for a single hearing.

---

TEXAS

Do-it-yourself divorce
By: Luke Ellis and Lisa McMorris
Lawyers often joke that if getting married was as hard as getting divorced, we would not see as many people tying the knot. A common divorce question relates to whether someone getting divorced actually needs to hire an attorney. . . . There is no law requiring someone to have a lawyer in order to file for a divorce. Someone can file for divorce pro se, which means "for oneself." There are numerous steps to completing a divorce, and the State Bar Association offers a Pro Se Divorce Handbook. . . . To file for divorce in Texas, you need to have lived in the state for six months, including three months in the county in which you file. You must first file an original petition for divorce and pay court costs, which are usually around $200. You then have to notify your spouse that you have filed for divorce. Your spouse then can file an answer to the divorce suit.

---

February 10, 2006

FEDERAL COURT: ILLINOIS

Navigating the Maze: U.S. Court Opens Do-It-Yourself Help Desk

By Kari Lydersen, Washington Post Staff Writer

When Chicago resident Wallace Bradley filed a federal employment discrimination lawsuit against a construction company, he got a quick lesson in the legal process. . . . After being fired in 2002, Bradley did not have enough money to hire a lawyer and he wanted to deal directly with the company himself. So he filed the suit pro se , meaning he would represent himself in court. It wasn't easy. . . . "The ins and outs are hard when you don't know what you're doing," Bradley said. "You're going against a company which can hire a major law firm to make you keep coming back to court again and again. It's rough." . . . Bradley, 53, a former gang member turned community activist who has run for Chicago City Council, said he was in the right and should have won the case. But, concerned that the judge might dismiss his suit, Bradley decided to settle out of court in 2004. . . . "A maze" is how many lawyers and judges describe the process of suing in federal court. But every year thousands of people such as Bradley try to navigate the process. . . . Now the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois in Chicago has launched a program to provide free legal assistance for people in filing pro se federal lawsuits.

---

TEXAS

In spite of Judge Mike

Re: "No one like Judge Mike," Sunday Letters.

Michael Sullivan, Plano

2-2-06 -- It's right to say there is "no one like Judge Mike."

I was a self-represented plaintiff in a small-claims court action in Judge Mike Yarborough's court. In this suit, Judge Yarbrough invoked Texas Rules of Court, Texas Rules of Evidence and Texas Rules of Civil Procedure as asked for by the defendant's legal counsel.

Why would Judge Yarborough directly violate the written instructions of Collin County's justice of the peace courts, which state a small-claims court action will have "informal hearings and pleadings" and "the judge will develop the facts"? Why would he apply these rules that apply to justice court (not small-claims court) to a small-claims suit?

A self-represented plaintiff would have difficulty introducing evidence, and using those rules could bias the outcome.

Additionally, why would Judge Yarborough not allow me, one of the three named plaintiffs in the small-claim action, to speak for the plaintiffs as we had agreed?

Instead, he dictated that the youngest, most inexperienced of the plaintiffs with no knowledge of the rules would represent the plaintiffs. The defendant was allowed to select the lawyer of their choice. Why was the plaintiff not allowed the same right in Judge Yarborough's court?

Small-claims court was specifically created to allow dispute resolution without the need to hire an attorney. When a complaint is filed in Precinct 4 of Collin County, or any other small-claims court, you have the right to expect unbiased, fair and equitable treatment from the judge. Know that if you re-elect Judge Mike Yarbrough, you may not receive what you have the right to expect.

In case anyone thinks this is just sour grapes, I'm happy to report that the plaintiffs won the suit. Without legal counsel and in spite of Judge Yarbrough, justice prevailed.

---

NORTH DAKOTA

UND: Fargo man's suit against UND clinic gets new life

By David Dodds, Herald Staff Writer

A lawsuit against a UND law clinic brought by a Fargo Christian activist trying to remove a "pagan" statue from atop the Grand Forks County courthouse should not have been dismissed so quickly, an appeals court ruled Thursday. . . . The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 8th Circuit reversed a district court's decision from July 2004 that threw out a lawsuit by Martin Wishnatsky. He said his First Amendment rights were violated when he was denied legal assistance from UND Law School's Clinical Education Program because of his views. . . . The higher court sided with Wishnatsky, a high-profile proponent of Christian causes, that the clinic refused services because he was a critic of the clinic and its representation of five men trying to remove a Ten Commandments monument near Fargo's City Hall. . . . The clinic, at the time, denied it did anything to violate Wishnatsky's rights, but asserted that the program could exclude people solely on the basis of their viewpoint. . . . "Taken to its logical conclusion, the clinic's argument means that a public law school could announce that its clinical program will accept as clients only persons who belong to one political party or espouse particular views," wrote Judge Steven Colloton, in the appeals decision filed Thursday.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Goddess of Justice looks favorably upon viewpoint discrimination lawsuit brought by supporter of Ten Commandments display who objected to North Dakota county's display of Themis atop the Grand Forks courthouse: The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit today issued a decision restoring a rather unusual viewpoint discrimination lawsuit against the University of North Dakota School of Law's Clinical Education Program. Earlier coverage of this dispute can be found here. Some modern-day depictions of Themis can be found in the "Blawg Review Awards 2005." . . . Posted by Howard Bashman

---

December 22, 2005 Man Acting As His Own Attorney Holds Corrupt Courts At Bay PART 2 by David Bresnahan Summary: Sometimes it is the little things that defeat the bad guys, says Gene Forte. He compares the evidence he now has about public officials and judicial corruption to what put Al Capone behind bars. MONTEREY, Calif. -- Gene Forte, who is acting as his own lawyer, believes he has a strong case to prove corruption in the highest offices in the State of California. Forte has charged Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, Attorney General Bill Lockyer, judges for the Monterey Superior Court, other public officials, as well as members of the local Monterey media with corruption. He compares his legal battle with the method used to ultimately catch Al Capone. "This is the Achilles heel of my adversaries. It can be compared to what happened to Al Capone. He did not go to jail for all of the murders. He went to jail for tax evasion. What will bring them down is the fact that the small claims case of Forte vs. Flippo can be shown without a reasonable doubt to have been fixed by Flippo and Commissioner Rutledge," said Forte.

---

TENNESSEE

New Trial Ordered For Man Who Had Fired 3 Attorneys
The Tennessee Court of Criminal Appeals has ordered a new trial for a man who represented him after firing three court-appointed attorneys. . . . The appeals court said Criminal Court Judge Rebecca Stern did not properly advise Corey C. Abernathy on representing himself. . . . He was convicted of theft of property in a bench trial. He got a suspended sentence. -- Click for Full Opinion

---