A Fool For A Client - Considerations For The Do-It-Yourself Litigant
Abraham Lincoln opined that the man who represents himself [in legal matters] has a fool for a client. Perhaps Honest Abe was a little harsh. Many, or at least some, people take care of their own legal disputes with varying degrees of success. Additionally, if a matter involves a small amount of money, it may be cost prohibitive to retain an attorney to assist in resolving the dispute. Before deciding to represent oneself, and potentially gaining a fool for a client, there are a few factors to consider.
Can you afford to spend the time and energy to learn the necessary law and procedure to resolve the dispute? Every court, or decision making tribunal, has its own rules and requirements that must be followed. This includes the proper form that documents must be in to be filed. It takes time to learn these "quirks". If you are working at other employment, are you prepared to sacrifice sleep and time off in order to meet court timelines and deadlines. Your schedule is secondary to that imposed by the court.
Are you prepared to learn the necessary area of law? While some areas are straight forward, many areas of law have grey areas that are easily manipulated by seasoned professionals. Failure to produce the right evidence on point or producing irrelevant evidence can harm your position.
Are you prepared to expend emotional energy? Legal fights generally create worry, frustration and anger. Studies have demonstrated the high cost of stress including litigation stress on one's health and wellbeing. Hiring a litigator to deal with the unpleasantness may be preferable to living with the more negative aspects of legal disputes.
Are you capable of being reasonable and considering other viewpoints? One of the most significant benefits of hiring a professional is that person's ability to objectively analyze the situation and advise you concerning both the good and the bad of your situation. It can be difficult to hear but objective counsel will help you more than you can imagine. (As a digression, good legal counsel will tell you more than just what you want to hear. S/he will also tell you where the problems might lie).
A recent British Columbia court case demonstrates the potential weakness of representing oneself. The plaintiff was unsuccessful following a 15 day trial and the defendant sought costs against the plaintiff including double costs for failing to accept an offer to settle. In deciding whether to award double costs against the self-represented litigant the court was required to determine whether the offer to settle "ought to have reasonably been accepted." The court evaluated that the plaintiff's view of the case was "quite unrealistic" and that the plaintiff's strategy seems to be designed to maximize litigation expenses for the defendant while he had nothing at stake in terms of litigation expenses. The plaintiff had rarely complied with court rules and had failed to follow, or had ignored, directions, deadlines and orders. The plaintiff had filed lengthy, irrelevant material and had taken unreasonable positions. For these reasons, the court ruled that the offer to settle should have been accepted and double costs were awarded against the plaintiff.
The case illustrates the importance of having an objective view of the legal dispute. The plaintiff apparently lost sight of what could realistically be achieved in his effort to prevail. Additionally, he failed to consider the consequences, including cost consequences to his actions. This failure to remain objective and to consider the consequences of actions was to his detriment. In his effort to save on litigation expenses, he increased his costs.
Similarly, the plaintiff failed to properly consider what evidence to place before the court and relied on lengthy and irrelevant materials. Doing so likely drove up the litigation costs of the opposing party who was required to prepare a response to those materials.
In summary, the case illustrates the principal of being penny wise and pound foolish. Lack of knowledge and objectivity in litigation can prove costly. Paying for an experienced legal advisor is similar to paying for any professional. After all, you would not dream of performing your own surgery or root canal. Doing so would prove Honest Abe correct that you had a fool for a client.
As a final thought, should you decide to proceed on your own, at the very least, hire an experienced litigator to provide an honest assessment of your case, including any offers to settle. It is also wise to obtain such assessments at various stages in the litigation i.e. the beginning, after discover and prior to trial.
Wright v Sun Life Assurance Company of Canada, 2015 BCSC 1899 https://www.canlii.org/en/bc/bcsc/doc/2015/2015bcsc1899/2015bcsc1899.pdf
The content and the opinions expressed here is informational purposes only and does not constitute legal or professional advice. Nor does reading or commenting on it create a lawyer/client relationship with the author. I encourage you to contact me directly at adrianlawoffice@gmail.com if you have specific legal questions or concerns.
The author encourages you to share this article on social media.
Follow me on Twitter @gwendolynadrian