An HOV lane makes a lot of sense on the Interstate, but not in a courthouse dedicated to justice for all. It’s good to encourage carpools, right? Foisting traffic jams on one-passenger cars is good public policy. But class action lawsuits are the only reason to have a fast lane in the courthouse. Is it just me? Or is it plain old common sense that all litigants in other types of cases should get the same access to the courts? So then why do lawyers get special treatment across the board?
In your typical courthouse, a lawyer has access to a judge’s outer chambers. That means a lawyer is more likely to get face time with the judge than any pro se litigant on the other side. In most jurisdictions, lawyers have online access to a judge’s calendar and can schedule hearings on their cases independently. Pro se litigants must request available dates from the judge’s assistant and ask permission to notice a hearing.
Lawyers can (and in many cases must) file their motions and pleadings electronically. But there are still too many courts that require pro se litigants to file documents by mail or in person at a clerk’s office. That’s expensive and time-consuming when you consider the cost of serving other parties with every filing.
There are dozens of these “minor” inconveniences for pro se litigants disguised as conveniences for lawyers. This special treatment creates an HOV lane for lawyers that limits access to the courts for the rest of us. For example, my own case is scheduled for a hearing next week. The plaintiff’s lawyer wants to amend his answer to my counterclaim, and he needs a court order because I’ve opposed it. The thing is, I’m not really opposed to his amendment. I don’t care how he answers the counterclaim. I’m forcing him to schedule a hearing because it’s the easiest way for me to get in front of the judge.
I’ve had a motion to compel discovery pending for months, but I can’t just schedule a hearing the way my plaintiff’s lawyer can. He doesn’t have to wait for a judicial assistant to answer his emails and phone calls (or not) the way I do. Bet I’ll get a hearing scheduled on my motion next week.
This is how pro se litigants get blamed for clogging the nation’s courts. It’s not because we’re ignorant of the law or inefficient in our procedures or frivolous in our pleadings. It’s because we don’t have equal access to the courts. The judicial system wants to improve its efficiency by creating special tracks and procedures for pro se litigants, but we apparently already have one. In my humble opinion, the best way to improve efficiency is let us ride in the HOV lane with the lawyers.
Have you been denied equal access to the courts? Been treated differently than the lawyer on the other side? Share in the comments below.
Great Article! Very valid!
Yes, having to file documents at the court house in person, as we don’t have access to electronic filing. Quite a racket. Fortunately we are a few minutes away from the court house, but if we lived any farther, this would be a significant PITA.
Fresh update, just happened 2 days ago. It appears that the judge and opposing counsel had some form of HOV lane set up prior to a hearing (which they set up) in which we requested permission to enter upon land for the inspection of evidence. The judge immediately allowed our ‘inspection’, but emphatically prevented us from moving any of the evidence (destroyed trees) with an excavator from a humongous pile – without any discussion or questions. Which means that we can inspect only about 10% of the evidence, as most of the trees are not visible without spreading the pile apart! It seems that blocking evidence is clear grounds for appeal. It is not possible for us to assess damages – and therefore make a valid claim for damages – without an inventory of the evidence. We performed the inspection, got some pictures and measurements just 2 days ago (same day, right after the hearing – we were given 1 hour to inspect 100+ tons of trees piled up in humongous piles – with our bare hands!). So this is hot in progress, so we’ll keep posting updates. Sounds to me like a possibility to repeat Courtroom5’s experience with glory upon appeal.
HOV lane? No discussion with me, but apparent prior discussion between the ‘honorables’ regarding emphasis of no excavator use.
To study the psychology of this – I felt great after the hearing, because in a courthouse full of depressed people and anomic lawyers, I was psychologically whole and happy, knowing that I am fighting for our rights in a corrupt system. The other lawyer couldn’t even look me in the eyes. Then yesterday and today, it smacked me like a ton of bricks: the effective denial of evidence inspection comes close to the type of stuff that happens in a banana republic. Is this where this country is going? So I know my role within it: to help uphold the integrity of the system. And the guilty – will be punished.
This is just a reminder about the long walk to freedom. African Americans have gotten far, native peoples and poor poor people continue the struggle. Class warfare is strong. As a privileged while alpha male (and immigrant fresh off the boat), I am glad to join the good old fight of good versus evil.
I understand this is only the beginning. Yet I look forward to more juicy tidbits of the system coming forth as we learn about its workings. We have learned our first real lesson of judicial bias. But we already won. So if they continue to pull off more shenanigans – we’ll be ok. Which is great for us, because we are not in any position of real vulnerability. This is life-changing experience – but not something that puts us in any form of real threat – just perceived threat. I just sympathize with the other stories here – where no access to justice is causing real and profound harm. This is an important battle. It is critical to improve a system – the legal system – which is supposed to be the ultimate corrector of wrongs. If we don’t, we may become another Russia.