Sentences with phrase «type of litigant»

Aside from the rising general need for expert witnesses in complex litigation, I think it helps that Teece advocates a position a particular type of litigant really likes to hear.

& Process 75 (2010)(analyzing Supreme Court brief readability using Flesch Reading Ease, Gunning Fog, and Flesch - Kincaid tests, and reporting variation in readability for different types of litigant and across time periods); Ian Gallacher, «When Numbers Get Serious»: A Study of Plain English Usage in Briefs Filed Before the New York Court of Appeals, 46 Suffolk U. L. Rev. 451 (2013)(using Flesch Reading Ease and Flesch - Kincaid test to measure readability and finding gradual reduction in readability from 1969 through 2008); Keith Carlson, Michael A. Livermore, & Daniel Rockmore, A Quantitative Analysis of Writing Style on the U.S. Supreme Court, 93 Wash..

Not exact matches

We'll be looking at how new technologies are making new types of government data — including key information about government regulations, judges, litigants and attorneys — available.

State and local jurisdictional rules notwithstanding, the ABA concluded that ghostwriters make no statement of any kind to the tribunal as to the type or degree of legal services provided to the pro se litigant.

Reporter Samson Habte explains that the court's April 23 opinion highlights the difficulty of proving two types of tort claim — malicious prosecution and abuse of process — that disgruntled litigants could try to use to turn the tables on opposing parties and their lawyers.

While shedding further light on an aspect of the law seldom visited, highlighting the risks involved in filing documents in a manner which can not be tracked / traced and illustrating the types of complication with which the courts will increasingly have to deal with ever more litigants in person, the case is perhaps most striking for what it highlights about the current fault - based divorce system.

Meanwhile, these four types of damage caused by the problem are getting worse: (1) to the population in that there are many thousands of people whose lives have been damaged for lack of legal services; (2) to the courts in that they are being clogged, as judges have warned, by high percentages of self - represented litigants, because their cases move much more slowly than those that have lawyers; (3) to the legal profession in that it is shrinking and is predicted to have a very negative future of contracting and of law firms failing; and, (4) to legal aid organizations because it is politically very unwise for governments to fund them better with taxpayers» money, to enable them to provide free legal services to more poor people, while the majority of the taxpayers can not obtain legal services for themselves at reasonable cost.

This is what is done to self representing litigants, they go through this type of unethical system of law.

Do the numbers of self - represented litigants, for example, look about the same in Canada as in the US, which is somewhere around 70 - ish percent of people, I think, depending on the type of matter, are unrepresented?

The Michigan Legal Help website had that type of evaluation done on whether it helped self - represented litigants navigate the divorce process, and when they followed up with the group they had studied, 74 % using the website got the divorce decree.

In a sample of 253 self - represented litigants, virtually all described searching for some type of limited legal assistance.

http://apps.americanbar.org/legalservices/delivery/downloads/bostontaskforce.pdf Among their findings was: In some types of matters unrepresented litigants do not obtain results as favorable as...

... many [self - represented litigants] sought some type of «unbundled» legal services from legal counsel; for example, assistance with document review, writing a letter, or appearing in court.

They are used regularly by a considerable number of judges, to the extent that a printed form of the order made can be handed to litigants as they leave court, and further printed copies go to the court office, so that the office does not have to spend time typing orders.

«If the courts believe that this type of dissemination of information already provided to a litigant — and often in the public domain — is inappropriate, it is important to explain this to litigants and also to explain why,» she says.

Understand foreclosure proceeding priorities, foreclosure orders, and strategic options; review strategies for dealing with self - represented litigants in the foreclosure context, including when to offer advice; review the types of foreclosure remedies we seek and why; and more.

Described as «a hub for connecting self - represented litigants to supportive lawyers and high quality resources both online and offline», Self - Rep Navigators have established a website at www.limitedscoperetainers.ca and list lawyers who will take clients on a limited scope retainer / at fixed fees for civil and criminal matters, and those offering the same types of services to family clients.

These rules govern such things as how a lawsuit is commenced, the types and content of documents that can (or must) be filed, the various deadlines that attorneys (and self - represented litigants!)

But, since the Internet is transnational in nature, it remains difficult to see how a single state can offer this type of service to cross-border disputes, especially when neither litigant has any connecting factors (to use the terminology set forth by the Supreme Court to establish competence for online disputes) with said state.

Now, imagine if, instead of having to type in their complaint, litigants were able to speak to the system and be guided through the resolution process (think of an ODR version of Siri).

Both solutions will occur because the power of the news media and of the internet, interacting, will quickly make widely known these types of information, the cumulative effect of which will force governments and the courts to act: (1) the situations of the thousands of people whose lives have been ruined because they could not obtain the help of a lawyer; (2) the statistics as to the increasing percentages of litigants who are unrepresented and clogging the courts, causing judges to provide more public warnings; (3) the large fees that some lawyers charge; (4) increasing numbers of people being denied Legal Aid and court - appointed lawyers; (5) the many years that law societies have been unsuccessful in coping with this problem which continues to grow worse; (6) people prosecuted for «the unauthorized practice of law» because they tried to help others desperately in need of a lawyer whom they couldn't afford to hire; (7) that there is no truly effective advertising creating competition among law firms that could cause them to lower their fees; (8) that law societies are too comfortably protected by their monopoly over the provision of legal services, which is why they might block the expansion of the paralegal profession, and haven't effectively innovated with electronic technology and new infrastructure so as to be able to solve this problem; (9) that when members of the public access the law society website they don't see any reference to the problem that can assure them that something effective is being done and, (10) in order for the rule of law, the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, and the whole of Canada's constitution be able to operate effectively and command sufficient respect, the majority of the population must be able to obtain a lawyer at reasonable cost.

Those «others» include, by the way, a type of outfit that is not usually thought of as a «public interest litigant,» but which in a very real sense is exactly that: the federal Department of Justice and its provincial counterparts (which I will refer to as the DOJs).

In addition, this year's Report describes the Access to Justice Program's multi-faceted approach to the delivery of legal services, assistance and information and the benefits to unrepresented litigants and the court system of the different types of delivery methods.

In Metro Detroit alone, six courts have adopted Matterhorn to resolve several different types of cases online, including failure - to - pay and failure - to appear - warrants for qualifying litigants.

[6] Alternative legal services (ALSs) are, for example: clinics of various types; self - help webpages; phone - in services; paralegal and law student programs; family mediation services; social justice tribunals; and court procedures simplification projects; arbitration and mediation for dispute resolution; public legal education information services; programs for targeted (unbundled) limited retainer legal services (as distinguished from a full retainer to provide the whole legal service); pro bono (free) legal services for short and simple cases; and, the National Self - Represented Litigants Project, the purpose of which is to help self - represented litigants to be better litigants withoutLitigants Project, the purpose of which is to help self - represented litigants to be better litigants withoutlitigants to be better litigants withoutlitigants without lawyers.

[iii] Alternative legal services (ALSs) are, for example: clinics of various types, self - help webpages, phone - in services, paralegal and law student programs, family mediation services, social justice tribunals, court procedures simplification projects, arbitration and mediation for dispute resolution, public legal education information services, programs for targeted (unbundled) limited retainer legal services (as distinguished from a full retainer to provide all of the legal services necessary), pro bono (free) legal services for short and simple cases, and the National Self - Represented Litigants Project, the purpose of which is to help self - represented litigants to be more effective self - represented lLitigants Project, the purpose of which is to help self - represented litigants to be more effective self - represented llitigants to be more effective self - represented litigantslitigants.

As ethicalEsq pointed out last year, the President of one state bar association responded to an excellent report on the need to improve to access, through many types of pro se assistance, by writing an article asserting that self - represented litigants (plus judges and court employees) must be educated so they understand that every litigant needs a lawyer.