anyone who represents himself in court has a fool for a client and ass for attorney

[pvsi]

I just saw this on "legal dictionary" and I find it very offensive, I believe this is the same as saying "if you re not a lawyer and don't need a lawyer in court you are an idiot" or "if you don't have our mafia protecting you, you are a loser" or "if you jam with us on stage, but are not a certified musician, you suck" - (I happen to have won 3 guitar contest when I was a teenager and I did not have a guitar teacher)

And as far as court, here is my story of how I was not allowed to speak when Verizon sued me:
In the late 1990s I was sued by Verizon, for not paying the advertisement bill in yellow pages. I was excited to go to court, to explain.. that when the Verizon saleslady was discussing the bill with me, she never mentioned that this will be a monthly $300 bill, so, I was under the assumption that it is a one time fee. I was so enthusiastic to speak in front of the judge, holding in my hand documents proving my innocence. But when my turn came to speak, the judge asked me if I have a lawyer, I said no, I can speak for myself. she said no, you need a lawyer. she did not allow me to say anything, and I was found guilty right then and there. and I was forced to pay 24 times more then what I originally thought. supposedly I was not allowed to speak because me and my father are set up as a 2 people corporation, and as a corporation you are required to have a lawyer, but it does not matter to me, I will carry the conviction of my innocence to my grave. and that $5000 made Verizon rich and famous, and ordinary people like me, indebted as a nation.

"anyone who represents himself in court has a fool for a client and an ass for an attorney"
from: Legal Dictionary | Law.com

 

[jillian]

i don't know a single attorney who would represent themselves.

and any lawyer knows that other lawyers make the worst possible clients.

the statement is absolutely true

but thanks for the thread. you could have done it without the rant.

 

[Avatar4321]

So you made a contract you obviously didn't read and are upset because you had to pay the bill. Not surprised you lost.

 

[dilloduck]

The law is complicated, expensive and hopelessly impossible for the common man to deal with. Be prepared to fork out bucks to possibly receive justice.

 

[LordBrownTrout]

You should have hired an attorney. It would have been cheaper.

 

[Avatar4321]

You should have hired an attorney. It would have been cheaper.

Not necessarily. Some attorneys can spot an easy mark a mile away. Anyone who doesn't understand a contract for service could easily lose alot more with an attorney who does

 

[Katzndogz]

I've represented myself several times. Mostly because I was having fun doing it.

A non attorney should never represent themselves. They just don't know how the game is played. The smallest things will cause disaster. Of course new attorneys make terrible mistakes too. Law firms either assign an experiences attorney to work with a junior attorney or give the new attorney dead bang loser that no one could win.

An attorney should never represent themselves in an area of law that they don't know well. They will be in the mop bucket.

I had two lesbians sue me and my business for refusing to paint their wedding portrait. They got so some gay flamer as their attorney. I knew they had no case. I spent five months dragging them around to run up their fees. Or waste the little gay guy's time before I dropped the hammer down with a summary judgment motion. Sadly the judge dismissed my business out on the first day or I would have had a ball with that.

 

[Noomi]

So you made a contract you obviously didn't read and are upset because you had to pay the bill. Not surprised you lost.

It wouldn't surprise me if he was lied to in order to make him sign on the dotted line. It happens - businesses will lie through their teeth about their fees, and then claim ignorance when they are questioned.

 

[Noomi]

I had two lesbians sue me and my business for refusing to paint their wedding portrait. They got so some gay flamer as their attorney. I knew they had no case. I spent five months dragging them around to run up their fees. Or waste the little gay guy's time before I dropped the hammer down with a summary judgment motion. Sadly the judge dismissed my business out on the first day or I would have had a ball with that.

Did they ask and you refused, or did you agree to paint their portrait and backtracked when you discovered they were gay?

 

[Katzndogz]

I had two lesbians sue me and my business for refusing to paint their wedding portrait. They got so some gay flamer as their attorney. I knew they had no case. I spent five months dragging them around to run up their fees. Or waste the little gay guy's time before I dropped the hammer down with a summary judgment motion. Sadly the judge dismissed my business out on the first day or I would have had a ball with that.

Did they ask and you refused, or did you agree to paint their portrait and backtracked when you discovered they were gay?

They asked me. I called them a couple of ugly dykes and threw them out. Since it was two women asking to have me paint their wedding portrait it was pretty obvious that they were lesbians. There was nothing to find out later. Now I do admit that I initially tried to be more gentle in refusing by simply saying no and suggesting a portrait artist that advertised for commissioned work. It was only after they pressed the issue by telling me I was discriminating against them that I told them no way was I going to paint a couple of ugly dykes.

 

[Lakhota]

I thought your previous DUPLICATE thread got the ax.

 

[Noomi]

I had two lesbians sue me and my business for refusing to paint their wedding portrait. They got so some gay flamer as their attorney. I knew they had no case. I spent five months dragging them around to run up their fees. Or waste the little gay guy's time before I dropped the hammer down with a summary judgment motion. Sadly the judge dismissed my business out on the first day or I would have had a ball with that.

Did they ask and you refused, or did you agree to paint their portrait and backtracked when you discovered they were gay?

They asked me. I called them a couple of ugly dykes and threw them out. Since it was two women asking to have me paint their wedding portrait it was pretty obvious that they were lesbians. There was nothing to find out later. Now I do admit that I initially tried to be more gentle in refusing by simply saying no and suggesting a portrait artist that advertised for commissioned work. It was only after they pressed the issue by telling me I was discriminating against them that I told them no way was I going to paint a couple of ugly dykes.

I wouldn't have taken that insult well. You could have handled it better - but at least you tried to assist them by directing them elsewhere to someone who may have been willing to help them out.

 

[pvsi]

So you made a contract you obviously didn't read and are upset because you had to pay the bill. Not surprised you lost.

It wouldn't surprise me if he was lied to in order to make him sign on the dotted line. It happens - businesses will lie through their teeth about their fees, and then claim ignorance when they are questioned.

Right. it is amazing how judgmental even "Christians" like avatar here can be. in the other thread he already found me guilty of running a stop sign.

 

[Noomi]

So you made a contract you obviously didn't read and are upset because you had to pay the bill. Not surprised you lost.

It wouldn't surprise me if he was lied to in order to make him sign on the dotted line. It happens - businesses will lie through their teeth about their fees, and then claim ignorance when they are questioned.

Right. it is amazing how judgmental even "Christians" like avatar here can be. in the other thread he already found me guilty of running a stop sign.

You did run a stop sign, did you not?

 

[Avatar4321]

So you made a contract you obviously didn't read and are upset because you had to pay the bill. Not surprised you lost.

It wouldn't surprise me if he was lied to in order to make him sign on the dotted line. It happens - businesses will lie through their teeth about their fees, and then claim ignorance when they are questioned.

That's why you read things before you sign them

 

[Avatar4321]

So you made a contract you obviously didn't read and are upset because you had to pay the bill. Not surprised you lost.

It wouldn't surprise me if he was lied to in order to make him sign on the dotted line. It happens - businesses will lie through their teeth about their fees, and then claim ignorance when they are questioned.

Right. it is amazing how judgmental even "Christians" like avatar here can be. in the other thread he already found me guilty of running a stop sign.

They ruled against you. You admitted you didn't know the terms of the contract. Don't sign things you don't read

 

[pvsi]

It wouldn't surprise me if he was lied to in order to make him sign on the dotted line. It happens - businesses will lie through their teeth about their fees, and then claim ignorance when they are questioned.

Right. it is amazing how judgmental even "Christians" like avatar here can be. in the other thread he already found me guilty of running a stop sign.

They ruled against you. You admitted you didn't know the terms of the contract. Don't sign things you don't read

They ruled against me WITHOUT LETTING ME OPEN MY MOUTH.
I do not know if you are really that ignorant, or just trying to provoke an argument, but I assume you are ok with this type of justice system - Jesus must be proud of you

In the late 1990s I was sued by Verizon, for not paying the advertisement bill in yellow pages. I was excited to go to court, to explain.. that when the Verizon saleslady was discussing the bill with me, she never mentioned that this will be a monthly $300 bill, so, I was under the assumption that it is a one time fee. I was so enthusiastic to speak in front of the judge, holding in my hand documents proving my innocence. But when my turn came to speak, the judge asked me if I have a lawyer, I said no, I can speak for myself. she said no, you need a lawyer. she did not allow me to say anything, and I was found guilty right then and there. and I was forced to pay 24 times more then what I originally thought. supposedly I was not allowed to speak because me and my father are set up as a 2 people corporation, and as a corporation you are required to have a lawyer, but it does not matter to me, I will carry the conviction of my innocence to my grave. and that $5000 made Verizon rich and famous, and ordinary people like me, indebted as a nation.

 

[Katzndogz]

Did they ask and you refused, or did you agree to paint their portrait and backtracked when you discovered they were gay?

They asked me. I called them a couple of ugly dykes and threw them out. Since it was two women asking to have me paint their wedding portrait it was pretty obvious that they were lesbians. There was nothing to find out later. Now I do admit that I initially tried to be more gentle in refusing by simply saying no and suggesting a portrait artist that advertised for commissioned work. It was only after they pressed the issue by telling me I was discriminating against them that I told them no way was I going to paint a couple of ugly dykes.

I wouldn't have taken that insult well. You could have handled it better - but at least you tried to assist them by directing them elsewhere to someone who may have been willing to help them out.

They lost anyway. They should have just gone and gotten another artist.

 

[Contumacious]

I just saw this on "legal dictionary" and I find it very offensive, I believe this is the same as saying "if you re not a lawyer and don't need a lawyer in court you are an idiot" or "if you don't have our mafia protecting you, you are a loser" or "if you jam with us on stage, but are not a certified musician, you suck" - (I happen to have won 3 guitar contest when I was a teenager and I did not have a guitar teacher)

And as far as court, here is my story of how I was not allowed to speak when Verizon sued me:
In the late 1990s I was sued by Verizon, for not paying the advertisement bill in yellow pages. I was excited to go to court, to explain.. that when the Verizon saleslady was discussing the bill with me, she never mentioned that this will be a monthly $300 bill, so, I was under the assumption that it is a one time fee. I was so enthusiastic to speak in front of the judge, holding in my hand documents proving my innocence. But when my turn came to speak, the judge asked me if I have a lawyer, I said no, I can speak for myself. she said no, you need a lawyer. she did not allow me to say anything, and I was found guilty right then and there. and I was forced to pay 24 times more then what I originally thought. supposedly I was not allowed to speak because me and my father are set up as a 2 people corporation, and as a corporation you are required to have a lawyer, but it does not matter to me, I will carry the conviction of my innocence to my grave. and that $5000 made Verizon rich and famous, and ordinary people like me, indebted as a nation.

"anyone who represents himself in court has a fool for a client and an ass for an attorney"
from: Legal Dictionary | Law.com

The "judicial "system is corrupt to its core.

Read:

.

 

[Katzndogz]

Right. it is amazing how judgmental even "Christians" like avatar here can be. in the other thread he already found me guilty of running a stop sign.

They ruled against you. You admitted you didn't know the terms of the contract. Don't sign things you don't read

They ruled against me WITHOUT LETTING ME OPEN MY MOUTH.
I do not know if you are really that ignorant, or just trying to provoke an argument, but I assume you are ok with this type of justice system - Jesus must be proud of you

In the late 1990s I was sued by Verizon, for not paying the advertisement bill in yellow pages. I was excited to go to court, to explain.. that when the Verizon saleslady was discussing the bill with me, she never mentioned that this will be a monthly $300 bill, so, I was under the assumption that it is a one time fee. I was so enthusiastic to speak in front of the judge, holding in my hand documents proving my innocence. But when my turn came to speak, the judge asked me if I have a lawyer, I said no, I can speak for myself. she said no, you need a lawyer. she did not allow me to say anything, and I was found guilty right then and there. and I was forced to pay 24 times more then what I originally thought. supposedly I was not allowed to speak because me and my father are set up as a 2 people corporation, and as a corporation you are required to have a lawyer, but it does not matter to me, I will carry the conviction of my innocence to my grave. and that $5000 made Verizon rich and famous, and ordinary people like me, indebted as a nation.

You were always going to lose anyway. You had no defense. Not understanding the terms of the contract that runs for a year is not a defense. I don't know why you would think that it was a one time fee. Phone book advertising contracts are very clear. I've signed many of them.

Without knowing anything more than what you said just now I know exactly what happened. You were served with the breach of contract complaint and did nothing. You did not read the Summons that told you that you had to answer within 30 days. You did not answer. Your default was taken and the matter set for a prove up hearing. You thought (wrongly) that you would get to present your side at the hearing. In fact the case was over and no one was going to listen to you. You had already received the full benefit of the contract because your ad was in the yellow pages for a full year. You didn't have to pay anything you should not be paying.

Do you understand why you were not taken advantage of?

Even at this late date. You already lost. Had you gone to see a lawyer that lawyer would have made a motion for relief from default and gotten the ruling set aside. Then the lawyer would take a magnifying glass to the ad and find what was wrong with the ad printed in the yellow pages. The typeface was wrong. A comma was misplaced. Maybe a misspelling. The location on the page was different than that represented by the agent. The lawyer would have said to the court that even if you owe the money, you are entitled to a reformation of the contract to reduce what you owe because the ad was not what you purchased. You are entitled to diminution of the value. You might only have had to pay 10%.

There. You have been educated. Don't make the same mistake agsin.