To sue or not to sue? Forum

[jackdanielsga]

Then I disagree with a small part of what below poster said. I think any opportunity to argue a case in front of somebody is at least marginally beneficial. Give it a big and see if this is something you want to do 2L would be my advice.

Thanks for the idea! I just reviewed the curriculum and civil procedure is taught in 2 courses in L1 and evidence in the fall of L2 so I'd be well-prepared if I was to drag this to that point ))

[cavalier1138]

Dude. Stop thinking about whether something is a good topic for a law review article as a 0L.

I have no idea whether there's any journal that would be interested in this topic (my guess is no and that you probably couldn't squeeze out more than 10 pages on the subject), but that is 100% not what you should be thinking about.

[jackdanielsga]

Dude. Stop thinking about whether something is a good topic for a law review article as a 0L.

I have no idea whether there's any journal that would be interested in this topic (my guess is no and that you probably couldn't squeeze out more than 10 pages on the subject), but that is 100% not what you should be thinking about.

Okay thanks

[albanach]

Then I disagree with a small part of what below poster said. I think any opportunity to argue a case in front of somebody is at least marginally beneficial. Give it a big and see if this is something you want to do 2L would be my advice.

Most states have programs to allow 3L students to practice, and most law schools have clinics where you can find opportunities to do so. At least in the states I am familiar with, practice requires supervision and is usually limited to representing the state, non-profits or the indigent.

I see several problems here. One, it's almost always a bad idea to represent yourself - see my comments above.

Two, it means waiting a long time to get paid. Presumably OP hasn't accepted any payment and signed a typical insurance release as the whole thing would then be moot?

Three, to really benefit as a law student, you'd want to get help from professors or clinic supervisors. Depending on state bar rules, they may be unable to assist a 2L who isn't eligible for the state bar program.

Four, given the above, there's little to no chance of school credit.

[Npret]

Then I disagree with a small part of what below poster said. I think any opportunity to argue a case in front of somebody is at least marginally beneficial. Give it a big and see if this is something you want to do 2L would be my advice.

Thanks for the idea! I just reviewed the curriculum and civil procedure is taught in 2 courses in L1 and evidence in the fall of L2 so I'd be well-prepared if I was to drag this to that point ))

Your courses are not going to “well-prepare” you to represent yourself in a case against any experienced lawyer.

I’m concerned that you seem so completely off on so many aspects of the best way to prepare for law school and what law school will teach you.

Why did you decide to change careers? What kind of law do you expect to practice- do you understand as an older student you are going to have to listen to advice and direction from much younger attorneys?

Where are you going to law school? Is it an accredited school? I’m only asking because of the way I’m reading your questions.

[jackdanielsga]

Where are you going to law school? Is it an accredited school? I’m only asking because of the way I’m reading your questions.

So in your opinion, me asking for advice on the forum so that I could correct my view of the world signifies what, in terms of willingness to listen to others?

I'm going to the GSU law school. I want to focus on criminal prosecution. I am interested in that because, as pompous as it may sound, there are some bad people in this world who need to be explained the concept of justice.

[Npret]

Where are you going to law school? Is it an accredited school? I’m only asking because of the way I’m reading your questions.

So in your opinion, me asking for advice on the forum so that I could correct my view of the world signifies what, in terms of willingness to listen to others?

I'm going to the GSU law school. I want to focus on criminal prosecution. I am interested in that because, as pompous as it may sound, there are some bad people in this world who need to be explained the concept of justice.

Every post has told you that handling this litigation is a bad idea and may even hurt you financially. Possibly I missed you changing your mind, but you still seem fixed on this idea. That’s why I feel you don’t listen.

I’m not exaggerating when I advise you that it’s important for older grads to be willing to work with younger supervisors. There are threads here regarding older students and this advice is a common theme.

Right now networking with any prosecutor or judge is a great investment of time for you. Learn what they do. Learn from GSU law alums which clinics and professors were the most helpful for them in becoming prosecutors.

[QContinuum]

Then I disagree with a small part of what below poster said. I think any opportunity to argue a case in front of somebody is at least marginally beneficial. Give it a big and see if this is something you want to do 2L would be my advice.

First, the standard caveats that this is not legal advice and I am not opining on OP's chances of success or his potential financial losses should he pursue this litigation and lose.

I agree with objctnyrhnr that gaining firsthand exposure to the small claims court system could potentially be beneficial, in light of OP's desire to litigate in the state/local court system after law school. Prior to law school I represented myself in an administrative appeal before an ALJ. The experience was tremendously valuable to me (and I actually won). That said, a few things distinguished my case from OP's. First, if I had lost, I would be in no worse of a position than if I had never filed the appeal. So there was no downside to doing it (aside from having to pay the filing fees). It was (essentially) the choice between an immediate loss and a loss after appeal. There was no settlement offer that I would forfeit by appealing, nor was there any risk that I'd open myself up to financial liability by appealing. Second, I was allowed to - and did - waive my right to an oral hearing, and conducted the appeal entirely through written briefs. I do not think I would have been remotely prepared to deliver a convincing oral argument (let alone respond to questions on my feet). I could spend as much time on the written briefs as I wanted to, and believe me, I spent a lot of time getting the briefs right. Finally, my opponent was also an unrepresented nonlawyer. So while my opponent was more experienced in the relevant field, he was not someone who would likely have the ability to leverage procedural legal tactics against me. All three of these factors reduced my downside risks and also increased my chances of success.

[objctnyrhnr]

Then I disagree with a small part of what below poster said. I think any opportunity to argue a case in front of somebody is at least marginally beneficial. Give it a big and see if this is something you want to do 2L would be my advice.

First, the standard caveats that this is not legal advice and I am not opining on OP's chances of success or his potential financial losses should he pursue this litigation and lose.

I agree with objctnyrhnr that gaining firsthand exposure to the small claims court system could potentially be beneficial, in light of OP's desire to litigate in the state/local court system after law school. Prior to law school I represented myself in an administrative appeal before an ALJ. The experience was tremendously valuable to me (and I actually won). That said, a few things distinguished my case from OP's. First, if I had lost, I would be in no worse of a position than if I had never filed the appeal. So there was no downside to doing it (aside from having to pay the filing fees). It was (essentially) the choice between an immediate loss and a loss after appeal. There was no settlement offer that I would forfeit by appealing, nor was there any risk that I'd open myself up to financial liability by appealing. Second, I was allowed to - and did - waive my right to an oral hearing, and conducted the appeal entirely through written briefs. I do not think I would have been remotely prepared to deliver a convincing oral argument (let alone respond to questions on my feet). I could spend as much time on the written briefs as I wanted to, and believe me, I spent a lot of time getting the briefs right. Finally, my opponent was also an unrepresented nonlawyer. So while my opponent was more experienced in the relevant field, he was not someone who would likely have the ability to leverage procedural legal tactics against me. All three of these factors reduced my downside risks and also increased my chances of success.

OP, this situation is considerably more ideal in terms of getting a shot to rep yourself.

As a full on lawyer, I would relish the idea to rep myself in a scenario where I had unlimited time and I truly felt wronged. As satisfying as it is to get what you feelcto be the correct/just result for another entity, I can only imagine that doing it oneself would be that much more satisfying.

I think only you know the potential risks of repping yourself and losing vs the alternative. Accordingly, qcontonuum makes a valid point. I also think that while you might be in a much better position as a 2L to do this, you still won’t do it nearly as well as a trained lawyer (even a bad one).

But if you are good with the risks and you have the time and there’s nothing you think you could be doing with your time that’s more valuable, I say why not.

[Npret]

As to point 3 your age and business experience in another field distinguish you. You don’t need a little case for that. You are going to stand out.

[abl]

2. Wouldn't the underlying legal issue (if indeed my point ends up being supported by the court) be worthy of a law review article? I have no idea what's the desired scope / extent of those things, and how valuable of resume boosters would they be.

Almost certainly no. Law review articles virtually never take the form of a post mortem on an individual one-off case, unless that case is being used as an illustration for a bigger and novel point or it's a case of national importance. Also, as others have noted, you shouldn't be thinking about possible law review article topics yet. I really don't think this should be part of your calculus.

3. Point taken. I was thinking mostly as a way to make myself stand out from the crowd, in however small way. I suck at selling myself so admittedly grasping at straws here.

I suppose I don't know much about hiring from your law school, but this would not have moved the needle in the least for any of the several competitive positions for which I have been involved in hiring. I really don't think this should be part of your calculus either.

4. This very well articulates the underlying thinking. Seeking justice when there's relatively little skin in the game - but still enough to keep things interesting. The time and cost of litigation I see as the cost of learning.

Again, you're probably not going to learn much or anything directly relevant to law school or to practicing as a prosecutor. This is more of a general civics-y learning experience. There is some value to that -- but it's value that accrues, for the most part, irrespective of whether you go to law school or become a lawyer.

[albanach]

Prior to law school I represented myself in an administrative appeal before an ALJ.

OP could volunteer with a consumer rights organization or legal aid and get the chance to represent someone in front of an ALJ but with all the support that comes from trained supervisors.

I think that would be more meaningful for admissions and 1L/2L hiring and they'd have the opportunity to learn a lot more.

[jackdanielsga]

So, thanks to everyone who contributed to this discussion.

I've decided not to take this matter to the court, and here's why:

- After the advice of several members, I went to the magistrate court at the tortfeasor's county and observed several cases. Thank you all who recommended that I do. Even though the process is relatively simple, it's still a full hearing with witnesses, certain standards for presenting evidence, and the possibility of lawyers articulating their point of view much better than I could. And being stuck with the attorneys' fees of the defendant if I end up losing considerably changes the risk profile, however confident I may be of my case.

- The magistrate courts in Georgia are not courts of record. So even if I prevail in my case, it wouldn't be very useful for creating a precedent, which was my main reason to consider taking the matters to court in the first place.

- Again on the cost side, if I was to delay the matters I'd still have to deal with the cold and lifeless corpse of my formerly lovely car.

So I squeezed another hundred dollars out of the insurance company and accepted their settlement.

This has been a wonderful learning experience:
- I've learned that there is such thing as "uniform rules of the magistrate court" that has a number of interesting provisions in it. Most amusing is that a corporation or an LLC do not require an attorney to be represented in the magistrate court - could be done pro se by a member or appointed employee.
- I saw four different judges handle contested cases with a different degree of formality and patience
- One of the hearings ran way past the usual hours, and it was great to see the professionalism in everyone involved. I even mustered the courage to say a few words to the judge after the hearing was done.
- I now understand why the case files are next to useless in the magistrate cases

Again, thank you everyone for the advice. I've actually printed out the networking questions and laminated them into a wallet card (I get nervous when talking to people so this will be a useful aid in case I don't have anything useful to say)

For Npret: I don't think it's reasonable to expect immediate compliance from a grown adult even when the best possible advice is given. I come here to ask questions of those more experienced in the field of law, but I still need to understand the details of the responses I get so that I could then fit the advice to my specific life's situation, and more importantly to gauge just how well I articulate my point - which is evaluated by how much understanding of what I'm asking comes across in the responses. So short-cutting to just saying that I shouldn't do something is not helpful. I've worked under the supervision of people younger than me before, and if they tell me to do something I do it. Same with working under a much younger attorney if things do get to that point after graduation - I know what it means to have a boss and I can take direction from whoever has that position. But here, I don't come looking to be told what to do, I come looking for the explanations that would lead to understanding that would lead to calibrating my own thought process. Sometimes I may agree, other times I may not agree with the reasoning - however, I usually read and re-read all detailed responses and the more detail the better.

[Hutz_and_Goodman]

This is a small claims court case. In my state (and others I think) the jurisdiction is disputes up to $5,000. I don’t really see a downside in pursuing. I’ve had issues come up where I threatened to sue in small claims court and have been offered a settlement. This type of case has a very small filing fee and to the extent you “screw up” the case it doesn’t matter because you’re representing yourself.

[jackdanielsga]

This is a small claims court case. In my state (and others I think) the jurisdiction is disputes up to $5,000. I don’t really see a downside in pursuing. I’ve had issues come up where I threatened to sue in small claims court and have been offered a settlement. This type of case has a very small filing fee and to the extent you “screw up” the case it doesn’t matter because you’re representing yourself.

In Georgia, it's up to $15000, but basically yes the filing fee is small and the process is expedient - file a written complaint, serve, the other side files a written response, you get served, the date is set, and there's a hearing.

However: attorneys can represent parties in the magistrate court, and it's not out of the ordinary for the loser to pay the winning party's attorney's fees. Which even for a small case like mine could be 10-20 hours at $250-$350 per hour. So that greatly elevates the risk if things go wrong. Plus the other side is a Georgia-based insurance company that's been doing business here for 20 or 30 years, so they know what they are doing and they would not be easily threatened.

I did send a strongly worded nastygram to the newly elected insurance commissioner though.