The Courts Fail to Treat the Non-Elite Fairly, Equally; Bar Poor and Middleclass from Success

A therapist sent this Doc of the Day, an exercise in satisfying unmet needs. I am sorry, there was no attribution.

Let’s focus on No. 16: “To be treated fairly, equally, and given an opportunity to succeed.”

The vast majority of people who represent themselves in court feel that they are treated unfairly, unequally and are doomed to failure.

The number one rule of court is that the rules “should be construed, administered, and employed by the court and the parties to secure the just, speedy, and inexpensive determination of every action and proceeding.”

Ha! That never happens!

Let’s look at one way the plebians are mistreated.

In the Federal District Court of Eastern Arkansas, attorneys are allowed to file electronically. The self-represented must print four copies of their documents, and either drive to Little Rock to file or mail the documents and hope they are received timely.

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 5(d)(2) states:

Nonelectronic Filing. A paper not filed electronically is filed by delivering it:

(A) to the clerk; or

(B) to a judge who agrees to accept it for filing, and who must then note the filing date on the paper and promptly send it to the clerk.

There is no definition of “delivering” in this section. Some jurisdictions specify that delivery for filing is the postmark date. It seems like a big risk to assume the postmark will be the date of filing where there is no specific rule. What if the mail never arrives? There will be no proof of the postmark. You might take a picture of the postmarked envelope at the post office. Why deal with the extra stress? It is prudent to hand deliver.

When I hand delivered last time, the clerk accidentally handed three copies of a document back to me. I called the clerk and sent an email to the judge’s clerk. Both said no need to bring the copies back to them.

One copy is used for the public box. These copies can be read by the press and other public by visiting the clerk’s office. That is a good idea, but why don’t the electronic filing attorneys need to bring in an extra paper copy?

Filing conventionally increased the costs on my case against Portfolio Recovery Associates by about $8,000, so far. PRA claims they spent about $8,000 on costs of deposing me, having transcripts printed, and copying the thousands of documents they demanded that I produce in discovery.

$8,000 is more than my total yearly pension.

As a low-income litigant, I had to choose between filing my documents or holding depositions and doing other discovery. Well, that is not really a “choice”. I am required to file the documents, or I lose.

King Antoinette Rudofsky (AKA Judge Lee P. Rudofsky) has a solution for the high costs of litigation for the commoners. He said that filing a lawsuit is the plaintiff’s “choice”. If you don’t want the high cost of litigation, just let the people who control the money walk all over you.

If you do choose to fight for your rights in court, beware! A judge like Rudofsky or Linda Lopez will do mental gymnastics to twist the facts to feign some reasonableness in forcing the poor or middle-class pro se litigant to pay the represented litigant’s costs and attorney fees.

Basically, if you choose to try to correct a wrong in court, expect to face bankruptcy.

(I have won several lawsuits against represented adversaries, but it is not easy, and most people don’t have my tenacity and aptitude for reading rules.)

Back to the purpose of this post. What can a person do to help himself move closer to getting his needs met when wronged by the moneyed elite?

Bombings and going postal are not viable options.

File a lawsuit? Not in Lee Rudofsky’s court. Not in Linda Lopez’ court. Not in Susy Weaver’s court.

(Yes, I know the courts are supposed to belong to the People, but let’s live in reality.)

Do you want to know the answer?

…to be continued