

“[T]he introduction of attorneys into the court where litigants traditionally represent themselves.
“‘This will be an incentive for more attorneys to use small claims,’ he said, ‘The cost benefit wasn’t there, but with a $5000 limit, it could be lucrative.”
The Sunday Gazette (Schenectady, New York) reports today that former marine and state trooper Paul Semanek has been elected 2004 president of the Capital Region Chapter of the Women’s Council of Realtors. (“Man heads women’s group,” 02-01-04, at B4, E5; available by subscription; confirmation is available here, from the Albany Business Review)
Could this happen — has it happened — in the often hyper-gender-aware legal profession? Wouldn’t it be a good sign?
Weblogger, JD?
The notion of ghost-written weblogs scares me. It looks like they’re coming, and they signal a new kind of weblogging devoid of the very spark of life that has put magic into this way of communicating and created a community. [See yesterday‘s and today‘s Netlawblog, where Jerry Lawson tells of four vendors “selling blogs to lawyers.”]
Going from weblog as “the unedited voice of an individual” to weblog as the fabricated voice (and image) created for an individual lawyer will turn this fresh community into a stale commodity. And it won’t work as a marketing tool, because what makes a weblog “good” and attracts repeat visitors is a strong personal voice, content that is interesting and well said, and rapid response time. [“The Good, The Bad and the Blogly,” by Glenn Harlan Reynolds] Those are three elements very unlikely to come from Blogs-R-Us (or, better, Weblogs-B-We).
There are times when I hate being the gadfly or prophet of doom. The role is particularly uncomfortable when the ox that I might be goring is owned by people who I admire and like. Jerry Lawson said yesterday that “Kevin [O’Keefe]’s approach looks promising, and not just because the Perry Mason photo is priceless.” Jerry has been a constant supporter of this website, helping it gain credibility and an audience. Kevin not only gave me my first cyber-pulpit at PrairieLaw.com (and signed the checks), but is creating a wonderful tool for serving legal consumers with his Project Lawyers Serve. [I don’t even hold a grudge that Kevin continues to use the ugly little word “blog,” despite admitting “the term ‘blog’ sounds funny.” ]
When answering the question “Why have a professional set up your blog?”, Kevin notes (emphasis added):
“[O]nly a small percentage of lawyers, best labeled as early adopters of technology, take the time to learn how to do [the things necessary to make a weblog successful]. It’s even a smaller group of lawyers who continue to execute over time. . . .
“For lawyers who do not have the time to regularly publish content to their blog so has to keep syndicating content to folks and stay at the top of search engines, we’ll do it for them – again at a very reasonable cost.”
“Come to think of it, a blog sounds a awful like a Web site with a few bells and whistles that make it a more powerful marketing tool for a lawyer than a typical Web site. Erik Heels, a pioneer on the law and the Internet, may be right when he defines blogs as websites created and maintained with weblog software.” (emphases added)
That’s what weblogs will certainly become if they are not truly personal in nature. For weblogs to remain more than a convenient way to create a website; for weblogs to create a community of colleagues and fans; for weblogs to actually become more effective marketing tools than traditional law firm sites (or e-brochures, or power-point presentations) — for them to be more than a technology and a fad — they must have a personal voice (even if there are multiple personalities).
California’s courts are facing an ever-increasing number of litigants who go to court without legal counsel, largely because they cannot afford representation. Self-represented litigants typically are unfamiliar with court procedures and forms as well as with their rights and obligations, which leaves them disadvantaged in court and consumes significant court resources. Accordingly, the Judicial Council has made access to the courts for self-represented litigants one of its top priorities.
Website: The Online Self-Help Center Program established by the California judiciary was improved significantly again in 2003, including launching a full Spanish-language site.
Family Court Facilitators help more than 30,000 self-represented litigants each month.
Family Law Information Centers: After five years in operation, an evaluation of the effectiveness of five pilot Family Law Information Centers, issued on March 1, 2003, demonstrated that the customers and judges were very happy with the services, and that more than 45,000 litigants were assisted each year.
Five Model Self-help Centers were created in 2002, which focus on translating materials and finding technological solutions, to continue improving the system through new methods of providing services.
Planning and Funding: To assist local courts in determining the needs of the self-represented litigants in their communities, developing partnerships in the communities, and establishing appropriate programs, the Judicial Council has encouraged every court to develop an action plan for serving self-represented litigants. Funding was provided to 52 courts to develop such plans, and for the courts that did develop them, additional funds were provided for implementation.
Similarly, the companion Fact Sheet: Online Self-Help Center Q&A (January 2004) demonstrates that California understands the important role that computer and internet technology can play to support its goals for self-help, access to justice, and the efficient running of the court system. It states:
The California Courts Online Self-Help Center is the nation’s most comprehensive court-sponsored source of legal information available on the Internet. The Judicial Council of California created the Online Self-Help Center to assist self-represented litigants and others wishing to be better informed about the law and court procedures. In July 2003, the council launched a Spanish-language version of the center, Centro de Ayuda de las Cortes de California. This bilingual link to the courts helps achieve the council’s goal of ensuring meaningful court access for all Californians.
What is the purpose of the Web sites? California courts are seeing a surge in self-represented litigants, a trend that shows no sign of abating. The California Courts Online Self-Help Center and Centro de Ayuda de las Cortes de California provide the kinds of legal information most sought by self-represented litigants. The Web sites are designed to help those without attorneys to become better informed, navigate the court system with more success, and have more realistic expectations about the legal system. Although a wealth of legal information and resources is provided, the sites do not interpret the law, predict results, or provide legal advice on individual cases.
What are some key features of the Web sites? Both the English and Spanish versions contain more than 800 pages designed specifically to help self-represented litigants navigate the court system. Users of the sites can find out about free and low-cost legal assistance, alternative dispute resolution, bringing a lawsuit, filling out court forms, and locating additional resources and information. The sites also offer information about specific [legal] topics.
“question mark” How does your State compare when it comes to giving meaningful self-help support to pro se litigants? Here in New York State it appears that there are no court-run self-help centers outside of New York City and Westchester County. New York’s CourtHelp website is now boasting that it “answers the Questions You Ask Most!” However, it is almost painful for this native of the “Empire” State to contrast the robust California Small Claims self-help webcenter with the handful of sentences palmed off as NYS’s small claims support page.
Powered by WordPress