Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [tips_and_tricks] Attorney vs. Lawyer (legal counsel)

Expand Messages
  • marilyn trevino
    Having an attorney weakens standing to plead in California. Slows everything down. Not so in your state Mr. Scwartz? ... From: Don
    Message 1 of 6 , Feb 9 8:43 PM
    • 0 Attachment
      Having an attorney weakens standing to plead in California.  Slows everything down.
       
      Not so in your state Mr. Scwartz?
      ----- Original Message -----
      Sent: Wednesday, February 09, 2005 5:32 AM
      Subject: Re: [tips_and_tricks] Attorney vs. Lawyer (legal counsel)


      I'm not aware of any.

      Attorneys must never get a judge mad at them though, for
      the attorney's bread and butter are dependent upon
      how many cases he can run through court.


      At 10:42 AM 2/8/05 -0800, you wrote:


       Does having an attorney represent you automatically bar access to certain
       types of defenses?  If so, which ones and why?





    • jm367@bellsouth.net
      I have posted elsewhere the link to the transcript of a hearing in which a person s rights were waived by his attorney who admitted he had no authority to
      Message 2 of 6 , Feb 9 11:46 PM
      • 0 Attachment
        I have posted elsewhere the link to the transcript of a hearing in which a person's rights were waived by his attorney who admitted he had no authority to waive and the court told the defendant [and the attorney] that the law is that he had appeared and waived.
        In Worcester v Georgia, Worcester appeared in propria persona and as a citizen of Vermont.
        There is a very great difference between appearance pro se and appearance in propria persona.
        There is a difference between appearance by attorney and appearance by counsel.
        An answer constitutes an appearance.  An act of an attorney in prosecuting an action on behalf of his client constitutes an appearance.  Attorneys are subject to the jurisdiction of the courts in which they have been admitted to practice.  You cannot appear pro se and challenge the jurisdiction of the court.  You cannot appear by attorney and challenge the jurisdiction of the court.   If the person summoned or arrested says anything except I deny jurisdiction to the court, do not answer, and cannot safely speak without assistance of counsel, he has appeared because he will be presumed to be representing as an attorney represents.  The paperwork prepares the record for the court to obtain jurisdiction if you answer.   Is it detrimental to waive jurisdiction ?
        I think so.  It was certainly detrimental to the person whose rights were waived in the Homeland Security hearing.  He had a right to a hearing in another forum.
        None of these attorneys on these lists are being forthcoming on fundamental matters.  They just want to argue.  They don't get paid unless there's an argument.
        I, on the other hand, just want to go home for lunch.
         
      • Don Schwarz
        Not sure. I believe though, that having an attorney makes your rights only as secure as the attorney wants to push it in court. This is where they make their
        Message 3 of 6 , Feb 10 6:41 AM
        • 0 Attachment
          Not sure. I believe though, that having an attorney makes
          your rights only as secure as the attorney wants to push it in court.

          This is where they make their money.

          Do you want a reputation as a "hard nose" attorney who supports
          the Constitution?

          With the proceedings unbroadcast, a virtual "Star Chamber",
          the only thing that gets out to the unwashed "sheeple"
          is what the court wants to put out.

          How quickly do you think that corrupt judges could shut
          down a good attorney?

          MODERATOR: A GOOD ATTORNEY WILL ANTICIPATE A CORRUPT JUDGE AND BE WAITING FOR HIM. THAT'S WHAT I DO. BEAR
        • pireleif88@aol.com
          In a message dated 2/9/05 11:50:22 PM Eastern Standard Time, ... My experience has been that most, not all, but most attorneys especially those comprised of
          Message 4 of 6 , Feb 10 9:35 AM
          • 0 Attachment
            In a message dated 2/9/05 11:50:22 PM Eastern Standard Time, plaintuff@... writes:


            I'm not aware of any.

            Attorneys must never get a judge mad at them though, for
            the attorney's bread and butter are dependent upon
            how many cases he can run through court.


            At 10:42 AM 2/8/05 -0800, you wrote:


            Does having an attorney represent you automatically bar access to certain
            types of defenses?  If so, which ones and why?






            My experience has been that most, not all, but most attorneys especially those comprised of home town good ol boys network club, when pushed to max placed left up against wall are loath, not lazy, to annoy say or do anything might suspiciously elsewhere be (mis)construed by judge appearing before that either ticks them off causes them annoyance, leaves them mad or angry for fear later on of repercussions in form of sanctions being imposed them stems from fines being levied against them, or a favor denied first being afforded granted them best elsewhere seen to existing in terms of leniency not being granted them elsewhere for some other client appearing represented by same attorney appears before same judge.

            the nicest thing about pro se free agent is not beholding oneself to such form of extortion demonstrated others

            Steve Greenspan
          Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.