Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 16 MAY 2020

Litigating With The Lawyerless … It's Still Happening

Butler Snow LLP
Butler Snow LLP
Contributor
Butler Snow LLP

Butler Snow LLP

Some law firms promise client service. Butler Snow delivers on that promise. Surveys by respected...

View firm profile
Explore more from Butler Snow LLP

The continuing challenge for the practitioner is to effectively advocate for the represented client, without appearing to be unfair or unreasonable, while guiding the court to avoid any temptation to "cut corners"...

United StatesLitigation, Mediation & Arbitration

Previously, I have written about appellate decisions considering the issues presented by pro se litigants and their non-compliance with applicable trial and appellate court rules. (See July 9, 2018 blog and September 18, 2018 blog). The continuing challenge for the practitioner is to effectively advocate for the represented client, without appearing to be unfair or unreasonable, while guiding the court to avoid any temptation to "cut corners" which may allow the DIY "lawyering" by the pro se party to be turned into an unfair advantage - perhaps even putting the court into the position of formulating the legal arguments that the DIY litigant should have made.

In Ray v. Willoughby, decided February 11, 2020, the Tennessee Court of Appeals (Case No. W2019-00646-COA-R3-CV) was again faced with an appellant's failure to comply with the Tennessee Rules of Appellate Procedure (and the rules of the Appellate Court) in his brief. Despite recognizing the noncompliance with

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

See more popular content from