re: Could most legal cases be solved without a lawyer?

Good luck with that. Lol

It’s the connection you need in those cases not knowledge of the law.

I can tell you for a simple car wreck with no injuries or just simple soft tissue with a doctor visit or 2, you can resolve that yourself

Technically, you don’t need a surgeon to remove your own appendix…. A sharp knife and a map is all you need. However, I would not recommend it….

Do you pay a guy to cut your grass, clean your pool, landscape your yard?

Do you pay a CPA to do your taxes?

Why wouldn’t you pay a lawyer to do your dirty work?

frick man. It’s not that hard to understand


The guy that went to law school and his/her job is to do law shite, You’re damn right I’m paying that person to handle that shite.

he who will be his own Counsellour, shall be sure to have a Fool for his Client

You focus on traffic / criminal matters… here’s what I’d say the bottom line is in such cases: you can either negotiate a settlement / plead down, or go through a hearing.

Many cases are on these dockets, so the DA (& Judge) want to move efficiently. The DA doesn’t really want to talk to you on your own. They’d much prefer to speak to your lawyer.

Thus, your only shot (unless you want to plead to the charge filed) is to represent yourself in the hearing. You likely will not prevail.

Ignorance of the law is not allowed as a defense . Which is total bs.

Because lawyers have friends that you likely don’t

quote:

---

Technically, you don’t need a surgeon to remove your own appendix…. A sharp knife and a map is all you need. However, I would not recommend it….

---

Two are not the same and that's pretty blatant. Obviously much higher risk to do your own surgery on appendix compared to getting a 1st time arrest DWI .10 BAC and you had blown and representing yourself to try to lower penalties bc you won't go to jail over that.

quote:

---

Because lawyers have friends that you likely don’t

---

That helps too.

No telling the judge and your lawyer both went to Southern Law and graduated at the same time and are best friends.


All jokes aside, in some cases a lawyer can find one of those technicalities that could end up getting a case dismissed.

Case in point, let’s say you get sued over an unpaid debt and a document is missing or was not turned over as evidence. That could make the plaintiffs case not be valid and a judge could choose to dismiss it over just that fact.

Since most debts are sold to collection agencies, they may just buy a spreadsheet and one or two sheets of paper or PDFs of the debt. They are expecting that the debtor ignores the suit and they get a default judgment.


But there are many defenses a defendant can file to stop the easy process to a default judgment.

One is was the debt out of statute of limitations.

Ownership of the debt, they may not have the required documentation to sue. Just last year a debt collector was ordered to pay 24 million dollars in fines and restitution over just that.

Also, disagreements between the customer and the debt are argued based on the contract with the original creditor, some of those agreements include arbitration clauses where the debt case could move to an arbitration venue and cost the debt collector more to collect than to settle for less.

Sometimes debt collectors violate the federal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act such as contracting you at the wrong time or misrepresenting something in a communication to you. So that means you could counter sue in federal court and collect up 1,000 dollars per incident.


In most cases a defendant can file these arguments pro se without legal representation since sometimes legal defense will greatly increase the cost to settle the matter, but larger debt like over 5-10k it may make sense to have legal representation and/or begin the steps to filing bankruptcy with an attorney who gets paid first in some cases.