The Pro Se Litigant: Self-Representation in Consequential Civil Cases

自诉当事人：后果性民事案件中的自我陈述

• 批准号: 8713255
• 负责人: Robert Emerson
• 金额: $ 10.77万
• 依托单位: University of California-Los Angeles
• 依托单位国家: 美国
• 项目类别: Standard Grant
• 财政年份: 1988
• 资助国家: 美国
• 起止时间: 1988-08-15 至 1991-01-31
• 项目状态: 已结题
• 来源: https://www.nsf.gov/awardsearch/showAward?AWD_ID=8713255&HistoricalAwards=false
• 关键词: Pro; Se; Litigant; Self; Representation

The contemporary American legal system is predicated on the expertise of professionally trained lawyers. Despite the fact that modern society is highly professionalized, it is noteworthy that some who seek access to the court system eschew the services of lawyers. These pro se litigants--laypersons who present their own case in an increasingly technical and procedurally complex legal system--are an anomaly in the American court. On the one hand, the pro se litigant symbolizes the democratic value of lay access to the court system. On the other hand, in the twentieth century, the American judicial system has become increasingly complex and technical in character, making it difficult for the untrained amateur to represent effectively his or her legal interests. Yet, while there is growing literature on courts, dispute processing, and litigation, scientific study of the pro se litigant has been quite neglected in the existing literature on courts, dispute processing, and litigation. Drs. Emerson and McCoin are undertaking a study to examine litigants who represent themselves in consequential middle range cases where parties are normally represented by attorneys. Using data from daily and weekly court dockets of cases filed in the California Superior Court, Los Angeles County, they will examine aggregate patterns in the types of civil cases that are filed and the outcomes received by pro se litigants. Central to the design is in-depth study of pro se cases over time based on a sample of approximately twelve cases identified as noteworthy by judges from the Superior Courts of Southern California. With this sample of cases, systematic observations will be conducted on all proceedings and hearings, and interviews are planned with judges, other court personnel, lawyers, and litigants. The "noteworthy" cases will be compared to an observational sample of "routine" cases. This extended case method should permit (a) identifying the factors that lead persons to represent themselves in civil actions, (b) assessing how this mode of representation affects the functioning of regulars and insiders in the court system, and (c) analyzing the process of how litigants represent themselves in a highly technical legal system. This research, focusing on an infrequently encountered but theoretically significant category of litigants, will fill a gap in research on dispute processing. The analysis of issues such as cost-benefit models of litigation, use and avoidance of lawyers, the dynamics of cultural and organizational outsiders, how legal actors deal with unequal combatants, and the role of lawyers in the legal system and in courthouse life has been based on a highly professionalized model. This study should add to our understanding of these issues when those who mobilize the law are untrained in formal procedure and not privy to the informal understandings and relationships within courts.

当代美国的法律体系是以受过专业训练的律师的专业知识为基础的。尽管现代社会高度专业化，但值得注意的是，一些寻求进入法院系统的人避开了律师的服务。这些专业诉讼人——在技术和程序日益复杂的法律体系中陈述自己案件的外行——在美国法院是一种反常现象。一方面，自辩当事人象征着普通人进入法院系统的民主价值。另一方面，在20世纪，美国的司法系统在性质上变得越来越复杂和技术化，使得未经训练的业余人士很难有效地代表他或她的法律利益。然而，尽管关于法院、纠纷处理和诉讼的文献越来越多，但在现有的关于法院、纠纷处理和诉讼的文献中，对当事人的科学研究却被忽视了。Drs。艾默生和麦柯因正在进行一项研究，调查在后果严重的中间案件中代表自己的诉讼当事人，这些案件的当事人通常由律师代表。利用每日和每周在洛杉矶县加州高等法院提交的案件摘要的数据，他们将研究提交的民事案件类型的总体模式以及诉讼当事人收到的结果。设计的核心是在南加州高等法院的法官认为值得注意的大约12个案例样本的基础上，深入研究自诉案件。有了这些案例样本，将对所有诉讼和听证会进行系统观察，并计划与法官、其他法院工作人员、律师和诉讼当事人进行面谈。“值得注意的”病例将与“常规”病例的观察样本进行比较。这种扩展的案例方法应该允许(a)确定导致人们在民事诉讼中自我代理的因素，(b)评估这种代理模式如何影响法院系统中普通员工和内部人士的运作，以及(c)分析诉讼当事人如何在高度技术性的法律体系中自我代理的过程。本研究关注的是一个不常见但理论上意义重大的诉讼当事人类别，将填补争议处理研究的空白。对诉讼的成本效益模型、律师的使用和回避、文化和组织局外人的动态、法律行为者如何处理不平等的战斗人员以及律师在法律体系和法院生活中的作用等问题的分析，都是基于高度专业化的模型。这项研究应该增加我们对这些问题的理解，因为那些动员法律的人没有受过正式程序的训练，也不了解法院内部的非正式理解和关系。