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

当代美国的法律的制度是建立在 受过专业训练的律师的专业知识。 尽管 现代社会高度专业化，值得注意的是， 一些寻求进入法院系统的人避开了这些服务， 的律师。 这些诉讼当事人--外行人提出他们的 在技术和程序日益复杂的情况下， 法律的体系--在美国法庭上是一个反常现象。 一方面 另一方面，当事人的自由诉讼象征着普通人的民主价值 进入法院系统。 另一方面，在第二十届 世纪以来，美国的司法制度越来越 复杂和技术性，使其难以 未经训练的业余人士有效地代表他或她的法律的 利益 然而，尽管关于法庭的文献越来越多， 纠纷处理，诉讼，科学研究的过程 在现有的文献中，自我当事人是一个被忽视的问题 关于法院、争议处理和诉讼。 埃默森博士和麦考恩博士正在进行一项研究 在相应的中间范围内代表自己的诉讼当事人 当事人通常由律师代表的案件。 使用 每日和每周法院备审案件表中的数据 加州上级法院，洛杉矶县，他们将审查 提出的民事案件类型的总体模式， 诉讼当事人获得的结果。 设计的核心 是在一个样本的基础上，随着时间的推移， 法官认为值得注意的约12起案件 来自南加州的上级法院 与此 将对所有病例进行系统观察， 计划进行诉讼和听讯，并与法官面谈， 其他法院工作人员、律师和当事人。 “值得注意的” 将病例与“常规”观察样本进行比较 例 这种扩展的案例方法应允许（a）确定 导致人们在民事诉讼中代表自己的因素 （B）评估这种代表方式如何影响 法院系统中的正规人员和内部人员的运作，以及 (c)分析诉讼当事人如何代表自己的过程 在一个高度技术性的法律的系统中。 这项研究，集中在一个不常见的，但 理论上重要的诉讼当事人类别，将填补一个空白 在争端处理方面的研究。 分析这些问题， 作为诉讼的成本效益模式，使用和避免 律师，文化和组织外部的动态， 法律的行为者如何处理不平等的战斗人员， 在法律的体系和法庭生活中的律师 高度专业化的模式。 这项研究应该增加我们的 这些问题的理解，当那些谁动员法律是 未经正式程序的培训，不了解非正式程序， 法院内部的理解和关系。

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.