Quote:
Originally Posted by mb1547
Do you have a will? (especially if you need to set up a legal guardian for your kids, set up a trust, or do a prenup)
LegalZoom.com
Do you own an incorporated business?
LegalZoom.com
Have you ever filed for divorce and it's gotten ugly?
nope.
Have you ever bought property without a real estate agent?
Yes. It was pretty easy.
Have you ever had a dispute with anyone over a property line, or some other issue?
nope. I would think though that in the age of GPS accuracy to a meter or less that a good initial survey would be all one needs -- unless someone hired a lawyer to muddy up to facts.
If you have, then you've needed a lawyer. Our government is founded on following laws vs. hit or miss personal opinion of the moment. Thats a good thing.
|
Answers in Red above.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Jones 1999
...to see this all you need to do is go and watch two pro se people "fight it out." Nothing gets done a lot of times because the two sides just try to talk over each other. I saw two people in a replevin case last week and it was painful. The plaintiff could have won but she did not provide evidence of the true value of the property. She needed evidence of that. The court wanted receipts not just her "word." Simple things like that a lawyer would more than likely overcome. But hey I use to think the same way until I went to law school. I can speak well and I can read...
|
If someone doesn't do the research they need to do then they will suffer the consequences. It's the same as not doing your homework in school. I don't see the difference and I still don't see the need for a lawyer if neither side has one. Of course, there could still be the danger of 'professional litigants' who gain the experience they need by constantly suing people. The fix to that is to apply penalties for bringing a lawsuit and loosing, especially if one has a history of filing lawsuits.
Quote:
Like it or not this Country was founded on LAWS!!!!
|
Wow. 4 exclamation points. I'd better listen to what this person is saying because it must be important. 
Quote:
|
There are concepts in the law which do not mean the same thing to a lay person. Try to understand the Rules of Evidence by just "skimming" a copy of the latest edition. It does not work like that.
|
Quote:
Just because you can read does NOT mean that you understand the law. There are "basic" things that you have to learn about the law (i.e. negligence is duty, breach, causation, damages). Each one of these elements have their own meanings which you have to understand before you can "bring a case for negligence."
I was watching on C-Span last night and saw congress holding a hearing on the Health Care Law. Day in and day out we have "legal experts" here on CD chimming in on what the interstate commerce clause means etc...I bet 95% of these people have NO training or background in the Interstate Commerce Clause but what they have read on wikipedia. Again, this stuff is not that simple.
|
Well, maybe it would be if we hadn't had congressmen who were lawyers for the past 200 years. People talk about simplifying the tax system all the time but the accountants don't like that because it would reduce their usefulness. We need to streamline and simplify the legal system. Unfortunately, the people needed to do that, congressmen, are the very lawyers who would be negatively impacted by it so it never gets done.
Quote:
Originally Posted by hotair2
Why don't we just pick people out from the general population to do surgery. Why don't we just pick people out from the population and have them fly our commercial airlines... certainly would save money.
|
Except Pilot Vs. Environment (plane + gravity) is not the same as the adversarial system of Lawyer Vs. Lawyer in the courtroom. We can eliminate both sides of the lawyer equation and keep it balanced. We can't do that in your pilot example until we develop artificial gravity (at which time probably everyone COULD be a pilot).
Quote:
Although you don't seem to grasp it, litigating requires a special skill set which a person has to both have the aptitude for and be trained to use. My guess is that you would not likely be accepted into a law school.
|
No doubt that being a lawyer requires a special set of skills. My point is that the reason it requires a special set of skills is because the side you are going up against also has that set of skills and the system was designed by lawyers and for lawyers. Also, you don't know anything about me so you really can't judge if I would be accepted to a law school. I wouldn't apply though. Watching a law school graduation is like watching a snake give birth.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Strel
Let me clue all of you in.
Most lawyers aren't criminal defense lawyers or personal injury attorneys. Many of us are employed in the business of KEEPING OTHER PEOPLE HONEST.
Sheesh.
|
... from unscrupulous people using their own lawyers.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
