• FreeAdvice has a new Terms of Service and Privacy Policy, effective May 25, 2018.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our Terms of Service and use of cookies.

My parents are getting sued, I want to defend them in court.

Accident - Bankruptcy - Criminal Law / DUI - Business - Consumer - Employment - Family - Immigration - Real Estate - Tax - Traffic - Wills   Please click a topic or scroll down for more.

sylv86

Junior Member
What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? NY

My parents have been running a hair salon in New York City for about 10 years and everything has been fine up until now. One or two weeks ago a customer came in for a hair straightening procedure. It's a very common procedure called 负离子 in Chinese, I don't really know its english equivalent. So anyway, she made payment after it was finished. She said she was satisfied with the result and reported no complications. Then she came back in 3 days and claims my parents damaged her hair , even though it's never happened to any other customers in the last 10 years as far as we know. She also demanded to have the money refunded (it was about $100-200). My parents' did not refund the customer's money and replied "We don't see any damage and even if there was how do we know that we're the ones responsible for the damage?". She left, then came back the next day with a police officer. The officer saw that we're running a legitimate hair salon with licenses and everything, so he left. She came back several more times throughout the following week accomplishing nothing more than making idle threats. Customer came back one last time with a camera to take pictures of the inside of the salon, without permission. Btw, isn't that illegal? It's not like there's anything shady inside to expose.

So yesterday, we got a letter saying that this person is taking legal action against us. It feels like my parents are being taken advantage of just because they don't speak English. At this rate we are about to go from poor to poorer. My question is this, what kind of counterclaims can I file against this person? and how can I best prove my parents' innocence in court without hiring a lawyer to represent us?
 


Gail in Georgia

Senior Member
What type of letter was this? A letter from her saying they're going to be sued? From a lawyer? A summons from the court? What, exactly are they being sued for? The return of the money spent on the hair straightening process?

Because they involve small amounts of money, these type of cases are typically handled in Small Claims; folks represent themselves and an attorney is not required. SHE has to prove her hair was damaged by this process.

Gail
 

racer72

Senior Member
My question is this, what kind of counterclaims can I file against this person?
You can do nothing, the business is not yours. Also, the person has not caused your parents any damages, they have no grounds to sue either.

and how can I best prove my parents' innocence in court without hiring a lawyer to represent us?
You are not a lawyer and cannot represent your parents in court. That is called practicing law without a license. Either find the money to hire your parents an attorney or have them give the money back. A refund would be the much cheaper option.
 

>Charlotte<

Lurker
You are not allowed to actually practice law, but the rules of procedure for small claims actions in New York do allow non-attorney representatives under certain circumstances.

§1815. Appearance by non-attorney representatives.

The court may permit, upon the request of a party, that a non-attorney representative, who is related by consanguinity or affinity to such party, be allowed to appear on behalf of such party when the court finds that due to the age, mental or physical capacity or other disability of such party that it is in the interests of justice to permit such representation. No person acting as a non-attorney representative shall be permitted to charge a fee or be allowed to accept any form of remuneration for such services.

For more information on small claims procedures in New York, try this link:

Laws of New York
 

You Are Guilty

Senior Member
You are not allowed to actually practice law, but the rules of procedure for small claims actions in New York do allow non-attorney representatives under certain circumstances.

§1815. Appearance by non-attorney representatives.

The court may permit, upon the request of a party, that a non-attorney representative, who is related by consanguinity or affinity to such party, be allowed to appear on behalf of such party when the court finds that due to the age, mental or physical capacity or other disability of such party that it is in the interests of justice to permit such representation. No person acting as a non-attorney representative shall be permitted to charge a fee or be allowed to accept any form of remuneration for such services.

For more information on small claims procedures in New York, try this link:

Laws of New York
So not speaking English is a disability now?
 

>Charlotte<

Lurker
So not speaking English is a disability now?
No, but I think "other disability of such party that it is in the interests of justice to permit such representation" allows enough wiggle room to permit someone that is not an attorney to act as an interpreter if the defendant(s) speak no English. The interpreter would be neither practising law nor representing the defendant. The defendant would be representing himself, while the interpreter merely translates what he says.

I suppose it depends on how the court defines "disability", but the definition of disability is not limited to physiological impairment, it is also "anything that puts one at a disadvantage." If an inability to understand what is being said and an inability to testify in a manner that can be understood isn't considered a disability by the New York court system, than so be it.
 
Last edited:

Zigner

Senior Member, Non-Attorney
No, but I think "other disability of such party that it is in the interests of justice to permit such representation" allows enough wiggle room to permit someone that is not an attorney to act as an interpreter if the defendant(s) speak no English. The interpreter would be neither practising law nor representing the defendant. The defendant would be representing himself, while the interpreter merely translates what he says.
An interpreter is not a "non-attorney representative"
 

BL

Senior Member
The party(s) can have an interpreter .

I agree though , in the end , instead of hiring an Attorney , a refund would cost less .


A Guide Small Claims Court

CAN I HAVE AN INTERPRETER?
If you or any of your witnesses will need an interpreter during your court hearing,
tell the Small Claims Clerk when you file your small claim. The clerk will arrange to have
an &#8220;official&#8221; interpreter available for you or your witnesses at the time of your hearing
.
 
Last edited:

justalayman

Senior Member
So not speaking English is a disability now?
Yes, when you are in an English speaking court.

Obviously not a legally accepted disability in the terms of ADA compliance and all but when appearing in a proceeding such as a court action where English is spoken, not speaking English is a disability.
 

Zigner

Senior Member, Non-Attorney
Since I "know" you well enough to give you the benefit of the doubt, I will. But what am I missing here? Can I call the interpreter "someone who is not an attorney"?
The interpreter does NOTHING but translate. The party speaks and they translate only.

A representative actually presents the case on behalf of the party.


I don't think the OP wants to be a translator, but I could be wrong...
 

justalayman

Senior Member
so, let's go back to clt747's post:

who is related by consanguinity
by defintion, OP is related by consanguity. He is their son.

be allowed to appear on behalf of such party
which means he can be more than an interpreter. He can act as an attorney in fact for his parents if 2 more items are satisfied.

1.other disability of such party that it is in the interests of justice to permit such representation
parents are at a disability due to the fact that they do not speak English. Even an interpreter does not totally remove this disability in all cases.

2.The court may permit, upon the request of a party,
So, they way I see it, the parents and son have to address the court to seek permission to allow the son to represent the parents.


anymore questions?
 

>Charlotte<

Lurker
The interpreter does NOTHING but translate. The party speaks and they translate only. A representative actually presents the case on behalf of the party. I don't think the OP wants to be a translator, but I could be wrong...
Right. I shouldn't have used the word "representative". Well, that's embarrassingly obvious. Thank you for not calling me a doink. :cool:
 

You Are Guilty

Senior Member
parents are at a disability due to the fact that they do not speak English. Even an interpreter does not totally remove this disability in all cases.
Nice try, but not quite. Interpreters are provided to all litigants who so request, although if one isn't available, the court will allow a family member to interpret. They will not allow a family member to "represent" (i.e. anything beyond translate - the translator is sworn in to only translate). So, no disability.
 

justalayman

Senior Member
Nice try, but not quite. Interpreters are provided to all litigants who so request, although if one isn't available, the court will allow a family member to interpret. They will not allow a family member to "represent" (i.e. anything beyond translate - the translator is sworn in to only translate). So, no disability.
I tried and you have to admit, not knowing they would provide translators (btw: who pays for the translator) and as such would not include not speaking English as a disability. I still believe a translator does not remove the disability. Think about this: what if you had somebody from New England on trial and you had somebody from Louisianna translating whatever language was being spoken in a court. While the language may get translated in to English, it is English influenced by the La influence and then trying to translate that to New England English. Hard to have complete communications but I'll accept it.:)

So, since the courts do recognize the consanguinity relationship as justification to allow such a person to represent another if there is a disability, would they allow #1 son to set at the defendents table and confer with mom and dad in an effort to assist them? Obviously not speaking for them but #1 son is going to understand the situation and be able to read inflections by the English that an interpreter may miss due to the unfamiliarity of the interpreter with the defendents?

Simply looking for a way for son to assist mom and dad without acting as representative or hiring an attorney.
 

Find the Right Lawyer for Your Legal Issue!

Fast, Free, and Confidential
data-ad-format="auto">
Top