Can spouses represent themselves in court as co-parties?

[georgebradley]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? Michigan

Michigan gives a constitutional right to its citizens to represent themselves in court. Art I, § 13.

How is unauthorized practice of law applied to spouses representing themselves, as co-parties in the same suit? (Again, not asking about a situation where only one spouse is a party, which is a clearer issue.)

Can they file joint pleadings and motions?

Does it matter if one spouse is doing the legal research and typing, discussing things with their spouse, and both are signing?

 

[quincy]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? Michigan

Michigan gives a constitutional right to its citizens to represent themselves in court. Art I, § 13.

How is unauthorized practice of law applied to spouses representing themselves, as co-parties in the same suit? (Again, not asking about a situation where only one spouse is a party, which is a clearer issue.)

Can they file joint pleadings and motions?

Does it matter if one spouse is doing the legal research and typing, discussing things with their spouse, and both are signing?

Are the parties named as defendants in a suit or are they the plaintiffs in the action? If defendants, were they named and served separately?

 

[georgebradley]

Are the parties named as defendants in a suit or are they the plaintiffs in the action? If defendants, were they named and served separately?

Spouses are co-plaintiffs, and filed a joint complaint.

 

[quincy]

First, I apologize in advance because I am not going to answer your questions directly. For answers, you will need to ask an attorney in your area (perhaps at a law school or a legal aid clinic).

Instead I am going to provide you with a link to the law that applies to you and your spouse, and I am going to provide you with links to the Michigan Bar site that has information on the unauthorized practice of law and significant UPL case law, and I am going to provide you with one Michigan Supreme Court Opinion that discusses the unauthorized practice of law (and the difficulty in determining just what that means ).

Here is the link to the law, MCL 600.916:
http://www.legislature.mi.gov/(S(x1sgwnni2ch5tbjmw0nlvr45))/mileg.aspx?page=GetObject&objectname=mcl-600-916

Here is the link to the Michigan Bar's site on UPL: http://www.michbar.org/professional/upl.cfm

Here is the link to the Michigan Bar's UPL case law: http://www.michbar.org/professional/caselaw.cfm

Here is a link to Michigan Supreme Court's Opinion in Paul Dressel and Theresa Dressel v Ameribank, 2003: http://www.americanbar.org/content/dam/aba/migrated/cpr/model-def/dressel1oct02.authcheckdam.pdf

With the Dressel case, you can read the entire Opinion or start at page 7 for the discussion on the unauthorized practice of law. I am supplying the case only for its discussion of UPL, as otherwise it does not apply.

The purpose of the statute is to protect the public from harm by preventing an unknowledgeable and unskilled person from counseling or assisting another in matters that require the use of legal discretion and "profound" legal knowledge. I am thinking you might be able to answer your own questions after reading through the material provided above.

Good luck to you and your spouse in your legal action.