What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? New York, Federal
To paraphrase Wikipedia: Having a U.S. citizen domiciled outside the U.S. and acting as a party completely destroys diversity jurisdiction, whereby the court must apply the law of the state in which the court is sitting (according to the so-called "Erie doctrine"). Without diversity jurisdiction, when laws conflict, under the choice of law, the court applies the law of the state that has the closest nexus to the case for substantive matters and "lex fori", the laws of the court's forum, for procedural ones.
For one and possibly two causes of action for which I am acting pro se, conflicting laws mean that the overseas law should apply for the substantive issues. The overseas forum also allows pro se's to recover up to 2/3 of a lawyer's hourly fee for the pro se's time (unlike the U.S. where pro-se litigants get nothing for their time).
Question: Could I argue that on this or these particular causes of action, acting pro se should allow me to recover for my time if I win on that/those particular claim(s)? Or would U.S. courts always consider recovery of legal fees as procedural rather than substantive issues?
To paraphrase Wikipedia: Having a U.S. citizen domiciled outside the U.S. and acting as a party completely destroys diversity jurisdiction, whereby the court must apply the law of the state in which the court is sitting (according to the so-called "Erie doctrine"). Without diversity jurisdiction, when laws conflict, under the choice of law, the court applies the law of the state that has the closest nexus to the case for substantive matters and "lex fori", the laws of the court's forum, for procedural ones.
For one and possibly two causes of action for which I am acting pro se, conflicting laws mean that the overseas law should apply for the substantive issues. The overseas forum also allows pro se's to recover up to 2/3 of a lawyer's hourly fee for the pro se's time (unlike the U.S. where pro-se litigants get nothing for their time).
Question: Could I argue that on this or these particular causes of action, acting pro se should allow me to recover for my time if I win on that/those particular claim(s)? Or would U.S. courts always consider recovery of legal fees as procedural rather than substantive issues?
Last edited: