cunundrum69
Member
U.S. Federal District Court located in California.
First off, I would like to thank those of you who regularly provide your time to assisting people like me who need assistance in various legal matters. Your advise has assisted me in defeating the government defendant's motion for summary judgment in a case where I was trully injured and almost was shut out of court on a technicality. Now it's on to trial. The defendant's have recently attempted to settle via Rule 68 for a sum which is roughly 10 percent of the asked for damages. I have declined to accept their offer, as the damages are substantial and I have suffered greatly. (These are City defendant's).
My main question now, as the date for trial approaches, is whether it is possible for me, as a prose plaintiff, to use my own money to retain a private attorney who is willing to act as co-counsel in an advisory position (basically tap me on the shoulder and tell me when to object, and assist me through the procedural issues, and MOST IMPORTANTLY, ask me questions during the testimony I intend to give during trial.
I have found an attorney who has reviewed my case and thinks I have action and is willing to act in this capacity for the agreed to sum, but he explained that he has never acted in this capacity before and knows of no other situation where another attorney has acted as co-counsel and/or advisory counsel with a prose litigant in a civil case before? This attorney explained that in McCaskle v. Wiggins, the US supreme Court ruled that a defendant in a criminal matter was able to hire his own advisory counsel if he wanted to in order to assist him through various legal issues that arise and perhaps ask him questions during the trial. But he knows of no case where this has occurred in a civil setting? But he does not think that there are any rules forbidding such a special situation? I would remain in control of the case and be able to manage it the way I have successfully managed it since obtaining exoneration pro-per during criminal proceedings and through civil summary judgment hearings, but he would merely be there to assist me in technical matters throughout the trial in an advisory capacity. He can't see any reason why it would not be allowed? He asked me to help him find some advise on the subject. I've tried google but have been unable to find any cases on the subject.
IS THERE ANYONE OUT THERE KNOWLEGABLE OF THE LEGAL REALM WHO CAN GIVE ME ANY ADVISE ON THIS QUESTION BEFORE I FORK OVER A DECENT AMOUNT OF CASH TO AN ATTORNEY TO TAKE ON MY CASE IN ADVISORY CAPACITY, PREPARE FOR TRIAL WHICH IS A MONTH AWAY, ONLY TO HAVE THE COURT PREVENT ME FROM HAVING ASSISTANCE DURING MY TRIAL. I MEAN, IF THE COURT WOULD NOT ALLOW THIS SITUATION, I WILL HAVE TO ACT LIKE WOODY ALLEN DID IN THAT 1960'S MOVIE CALLED "BANANAS" WHERE HE REPRESENTED HIMSELF IN A CIVIL CASE AND EVERYTIME HE ASKED HIMSELF A QUESTION FROM THE PLAINTIFF PODIUM, HE HAD TO RUN UP TO THE WITNESS STAND, SIT DOWN, THEN ANSWER THE QUESTION, THEN RUN BACK TO THE ATTORNEY TABLE TO ASK ANOTHER QUESTION TO HIMSELF, THEN RUN BACK TO THE WITNESS STAND AGAIN TO ANSWER THE QUESTION. But seriously...what can I do? Are there any rules that you know of forbidding advisory counsel to a civil litigant? I personally have a gut feeling based on common sense that there is not a problem with such a situation. Thanks for any advise.
First off, I would like to thank those of you who regularly provide your time to assisting people like me who need assistance in various legal matters. Your advise has assisted me in defeating the government defendant's motion for summary judgment in a case where I was trully injured and almost was shut out of court on a technicality. Now it's on to trial. The defendant's have recently attempted to settle via Rule 68 for a sum which is roughly 10 percent of the asked for damages. I have declined to accept their offer, as the damages are substantial and I have suffered greatly. (These are City defendant's).
My main question now, as the date for trial approaches, is whether it is possible for me, as a prose plaintiff, to use my own money to retain a private attorney who is willing to act as co-counsel in an advisory position (basically tap me on the shoulder and tell me when to object, and assist me through the procedural issues, and MOST IMPORTANTLY, ask me questions during the testimony I intend to give during trial.
I have found an attorney who has reviewed my case and thinks I have action and is willing to act in this capacity for the agreed to sum, but he explained that he has never acted in this capacity before and knows of no other situation where another attorney has acted as co-counsel and/or advisory counsel with a prose litigant in a civil case before? This attorney explained that in McCaskle v. Wiggins, the US supreme Court ruled that a defendant in a criminal matter was able to hire his own advisory counsel if he wanted to in order to assist him through various legal issues that arise and perhaps ask him questions during the trial. But he knows of no case where this has occurred in a civil setting? But he does not think that there are any rules forbidding such a special situation? I would remain in control of the case and be able to manage it the way I have successfully managed it since obtaining exoneration pro-per during criminal proceedings and through civil summary judgment hearings, but he would merely be there to assist me in technical matters throughout the trial in an advisory capacity. He can't see any reason why it would not be allowed? He asked me to help him find some advise on the subject. I've tried google but have been unable to find any cases on the subject.
IS THERE ANYONE OUT THERE KNOWLEGABLE OF THE LEGAL REALM WHO CAN GIVE ME ANY ADVISE ON THIS QUESTION BEFORE I FORK OVER A DECENT AMOUNT OF CASH TO AN ATTORNEY TO TAKE ON MY CASE IN ADVISORY CAPACITY, PREPARE FOR TRIAL WHICH IS A MONTH AWAY, ONLY TO HAVE THE COURT PREVENT ME FROM HAVING ASSISTANCE DURING MY TRIAL. I MEAN, IF THE COURT WOULD NOT ALLOW THIS SITUATION, I WILL HAVE TO ACT LIKE WOODY ALLEN DID IN THAT 1960'S MOVIE CALLED "BANANAS" WHERE HE REPRESENTED HIMSELF IN A CIVIL CASE AND EVERYTIME HE ASKED HIMSELF A QUESTION FROM THE PLAINTIFF PODIUM, HE HAD TO RUN UP TO THE WITNESS STAND, SIT DOWN, THEN ANSWER THE QUESTION, THEN RUN BACK TO THE ATTORNEY TABLE TO ASK ANOTHER QUESTION TO HIMSELF, THEN RUN BACK TO THE WITNESS STAND AGAIN TO ANSWER THE QUESTION. But seriously...what can I do? Are there any rules that you know of forbidding advisory counsel to a civil litigant? I personally have a gut feeling based on common sense that there is not a problem with such a situation. Thanks for any advise.
Last edited: