Search Results

Milton’s third Latin defense, Pro Se Defensio, remains one of his least-studied works, in part because he seems to be attacking his opponent, Alexander More, in illogical, petty, and hypocritical ways. This chapter argues that critics have misunderstood Pro Se Defensio by reading it in a generally rhetorical context, instead of a specifically legal one. In this work, Milton draws extensively on the civilian jurisprudence of iniuria. He wields civil law principles and practices—e.g., the importance of reputation or fama, the legal liabilities attached to libel, and the role of hearsay in legal argumentation—to make his case. In the process, he casts himself as a defendant presenting evidence to rebut the claims of More, the metaphorical plaintiff. Since More lived in the Netherlands, Milton cannot actually bring suit for his defamatory attacks. Instead, he wields the principles of the same Roman law system under which More lived, and he thereby asks his Latinate readers to view Pro Se Defensio as a textual courtroom where they can see the evidence and judge the relative claims of both parties. This chapter also compares Milton’s approach to a similar one that Ben Jonson uses in his play Poetaster.

This chapter provides an overview of civil litigation as it affects poor and low-income people. The U.S. Constitution is intended to “establish Justice,” but many poor and low-income people experience the court system as a source of injustice—subjecting them to meritless default judgments, fees and fines, imprisonment and forfeiture of property when no crime has been committed, and enforcing harsh collateral consequences of contacts with the criminal justice system. Moreover, many low-income people are blocked from going to court at all, because employment and consumer contracts include boilerplate terms that mandate arbitration, consigning the claimant to a private system of dispute resolution that has been questioned as unfair and in conflict with statutory and constitutional rights. Part of the problem is that the legal system assumes that litigants have the resources they need to bring or defend a civil action. The U.S. Constitution does not guarantee a right to counsel in civil litigation, and fee waivers, even when they are available, do not cover all of the costs of litigation. A rising number of civil litigants face stiff obstacles when seeking justice under law, for they cannot afford legal representation and lack resources to litigate in a meaningful way. This chapter is designed to help low-income people navigate the civil court system so that it moves closer to the ideal of equal justice under law, rather than exacerbate poverty or further entrench racial inequality.

The role of the professional engaging in forensic psychology practice are distinct from therapeutic roles in many ways, including the fact that forensic roles often include multiple parties with distinct interests in the outcome of the specific case (e.g., examinees, attorneys, courts, society)., This chapter focuses on the critical task of identifying the client and delineating the professional services to be rendered at the outset of the forensic practitioner’s engagement. In addition to this key consideration, this chapter addresses specific issues related to professional interactions, including working with pro se clients, navigating issues related to conflicting and multiple roles and relationships, providing informed consent, providing pro bono services, and maintaining and managing records.

This chapter marks the first of four reform chapters, taking up the issue of undesirable cases, which are those that should never be brought in the first place. The chapter accordingly proposes a number of filters to prevent or discourage undesirable cases from entering the civil litigation system altogether, again in the interest of lowering litigation costs. These reforms include tightening rules and procedures aiming at frivolous cases and increasing the potential use of sanctions, as well as mechanisms to provide advice to self-represented (pro se) individuals.