PLEASE NOTE: This blog is a bigotry free zone open to all persons, regardless of age, race, religion, color, national origin, sex, political affiliations, marital status, physical or mental disability, age, or sexual orientation. Further, this blog is open to the broad variety of opinions out there and will not delete any comments based upon point of view. However, comments will be deleted if they are worded in an abusive manner and show disrespect for the intellectual process.

Thursday, March 27, 2014

ANNE STEVENSON'S STAUNCH DEFENSE OF SELF-REPRESENTED PARTIES IN CT

Anne Stevenson calls out the CT Judicial System in regard to their comments about self-represented parties.  See below:
 
"Despite the economic barriers to justice faced by struggling Connecticut families, rising from the ashes of the highly charged public debates over how to reform the family courts is a shockingly insensitive outcry from court industry insiders demonizing the 85 percent of divorcing parents who have chosen to invest in their families instead of attorneys.
 
Tauck v. Tauck was perhaps the most inefficient and expensive trial in Connecticut family court history, spanning over five years, 600-plus filings, and ending in an 86-day trial in 2007 that played out before Judge Holly Abery-Wetstone on Middletown's Regional Family Trial Docket. According to the Hartford Courant, the family paid out some $13.3 million in fees to the dozens of legal industry professionals on the case, including $1.3 million paid (without challenge) to attorney Gaetano Ferro, the children's guardian ad litem.
 
Clearly, the legal industry professionals were the big winners in the Tauck case, and if ever there was a case for cutting out the middleman and going pro se, it is the Tauck divorce. While some may be quick to blame the Nancy and Peter Tauck for their part in spurring on this "high-conflict" litigation marathon, one might also question the competence and propriety of the judges and legal professionals who had clearly lost control of the case. Did Judge Wetstone really need help deciding the case from dozens of industry professionals who just couldn't seem to agree with each other on much except that the $13.3 million they charged the family was "necessary and reasonable"?


For more information in Anne Stevenson's remarks, please click on the link below:

http://www.ctlawtribune.com/id=1202648664975/Opinion%3A-In-Defense-Of-Self-Represented-Litigants#ixzz2xCRBNjal

1 comment:

  1. It's interesting that the court industry insiders' singular measure for pronouncing litigants crazy, histrionic, or mentally unstable is the litigants' possession of fraudulent or manufactured bills from court industry insiders… or rather unwillingness to pay them.

    ReplyDelete