You’ve seen movies about it and you may have even heard a few stories: The righteous individual who decides to take on the legal system alone, without the help of the attorney. It’s actually more common than you think. The biggest State court, California, reported sixty-seven percent of all cases litigated in this way. Florida reported seventy-three. Though less common at the Federal level, it still occurs almost a quarter of the time. Many personal injury claimants feel that they have been wronged, and justly so. Why should they have to share compensation for loss and suffering with an attorney?

You can’t possibly know as much about personal injury law as your attorney. If you did, you would be a personal injury attorney yourself. Seemingly clear cut cases aren’t always so simple. Let’s take the case of a distracted driving accident: Motorist x hits a pedestrian while talking on their cell phone. Pro se litigant Y would certainly be able to get their medical bills paid by going to court on their own, but they would be unlikely to get punitive damages (special fines assessed as a punishment.) It would take an attorney to prove cognitive as well as visual distraction, and persuade the judge and jury to assess the maximum damages allowed under the law.

You don’t know how to do jury selection. Jury selection is tricky, involving a a mix of proper questions, statistical knowledge, and just gut-feeling. Clearly the manner of choosing the jury directly impacts the outcome of the case. We don’t recommend relying on opinions but statistical facts, which vary case-to-case. An attorney would be far better qualified to make this determination.

Examination and cross-examination is next to impossible to win against a trained attorney. Which, the other side will likely have one. Examination can be an exhausting process and unless you have had lots of training on how to handle it, the likelihood of it favoring you is slim. It’s not just an argument, there are certain things you are allowed to say and certain things the judge will order stricken from the record. Pro se litigants tend to crumble under effective cross-examination and you should be very mindful of how this will affect your claim.

Questioning the witness. Interviewing the witness is not easy. Remember, they can lie but you can’t accuse them of lying, that’s called “badgering the witness.” You must slowly develop a case that shows your position is more likely to be true than their’s. There have been a number of books written on this art form but the truth is, unless you’ve done it already, there is no way to know you will be successful.

Related reading – Injury Solicitors