Stressed By Legal Issues?

Two of the biggest sources of ongoing stress I have seen in our modern day society are legal and financial problems.  I have a few posts on this site about relieving financial stress.  This one is about relieving legal stress.

If you are in the right you should win in court, right? 

Unfortunately, that is too often not what happens in the real world. 

Instead, whichever side has the best legal resources all too often prevails without any regard to who is in the right.  In many cases justice doesn’t even enter into it.

And even if you can afford to hire a good attorney to represent you and present your case, that often is not a very good guarantee that you will receive justice.  

To increase your chances of receiving justice you will need to learn what the American Bar Association along with most legal professional organizations hope you never learn.

Anything sound familiar about this picture?  Yes, you guessed it!  Just as we all need to dig for and acquire quite a bit of uncommon and often carefully hidden information if we want to maintain our good health, we will need to do the same here. 

My apologies to all the hard-working, skilled and strictly ethical and honest attorneys out there, but there is a reason why lawyer jokes are so popular. 

Sad but true, many lawyers become unofficial members of the tight little clique that tends to form around the courthouse.  And when your case is over and long forgotten, your lawyer still depends on having a good relationship with the rest of the members of the club, including the judge. 

So your lawyer, at least on the unconscious level, and in some cases perhaps even consciously, may have divided loyalties.  This may lead your attorney to recommend that you settle even if you have a strong case where a completely unbiased lawyer would instead urge you to shoot the moon.  Or perhaps your lawyer will not be the fierce advocate for you that you hired him or her to be. 

So what can you do?  Once again, in this area, as in most important areas of life, the solution is to become well-informed.   

But how can you do that without going to law school, or spending hundreds of hours studying in the local law library? 

One approach is to buy one of the several law courses for non-lawyers that have been published over the last few years.

About 2 years ago I became involved in a small civil suite.  I got an estimate from a lawyer at somewhere between 35 and 50 thousand dollars to have him represent me.  I was shocked because the whole case was about less than 15 thousand dollars, including whatever the court was likely to award in legal fees to the prevailing side. 

I probably could have settled the case for around $3,500 but felt that I was in the right and that it was a matter of principle for me to stick up for my rights and hold out for real justice.  I just wasn’t ready to cave in to a big bully that had clearly committed fraud. 

So I got a few more estimates from some other lawyers.  They were all in the same price range.  To make matters worse, they all told me that even if we won, which they thought was likely, there was a chance the other side would appeal and we would have to spend even more to fight the appeal!

Well, obviously hiring an attorney was not an option.  And I did not want to give up just because the other side had far more legal resources than I had.  I guess I have always hated bullies and have always been drawn to taking on David and Goliath battles.   

I decided to represent myself.  I read a few basic books on the general principles of civil law suites, put on my armour, picked up my lance and headed for the jousting field – the local court house.

After my first appearance in court the judge commented that I might want to consider hiring professional representation as the other side was represented by a lawyer with more than 30 years of experience at trying just this sort of civil case. 

I certainly felt lost.  I did not know how to organize a case.  I did not know how to compel the other side to produce documents and to answer questions.  I really did not even now some of the basic details for properly writing and filing motions.  And why would I know these things.  I have never had any formal legal training.  (What you see on TV and what goes on in court are not the same – not even close!) 

As I said, hiring a lawyer for this was not a practical option.  And I could not find the time to read stacks and stacks of law books. 

About this time a friend suggested that I might consider one of the law courses for non-lawyers in my situation that are available on the Internet.  That seemed like a reasonable place to start.  I did a bit of searching and narrowed it down to a few candidates.

I ultimately chose “Jurisdictionary”, which is a course that comes on several DVDs, and includes a number of very efficient documents that summarize what you need to know. 

Jurisdictionary is a bit more expensive than some of the other courses, but it also is much more complete, seems to have better focus – that is you can more quickly learn what you need to know.  And it had great reviews. 

And what really sold me on it was that just from reviewing the curriculum and a sample lesson I quickly realized that this course was all about learning what the brotherhood of lawyers do not want us to know.  Like many professional guilds – bankers, lawyers, physicians, etc., there is the information freely shared with the public, and then there is the set of closely held secrets that is almost never disclosed to anyone not clearly a member of the club.  This was a perfect for me as I have spent most of my life digging up the secret information that the Powers That Be, whoever they may be, do not want me to know. 

The lectures and the entire course, for that matter, is the work of a long-time lawyer who also has taught law for many years. 

I found the Jurisdictionary course to be excellent, worth every penny, and it really helped me to quickly get up to speed. 

Ultimately, I did not win my case.  It ended up as a sort of draw, where both sides sort of threw in the towel.  While I was disappointed in some ways, doing as well as I did with a lawyer with more than 30 years of experience pitted against me was not a bad outcome.  I felt proud of my efforts and my showing, and I still feel that way. 

Jurisdictionary was an essential resource for me.  I am convinced I would have gotten truly and well clobbered without it. 

So if you are facing any kind of legal action, civil or otherwise, whether you are the plaintive or the defendant, and whether you choose to represent yourself or hire a lawyer,  you will be able to exert your personal power and protect your rights much better if you are well informed.  This is especially true if you have much of the same insiders information that the lawyers and members of the court have and that they do not want you to have.  Jurisdictioary is the best way that I know for you to quickly acquire that information.    

It is a lot like the health care system – if you need to engage with it, the outcomes are apt to be far better if you are well informed.  And if you know enough, there are many things you can do directly to help yourself. 

Bottom line:  I was very well pleased with Jurisdictionary and am glad that I purchased the course.   It has made me a much wiser and more confident consumer of legal services.  And it has really served to clarify when I can safely handle something myself and when I might need to retain professional services. 

Click Here To Learn More About Jurisdictionary

To your Whole Health! (including legal)

Jeff Bell

This entry was posted in Resource Reviews. Bookmark the permalink. Post a comment or leave a trackback: Trackback URL.

2 Comments

  1. Sandy
    Posted May 18, 2012 at 7:08 am | Permalink

    This sounds good. Did you have to employ the strawman v. person defense and did they teach you about this on the site?

    Good for you.

    • Jeff Bell
      Posted May 18, 2012 at 11:45 pm | Permalink

      Thanks for asking a great question, about the “straw man” vs. the “real person”, or “human being”.

      I did not get into that in my most recent court dealings. Of course, I know about that whole issue, which falls under the rubric of “personal sovereignty”. I have studied it for some years. And while it is absolutely valid, and while it is based on 100% legally solid grounds, I have found that it is extremely difficult to successfully assert in a court of law.

      I tried it a few years ago in another civil suit, involving an alleged creditor who committed fraud and breach of contract. I should have easily won. However, I focused on challenging the court’s jurisdiction and using the legal grounds of sovereignty. I got my butt kicked and narrowly avoided being incarcerated for contempt of court.

      I was shocked by this experience. Here is what I have since learned: All the sovereignty legal knowledge is real and is valid, but the judge really cannot afford to let the “common folk” prevail at that game. For if they do, they get recycled back to judge school, which is effectively a career-ender. So they will do anything they can to prevent us from prevailing in such assertions.

      Of course, there are a few select people, like Tim Turner, who have such powerful and amazing presences that they can and do pull this off. But us mere mortals have a small chance for success, no matter that we are completely in the right, and seldom succeed.

      It was a bitter and expensive lesson for me, but it brought me back to reality. There is what is right, and then there is what happens. And they often do not coincide in a court of law.

      The second, and more recent time I have been involved in a civil matter, I approached my case from a much more conventional basis. I used all the court mechanics that I learned from the Jurisdictionary Course: learning how to compel disclosure by the opposing party through effective discovery and deposition; getting my evidence admitted over the objections of opposing council; properly drafting and filing motions that actually got results; compelling the court to follow its own rules and procedures; etc.

      So I think it is important and worthwhile to understand the subject of sovereignty, but unless you are a person with a huge presence and balls big enough to need a large wheelbarrow to transport them, in practical terms, I think it is much better to become knowledgeable in conventional court procedures and court mechanics and to rely on them to get the outcome you want and deserve.

      I found that Jurisdictionary does a great job of teaching that body of knowledge and the related skills and legal mechanics in a surprisingly short period of time. It turned out to be one of the best investments in both time and money that I have very made. In recognition that most people will not be able to pull it off, the Jurisdictionary course does not delve into the sovereignty issues. But what it does give you is nonetheless precious and valuable information that most of us will maybe desperately need at some point in our lives, but most likely never have. And we will surely suffer real consequences for that lack of knowledge.

Post a Comment

Your email is never published nor shared. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

*
*

  • Cataegories