{"id":147,"date":"2006-09-26T11:57:57","date_gmt":"2006-09-26T15:57:57","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/blogs.law.harvard.edu\/shlep\/2006\/09\/26\/spread-the-news-kvetchin-kvellin\/"},"modified":"2006-11-03T16:38:48","modified_gmt":"2006-11-03T20:38:48","slug":"spread-the-news-kvetchin-kvellin","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/archive.blogs.harvard.edu\/shlep\/2006\/09\/26\/spread-the-news-kvetchin-kvellin\/","title":{"rendered":"spread the news: kvetchin’ & kvellin’"},"content":{"rendered":"

An editorial over the weekend\u00a0in the upstate New York based\u00a0North Country Gazette<\/a><\/em> reminded me that\u00a0self-help-law advocates can advance\u00a0our cause in two important ways :\u00a0 1) get our message to the mass media\u00a0(as news and opinion) and 2) make sure\u00a0we’re both kvetchin’<\/em> and<\/a> kvellin’<\/em>\u00a0— complaining about what’s wrong and needs to be done in the current system, but also pointing (often with with pride and pleasure) at what has been accomplished and is already available to the public.\u00a0<\/p>\n

\u00a0As we had<\/a> on September 16, the\u00a0North Country Gazette<\/em> editorial focused on Ohio Chief Justice William Moyer’s remarks about working to reduce the number of pro se<\/em> litigants coming before Ohio courts.\u00a0 (“Eliminating the pro se litigant<\/a>,” Sept. 23, 2006)\u00a0 The Gazette<\/em> seems to specialize in investigating and reporting on abuses in the NY and American government, especially the judiciary.\u00a0\u00a0 Its editorial wonders whether Moyer has “thrown out the Constitution” and is trying to “legislate from the bench . . . or his swimming pool.”<\/p>\n

\"SoapBox\"\u00a0 We certainly can understand\u00a0The Gazette<\/em>‘s suspicions about judges and lawyers, and can join in its suggestion that<\/p>\n

“Instead of shutting the court doors to pro se<\/em> litigants, Moyer should take steps to simplify court procedures, to remove the barriers and roadblocks for those who wish to proceed for pro se, particularly the costs, make the court system more ‘user-friendly’ instead of restrictive to those who can pay to play.”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

But the editorial left me wondering whether The Gazette<\/em> might not also live up to its tagline “serving New York” by turning its investigative talents toward showing what New York State has been doing lately to assist the pro se<\/em> litigant.\u00a0<\/p>\n

And that thought quickly reminded me<\/em> that it’s about time that I<\/em> also remind the public in my home state of what has been achieved and is being done to make self-representation an effective option in our courts — especially given ethicalEsq<\/em>‘s complaints<\/a> in 2004 about the failure of New York courts to use assisted self-help in achieving access to justice.\u00a0 That task deserves a fuller treatment, but for now I will point out with pleasure that:<\/p>\n

\n