Do you have to be a lawyer to represent someone else in court? Recently, I've had to secure durable power of attorney (POA) for a friend of mine with a neurodegenerative disease to help him with a bunch of different matters. We've been working our way through the pile of issues and it had occurred to me that on several issues, another party could sue my friend for civil damages. Granted, I'm not sure why they would, it'd be like trying to get blood from a stone, but presuming they did my friend is hardly able to represent himself. In that situation, would I be allowed to represent him in court even though I am not a lawyer? Does the answer change in the event that the matter were criminal and not civil? I've identified this similar question, but my jurisdiction is different furthermore, I'm unclear how the POA functions in this instance. Said POA was provided to us by a social worker associated with my friend's case, but a copy is freely available through this link: https://powerofattorney.com/new-jersey/durable-power-attorney-jersey-form-adobe-pdf/
A POA (power of attorney) does not allow one to represent someone in court. The name is confusing, it dates from a period when &quot;attorney&quot; meant one who acted for another, not just in court. That hasn't been a current meaning for hundreds of years except in this one expression. A POA might now be better called a &quot;power of agency&quot; but the inertia of terminology applies. According to Section Section 2C:21-22 of the NJ code: a. A person is guilty of a crime of the fourth degree if the person knowingly engages in the unauthorized practice of law. b. A person is guilty of a crime of the third degree if the person knowingly engages in the unauthorized practice of law and: (1) Creates or reinforces, by any means, a false impression that the person is licensed to engage in the practice of law. As used in this paragraph, &quot;by any means&quot; includes but is not limited to using or advertising the title of lawyer or attorney-at-law, or equivalent terms, in the English language or any other language, which mean or imply that the person is licensed as an attorney-at-law in the State of New Jersey or in any other jurisdiction of the United States; or (2) Derives a benefit; or (3) In fact causes injury to another. c. For the purposes of this section, the phrase &quot;in fact&quot; indicates strict liability. Accoding to the NJ courts: A person is considered to be practicing law when that person's conduct whenever and wherever it takes place is of such a nature that legal knowledge, training, skill and ability are required. This definition of the practice of law is not limited to the conduct of cases in court. (Source: www.njcourts.gov › assets › criminalcharges › unprlaw) This rule is, if anything, more strictly enforced in criminal cases than in civil cases. In some states non-lawyers may assist a party in small-claims courts, I believe, but not in NJ.
The only way in which you could be &quot;incorrectly listed as a defendant&quot; is if somehow your name was typed in as a party (there would be a glaring gap, that no paragraph of the complaint says anything about you as a defendant). Assuming the situation is nothing so bizarre as a typo, you are a defendant. Whether or not you are liable in this case is a matter of fact and law, and the plaintiff's attorney has probably done due diligence in suing everybody imaginable. Perhaps the plaintiff lied to his attorney about material facts (read the complaint); or perhaps there is a credible legal theory under which you would be liable (read the complaint). Your attorney will take care of your problems, to the best of his ability. He may be able to persuade the plaintiff's attorney that they stand no realistic hope of winning and some chance of getting smacked for pointlessly involving you. If the plaintiff's attorney isn't persuaded by the argument, your attorney could submit the legal arguments as a motion to dismiss. If the judge is not persuaded (at this stage), you (your attorney) will have to counter the arguments presented at trial.
It happens all of the time, even though it is mildly improper. Usually, the lawyer can get away with it until the judge sternly warns the lawyer not to try it again, in which case the lawyer risks being held in contempt of court. This is riskier for a prosecutor (who risks this conduct causing a conviction to be overturned on appeal resulting in a new trial), than for a criminal defense attorney. This is because an acquittal, if obtained by these methods, is still not subject to appeal. Indeed, for a criminal defense attorney, even if it results in a mistrial followed by a new trial (which can be allowed if the mistrial is caused by the conduct of the defense), the mistrial will often count as a win if the trial was going badly on the merits.
In the united-states, attorneys are almost never placed under oath. Their statements -- whether they are assertions of fact or legal arguments -- are not evidence, and they are not subject to cross examination. There are limited circumstances in which an attorney would be competent to present actual evidence. In such cases, the attorney would be sworn in as a witness and subject to cross examination, but the attorney would likely also be disqualified from acting as an attorney in such a situation under Model Rule 3.7.
Medical PoAs in General A medical power of attorney (PoA) is only valid (at least in most US states, the rules vary a bit) when the principal (the person granting the power), is unconscious, unable to make a choice, or legally incompetent. A fear, even an irrational fear, will not suffice to make a person incompetent. Maryland To deal with a specific example, consider the law of maryland. According to the article on &quot;Powers of Attorney&quot; from The People's Law Library : Unless otherwise stated in the advance directive, the directive goes into effect when the person becomes too sick to make a decision about his care. If the patient is unconscious or not able to communicate, then the attending doctor may make the determination that the advance directive is in effect. Otherwise two doctors must certify that the patient is not capable of making an informed decision about care. More specifically to use a Maryland advance directive (healthcare PoA) for the purpose described in the question, a person would need to create a written Advance directive under code §5–602(a). It would need to include language waiving the right to revoke the directive. The person would then need to be formally declared &quot;incapable of making an informed decision&quot; about injections by two physicians. Then, and only then, would anyone acting under the PoA be justified in restraining the principal and forcibly administering an injection. I suspect one would find many health care facilities very apprehensive of malpractice suits and other possible legal complications in such a situation, and thus very reluctant to undertake care in such circumstances. Specific Maryland Laws Maryland code section 5–602 reads, in relevant part: (a) (1) Any competent individual may, at any time, make a written or electronic advance directive regarding the provision of health care to that individual, or the withholding or withdrawal of health care from that individual. (a) (2) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, in the absence of a validly executed or witnessed advance directive, any authentic expression made by an individual while competent of the individual’s wishes regarding health care for the individual shall be considered. ... (e) (1) Unless otherwise provided in the document, an advance directive shall become effective when the declarant’s attending physician and a second physician certify in writing that the patient is incapable of making an informed decision. (e) (2) If a patient is unconscious, or unable to communicate by any means, the certification of a second physician is not required under paragraph (1) of this subsection. §5–601 reads: (f) “Competent individual” means a person who is at least 18 years of age or who under § 20–102(a) of this article has the same capacity as an adult to consent to medical treatment and who has not been determined to be incapable of making an informed decision. ... (m) (1) “Incapable of making an informed decision” means the inability of an adult patient to make an informed decision about the provision, withholding, or withdrawal of a specific medical treatment or course of treatment because the patient is unable to understand the nature, extent, or probable consequences of the proposed treatment or course of treatment, is unable to make a rational evaluation of the burdens, risks, and benefits of the treatment or course of treatment, or is unable to communicate a decision. §5–604 reads: (a) (1) Except as provided in paragraph (2) of this subsection, an advance directive may be revoked at any time by a declarant by a signed and dated written or electronic document, by physical cancellation or destruction, by an oral statement to a health care practitioner or by the execution of a subsequent directive. (a) (2) A declarant, knowingly and voluntarily, may elect in an advance directive to waive the right under paragraph (1) of this subsection to revoke any part or all of the advance directive, including the appointment of an agent, during a period in which the declarant has been certified incapable of making an informed decision under § 5–602(e) of this subtitle. (b) If a declarant revokes an advance directive by an oral statement to a health care practitioner, the practitioner and a witness to the oral revocation shall document the substance of the oral revocation in the declarant’s medical record. Alternate Procedure In many cases it is possible to treat and mitigate irrational fears. The process is not instant, but it is often effective, I understand. The hypothetical patient might be wise to undertake such treatment. It is possible to render a person unconscious without using an injection, although this has significant risks. That is not a legal issue, but a person could consent to such a procedure, and then be injected while unconscious. Whether a doctor would be willing to undertake this I cannot say. Some medications normally taken by injection can be administered by other routes, but I gather that some cannot, so this might or might not be a useful solution.
Yes Assuming you were assaulted (with or without battery) and you suffered injury (physical or otherwise) during that assault you are entitled to damages. The injury has to flow from the assault but not necessarily from the assaulter. For example, if you fled across the road and were struck by a car you could sue your attacker. Because assault is an intentional tort, it is not necessary for you to prove that actual financial loss was suffered - this is not negligence. The court can assess economic loss, non-economic loss and exemplary (punitive) damages.
There is no public place to “file” that. When privilege is claimed and the other side challenges it then the person claiming privilege needs to establish somehow that the attorney client relationship exists and is pertinent to the question. In the normal course of things there would be an engagement agreement in the attorneys files. And not everything communicated between a client and attorney is protected by the privilege. It only covers legal advice and specifically does not cover discussions planning criminal activity.
Not a lawyer, but: In many countries, a purchased item is your property once you removed it from the premises of the seller. In practice, this rarely makes a difference. You have entered a contract with the seller where the seller has to deliver the product, and you have to pay the money, you did your part, they have to do their part. There would be a difference if the item was stolen while in the store, or damaged by fire, or if the store went bankrupt and bailiffs took the item. If these rules apply in your country, then what they did is not theft, otherwise it would be theft (in all countries, if the store removed the door from your home after it is installed, that would be theft). You paid for a door, the store owes you a door. You have a legal contract. Both sides are bound by that legal contract. They have to do what the contract says (delivering the door that was displayed in the store), if they can't, then they have to do the nearest thing that isn't to your disadvantage, like delivering a new door. Or possible a different door that was on display. They can't just declare your contract invalid because it suits them better. That wouldn't be the case if this would put the store at an unacceptable disadvantage. For example, if thieves had broken into the store and stolen ten doors, including yours, the store might get away with returning your money. Since they intentionally sold your door again to someone else, I don't think they could use this as an excuse. I'd go once more to the store and ask them whether they want to deliver a door to you, according to your contract with the store, or if they want you to get a lawyer. A letter from a lawyer might work wonders. (Or of course the lawyer might tell you that I'm completely wrong, but they don't know that, so telling them that you will hire a lawyer might be enough).