How can laymen get pro bono assistance from Downtown Toronto Litigation Firms? To narrow this question, I focus on Toronto Canada. I am NOT referring to Pro Bono Ontario, because &quot;legal advisors on the hotline provide brief services. They do not create an ongoing relationship with you.&quot;. Unlike Access Pro Bono in B.C., Pro Bono Ontario does not assist you to instruct or retain lawyers. Many famous Downtown Toronto litigation firms tout Pro Bono. Lenzcler Slaught Representing a respondent plaintiff in an appeal from a judgment obtained in the Small Claims Court concerning a purchase of a defective vehicle. Paliare Roland All quotes henceforth from Murray Gottheil's article. I rule out firms outside the Greater Toronto Area, for the reasons of Murray Gottheil tout in his article. After I cold call the Partners of their Litigation department, sometimes I get no reply. Or I get these responses. The Defendant is a wealthy Multi National Corporation. We are conflicted. One Partner admitted me on the phone that if they acted for me, then &quot;they will not be conflicted out of a major file&quot;. Even if they do not currently represent the MNC, other MNCs they represent &quot;clients may not take favourably to you acting against a Bank and trying to establish that a common banking practice is improper.&quot; For example, if a firm has a deep expertise in insolvency and may have a good shot at being appointed lead counsel for an airline that is on shaky grounds, they will feel pretty stupid if they take on a file for a consumer group making a claim against the airline and are then conflicted out of the much more lucrative role of acting for the airline or its monitor in the insolvency. We do not take on a client just for small claims. We act in small claims court just for existing clients. We cannot represent you cost effectively. Our retainer costs you quantum of damages sought The problem is that in some areas of the law, there are only so many lawyers who have deep experience and are really good at what they do. If a client has a complex matter which requires a particular expertise, it is not unusual for the client to discover that the number of knowledgeable lawyers who are available to take on the matter may be quite limited. [...] Moreover, I will readily acknowledge that there are many situations where most, if not all, of the best lawyers who practice in the relevant area of law will be in a large firm.
What Kind of Cases Do Large Law Firms Take On A Pro Bono Basis? There are three main paths to pro bono representation by a large law firm. One is to have a personal relationship with a firm or someone in it, in a way that causes one or more lawyers to see you are part of their community, when you are in a potential legal dispute that poses a grave risk of injustice to you which you have no ability to afford a lawyer to assist you with. A pretty typical example of this would be a law firm that has a receptionist or a child of an office manager, for example, who is being stalked by a violent ex-boyfriend who needs a protection order, which a lawyer in the firm agrees to provide for free. Some times former clients who have fallen on hard times after a long paying representation can fit in this category as well. Often these disputes are &quot;small potatoes&quot; cases too minor to arouse the interest or ire of clients or prospective clients, and that are unlikely to change the law itself. Another way to get pro bono representation from a large firm is to have a legal problem that fits into some sort of adopted cause of the law firm that doesn't conflict with its usual client base. For example, it is fairly common for large law firms to take on the pro bono representation of someone who is likely to have been wrongfully convicted of a serious crime and is not sophisticated enough to represent themselves in the matter. A representation like this can provide trial court experience that young lawyers in large firms rarely get, rarely conflicts with the firm's representation of large businesses and rich people, and provides a moment in the lives of the participants in which they can remind themselves that the legal system can be used in skilled hands to secure justice for justice's sake, rather than merely to advance a paying client's interests. Assisting refugees seeking asylum, helping marginal small business owners comply with their tax obligations, and assisting a low income person with a case that has the potential to establish good precedents (e.g. regarding property rights) for your paying clients are other popular options. Typically, these kind of pro bono representations are &quot;pet causes&quot; of particular lawyers in the firm and those lawyers proactively look for opportunities to locate people for whom representing them pro bono can advance the cause. Finally, a fair amount of pro bono work comes in the nature of civic involvement with a legal angle, such as serving on the board or as a general counsel for a non-profit organization or church, or in some special one time transaction for a non-profit like a bond offering for a new building. Often, the non-profit or civic organization is one in which people somehow connected to the firm are involved. In almost all cases, large law firms are also image conscious and will only take cases that would reflect well on the firm if they were reported upon in a newspaper story from a reporter willing to listen to their side of the story. In a pro bono case, the law firm wants to be on the side of the case where they are wearing the &quot;white hats&quot; (i.e. the good guys). When Do Law Firms Have A Policy Of Declining Pro Bono Representation? On the other hand, in addition to actual direct conflicts, where the law firm represents the other side of a dispute with you, which of course, no one would expect the firm to represent you in on any basis, most large law firms have a class of potential clients that they refuse to accept because they constitute &quot;business development conflicts.&quot; Firms that are hired by insurance companies to represent defendants in personal injury cases will almost never take on a personal injury plaintiff. Firms that represent residential landlords will almost never represent a residential tenant. Firms that represent big businesses that do business with the general public will almost never take on a consumer protection lawsuit for a consumer. Firms that represent manufacturing and utility companies won't take on lawsuits to enforce environmental laws. Firms that represent employers don't represent unions. They don't take on these kinds of clients both because their existing and prospective clients don't like it from an appearances and &quot;loyalty to the cause&quot;/solidarity perspective, and because they don't want to end up making precedents as a result of their skillful representation that end up hurting most of their clients. Finally, law firms almost never represent someone who can afford their services on a paying basis for the work in question. Similarly, law firms like to represent pro bono clients who are appreciative and reasonably tolerable to deal with. Law firms don't want to represent a client who is a headache to interact with without even getting paid to do it, unless very high principles indeed are at stake.
The issue you describe is usually characterized as the multijurisdictional practice of law and is not terribly straightforward, in part, because the "practice of law" is not a well defined or consistently defined term. For example, in New York, preparation of a title opinion is considered to be the practice of law, while in Colorado, it is not and title opinions are routinely prepared by non-lawyers in title companies and by a type of independent paraprofessional (with no formal licensing) known as a "landman". As a rule of thumb: All work involving law in a jurisdiction where you are not admitted is subject to the ethical requirement that you be actually competent to render the opinion regardless of your formal licensure, and Normally, work involving law in a jurisdiction where you are not admitted must be incident to your representation of a client in a state where you are admitted to practice. A leading analysis of the issues related to multijurisdictional practice is a 2002 report of the American Bar Association on the subject, much of which has been incorporated into the rules of professional ethics for attorneys of many states. The core rule of professional conduct that was proposed and adopted in identical or similar form by many states from that report is as follows: Rule 5.5 Unauthorized Practice Of Law; Multijurisdictional Practice Of Law (a) A lawyer shall not practice law in a jurisdiction in violation of the regulation of the legal profession in that jurisdiction, or assist another in doing so. (b) A lawyer who is not admitted to practice in this jurisdiction shall not: (1) except as authorized by these Rules or other law, establish an office or other systematic and continuous presence in this jurisdiction for the practice of law; or (2) hold out to the public or otherwise represent that the lawyer is admitted to practice law in this jurisdiction. (c) A lawyer admitted in another United States jurisdiction, and not disbarred or suspended from practice in any jurisdiction, may provide legal services on a temporary basis in this jurisdiction that: (1) are undertaken in association with a lawyer who is admitted to practice in this jurisdiction and who actively participates in the matter; (2) are in or reasonably related to a pending or potential proceeding before a tribunal in this or another jurisdiction, if the lawyer, or a person the lawyer is assisting, is authorized by law or order to appear in such proceeding or reasonably expects to be so authorized; (3) are in or reasonably related to a pending or potential arbitration, mediation, or other alternative resolution proceeding in this or another jurisdiction, if the services arise out of or are reasonably related to the lawyer's practice in a jurisdiction in which the lawyer is admitted to practice and are not services for which the forum requires pro hac vice admission; or (4) are not within paragraphs (c) (2) or (c)(3) and arise out of or are reasonably related to the lawyer's practice in a jurisdiction in which the lawyer is admitted to practice. (d) A lawyer admitted in another United States jurisdiction or in a foreign jurisdiction, and not disbarred or suspended from practice in any jurisdiction or the equivalent thereof, or a person otherwise lawfully practicing as an in-house counsel under the laws of a foreign jurisdiction, may provide legal services through an office or other systematic and continuous presence in this jurisdiction that: (1) are provided to the lawyer's employer or its organizational affiliates, are not services for which the forum requires pro hac vice admission; and when performed by a foreign lawyer and requires advice on the law of this or another U.S. jurisdiction or of the United States, such advice shall be based upon the advice of a lawyer who is duly licensed and authorized by the jurisdiction to provide such advice; or (2) are services that the lawyer is authorized by federal or other law or rule to provide in this jurisdiction. (e) For purposes of paragraph (d): (1) the foreign lawyer must be a member in good standing of a recognized legal profession in a foreign jurisdiction, the members of which are admitted to practice as lawyers or counselors at law or the equivalent, and subject to effective regulation and discipline by a duly constituted professional body or a public authority; or, (2) the person otherwise lawfully practicing as an in-house counsel under the laws of a foreign jurisdiction must be authorized to practice under this rule by, in the exercise of its discretion, [the highest court of this jurisdiction]. The meaning of the rule quoted above is discussed in official and unofficial commentary beginning at page 19 of the ABA Report.
Someone has pulled a sample motion of this type off of PACER (the public access Internet portal to civil filings in federal court). The example is more formal and structured than a lot of state court motion practice would be, however (e.g. few state court's require or encourage motions with a table of contents and a table of authorities). This example is 36 pages long, and many states don't even allow motions to run for more than 10-15 pages without leave of the court to do so in advance. There is a New Jersey federal court example here which is also on the formal and fussy side (although, in part, because the motion isn't just an arbitration motion and is also raising several additional unrelated issues which if omitted would cut it in half). See also one here. Another example, from a California state court, is closer to the mark for a typical state court filing. A court that handles residential landlord-tenant matters is probably even more &quot;casual&quot; and probably expects motions to get to the point more quickly. The core content is probably solid, although it would have to be customized to reference the state law statutory and procedural rules rather than the federal rules of civil procedure, and to analyze and set forth the facts of your case rather than those of some random person whose pleading is linked. This would also have to be adopted to state court practice standard, which typically uses different formatting for captions, signature blocks, whether or not line numbering is required, etc., and is often subject to other requirements. Some require that a certificate of service be filed as a separate document, while others routinely incorporate it in the main document. Many state courts require that a proposed order be submitted with a motion as a matter of state or local court rules, a few states require a cover sheet to be filed with motions, many states require you to confer with the other side in the case and to recite their position opposing or supporting the motion, or something in between, before filing it, and some courts require you to notify them once the deadline for a response has passed, regarding whether an opposition has been filed to the motion's request for relief or not. Similarly, some states courts require that motions be &quot;verified&quot; (i.e. have their allegations confirmed under oath) or supported by an affidavit setting forth the factual matters alleged in them. New York State structures a lot of motions as &quot;orders to show cause&quot; in which the court preliminarily reviews the relief requested and issues an order telling the other side that it will do something if they don't file an objection showing good cause for the court not to rule in that way by a given day, which must be formally delivered (i.e. &quot;served&quot;) upon the other side by a deadline. I don't know if New Jersey local motion practice is similar. Many court systems also charge a &quot;new case&quot; filing fee for motions to compel arbitration that does not apply to other kinds of motions. Ideally, you'd want to review some motions (about pretty much anything) to get a feel for how this is usually done in New Jersey.
I am not a lawyer: If they sue you it will probably be for fraud, then the DA will investigate and can easily find out who you are. If they can prove that you signed the contract is another story. If the clause in the contract is valid yet another. Getting a lawyer might be wise, especially if your visa depends on a clean legal record. Have you talked to them yet? If you can afford it, you or your new company could pay off he months salary to the old company. In my opinion it's fair, they probably turned down a lot of other applicants an will either need to search again or find a good temp to replace you. Think there was something that you cannot quit a contract before it starts, but another option would be to start working for them and then realizing during the test period that it's a bad match. However, best lawyer up! Search for "Kündigung vor Beschäftigungsbeginn" (Cancellation before the start of employment) Quick google suggests that they might be right if they have it in the contract, but the lawyer will know for sure. Look for someone who does "Arbeitsrecht".
Can the subject actually sue me in England, or is it possible to sue only in the EU country I posted the article from, or in the US where the article is actually hosted? Yes. If the online encyclopedia is available in the UK, then you have libelled them in the UK and, indeed, in every country where it is available. They can choose to sue in and under the laws of any country where they were libelled. If the subject can and does sue in England, what happens exactly? This is laid out in the Civil Procedure Rules Am I correct in presuming that I will be notified of this by mail and asked to enter a defence? You will definitely need to be served with the Particulars of Claim, however, this may come by other methods than snail mail. If so, what happens if I ignore the matter? Will a default judgment against me necessarily be entered, or will the court duly consider the plaintiff's case, perform the bare minimum investigation/reasoning necessary to determine which arguments of theirs are (un)sound, and so possibly rule in my favour? A default judgement will be entered providing the Particulars of Claim show a cause of action on its face. The court will not examine any evidence or enquire into the veracity of the statements made on the Particulars of Claim. In short, unless the plaintiff has ballsed something up - you lose. If I do choose to respond, can I hire an England-based lawyer to handle everything remotely, or can I be compelled to physically attend the court in England? You are generally not required to attend court in a civil matter unless you need to testify. Even then, arrangements can be made for remote testimony. If the court rules for the plaintiff and awards damages, can this judgment be enforced in the EU, or would it apply only in the UK? It can be enforced in the EU. As a courtesy or by treaty, domestic jurisdictions will enforce foreign judgements in most cases. If the court rules in my favour, would I recoup my legal fees? You will probably recoup some but not all of your legal fees, say 50-60%. Costs orders are complicated - talk to your lawyer.
Now the party in question is threatening to sue (but of course refuses to point to which sections he believes are libelous) ... do we have to pay the $$ to &quot;lawyer up&quot; if we want to be safe? If you get sued, you will definitely want a lawyer. If you don't get sued, well, in that case you're safe. So your first question is whether the supposedly aggrieved party will actually sue. Your second question is, if they sue, do they have a good case? That question will be useful in deciding whether to settle. If the threats are empty then you might want to hire a lawyer to call their bluff. Otherwise you may have to endure the continual empty threats. This is especially true if the libel case is weak. Your lawyer can write a letter that explains why there is no case. If they do sue, they will have to identify the specific libelous statements, so you will at that point be able to refute the claims. But you'll also want a lawyer at that point, so you won't have to be directly concerned with the details; your lawyer will take care of them. As suggested in a comment, do keep in mind that a true statement cannot be libelous, by definition. To the extent that you can prove that every statement in the piece is true then you don't have much to worry about. But even then you'll want a lawyer's advice, because even if you know yourself that everything is true, you don't know what it will take to prove that in court. (Another aspect of the element of falsity is that statements of opinion are generally not defamatory.) To learn for yourself about the elements of libel you can start with Wikipedia or a bit of internet searching. To get a thorough analysis of the facts of your case in light of the laws of the relevant jurisdictions, you will need to engage a lawyer. It might not cost as much as you fear.
Let me turn this around, how would you find a doctor, plumber or hairdresser? There is nothing special about lawyers! Things you should consider when hiring a lawyer are the same as for any other profession or trade: The service you need them to perform Location Value Ability/Expertise References/Referrals As a simple procedure: Define your search. You don't need a big city lawyer for a traffic offence and you probably need a specialist if you are going to lodge a patent. Consider how far you want to travel for face-to-face meetings. Again, a traffic offence will have you looking in your local area; a patent may involve travel to a major city. As a general guide a bigger firm will have more expertise available but charge higher fees. Search Internet, telephone books, court records, radio ads, word of mouth etc. etc. Build a shortlist based on your criteria. Contact your prospectives and ask them: Can they do the work you need? What will it cost? Who are their references? Check the references! Really! Check the references! Decide.
If what you show is correct and above-board then you are being sued in superior court. However it sounds unlikely that the plaintiff could have served you with notice of such a lawsuit without you realizing it, so if I were you I would first call the court to see if they do in fact have a case with the docket number listed. Then ask: When and who served the original notice in the case (because if you really didn't get it then whoever said you did majorly screwed up and is probably in trouble) Who the plaintiff's counsel is If the letter was from a real lawyer on the California Bar, and that case really is open in the superior court with you as a defendant, then you really are being sued, and you should either get a lawyer or negotiate a settlement, because if you don't answer and defend then you're just going to have more judgments against you. If any of the above does not check out then whoever sent that letter is in big trouble if you report it to the DA, postal inspector, and (if they are a real lawyer) the Bar.