Representarse a sí mismo

• Su caso es sencillo y no hay una parte contraria (como un cambio de nombre).
• La otra parte y usted están de acuerdo en todo (como en una adopción o tutela de un menor no disputada).
• Usted entiende todas sus opciones y puede tomar decisiones informadas sobre su caso.
• Está dispuesto a aprender y entender la ley, y las reglas y los procedimientos que se aplican a su caso.
• Puede dedicar tiempo a preparar su caso.
• Sabe seguir instrucciones escritas y trabajar por su cuenta.

• Tiene un caso complicado o que puede complicarse. Es posible que no siempre se dé cuenta de que un caso es o podría ser complicado si no habla con un abogado.
• La otra parte tiene un abogado.
• Desea asesoría legal.
• Desea una relación confidencial abogado-cliente.
• Desea hablar de estrategias para su caso, como dónde presentar su demanda, si presentar una respuesta, si solicitar un jurado y muchas otras decisiones que surgirán durante el caso.
• Desea que alguien negocie por usted con la otra parte.
• Le preocupa que la otra parte no “juegue limpio” (es más probable que un abogado se dé cuenta y sepa qué hacer al respecto).
• Va a tener un juicio con jurado. Hay decisiones complicadas que tomar durante un juicio con jurado, desde elegir al jurado hasta cómo presentar un caso de manera efectiva ante un jurado.
• Está demasiado implicado emocionalmente en el caso y le cuesta ver las cosas con objetividad.

If you are suing for medical malpractice, or some other type of professional negligence, the law says you need to prove that

1. the doctor or other professional breached (broke) the duty of care owed to you, and
2. you suffered damages as a direct and proximate cause of the breach.

These legal requirements are very hard to prove, and you will need expert witnesses to do it. First, expert witness fees are very expensive. If you have a lawyer representing you on a “contingency” basis (meaning the lawyer only gets paid if you win), the lawyer will usually hire and pay for the expert witness upfront, so you will not have to reimburse the lawyer until the case is over. If you are representing yourself and do not have a lawyer to advance these costs, you may not be able to afford the experts you need to prove your case.  Also, getting an expert witness and establishing to the court that he or she is an expert can also be very complicated and should be handled by a trained and experienced lawyer.

Construction defect cases often depend on expert witnesses to prove or disprove the allegations of the complaint. This may not be true of a small case in which the property owner hired a handyman or contractor to perform a single job on the property and one person performed all the work. For example, if you hired a roofing contractor to install a new roof, and the new roof leaked, you may be able to sue the roofing contractor without a lawyer or expert witnesses because you may be able to prove on your own that (1) you hired the contractor to install a new roof, (2) you paid the contractor, (3) the roof leaked, and (4) the leaks caused damage.

But if you had several people working on your house (like an architect, a structural engineer, and a general contractor who, in turn, hired subcontractors and purchased supplies from different suppliers), proving who is at fault when something goes wrong becomes very difficult, and you would probably need expert witnesses to determine fault and explain it to the court.

Also, while construction experts are usually not as expensive as medical experts, they can still cost a lot, especially if you need many experts in different specialties. Expert costs for these types of cases can run in the tens of thousands of dollars.

Some lawyers will take construction defect cases on a contingency basis, but most charge by the hour. You may be able to hire a lawyer on a limited-scope basis to help you with certain parts of the case, while you handle other parts on your own. Get more information on limited-scope representation.

Real estate cases that allege someone committed fraud, like cases in which there is competing title to real property, are usually too complicated for a person without a lot of legal training and experience. Also, even if you win, if you make a mistake in writing up the final order (in civil cases, the court generally does not prepare orders, it is up to the parties to do it), the title insurance company may not insure title, in effect preventing you, as the property owner, from selling or refinancing.

If you are suing your employer for employment discrimination or wrongful termination, you most likely will need a lawyer. Proving these cases is complicated and the employer’s lawyers usually fight these cases vigorously. To win this type of case, you must have a lawyer skilled in direct and cross-examination of witnesses and the rules of evidence.

Cases appealing a final decision by an administrative agency or hearing officer are extremely complicated and limited in the type of review the court can make. A lawyer can tell you if you have a sufficient basis in the record for an appeal and discuss other options with you.

There are other types of cases that are difficult or impossible for non-lawyers to win because the law or procedure is extremely complex or because the cost of bringing the case to trial is high.