.webp)
.png)
Abraham Lincoln once said: “A person who represents himself has a fool for a client.” Over the years, plenty of other prominent people have commented on the desirability of going pro se in a legal matter. In legal terms, “pro se” simply refers to a situation in which someone represents himself or herself as his or her own attorney. The idea of going pro se may seem appealing to many people at first. The big source of appeal, of course, is just the fact that going pro se won’t generate an attorney fee, but there are lots of reasons to believe that going pro se isn’t usually a wise course of action.
The legal system in Maryland is highly complex, just as it is in other states across the country. Even seemingly smart and educated individuals find it challenging to represent themselves in complex legal cases. Mastery of complex concepts, comprehension of nuances, and adherence to procedural protocols are imperative.
In the case of Kapustin v. Lugovkin (2018), the father in a custody case ended up going pro se and ultimately lost. Let’s examine this case in more detail to learn about what happened.
Overview of the Case
The father and mother in this case were involved in a prolonged custody dispute. Prior to trial, the court granted the mother sole legal and physical custody on a temporary basis. The father made it clear that he intended to represent himself, and he proceeded to appear alone at hearings. At the first hearing, his lack of representation already began to hurt his case: the father made no arguments, he failed to present any evidence, and made other mistakes which would not have been made with the help of an attorney. The father lost his case at trial and then brought the matter to the appellate division.
Ruling & Discussion
On appeal, the father tried to argue that the trial court had falsely terminated his parental rights by granting the mother temporary sole legal and physical custody. However, he failed to grasp that termination of parental rights is not identical to sole legal and physical custody. These things are quite different from each other. Termination of parental rights is more severe, as the parent is effectively stripped of all formal rights and is essentially indistinguishable from a nonparent. When someone is granted sole legal and physical custody, the other parent still has some rights, and retains some ability to have visitation. Hence, the father conflated these two concepts, and consequently was unable to bring a good argument against the trial court ruling. For this reason, this aspect of his appeal failed.
The father made other critical mistakes. For instance, he tried to appeal specific trial court determinations nearly 10 months after they were made. In Maryland, litigants typically have 30 days to appeal a trial court determination. This aspect of the father’s appeal was struck down because of this procedural error. Again, the father likely wouldn’t have committed this procedural error if he had consulted an experienced attorney.
Contact the Murphy Law Firm for Additional Information
If you want more information about handling things prose, or about another related topic, get in touch with one of the family law attorneys at the Murphy Law Firm today by calling 240-219-5243.
.png)
