.webp)
.png)
Often, litigants in Maryland assume that only certain types of cases can benefit from assistance from a skilled attorney. Many litigants assume that only “complex cases,” or only cases involving a great deal of assets, benefit from hiring legal counsel, but the truth is that just about every family law case can derive some benefit from a competent attorney. Whenever someone proceeds without any attorney – in legal parlance, proceeding on a “pro se” basis – there is always a greater risk that the case will not unfold in the optimal manner. Of course, proceeding prose can work, but the point is that the odds of things working out optimally are much greater with the assistance of a skilled attorney.
The case of McCotter-Jacobs v. Jacobs (2019) provides a compelling example of the need to hire a competent attorney. Let’s look at this case in detail.
Overview of the Case
The wife in this case initially filed for divorce in June 2019; the case went to trial in November of that same year. The two primary issues in the divorce were the wife’s government pension and the marital home. Importantly, both the husband and wife proceeded through the trial (and the ensuring appellate litigation) without the assistance of an attorney.
During the trial, the wife made certain statements which had a critical significance on the outcome of the case. Furthermore, she failed to do certain things – such as raise objections at certain junctures –which might have contributed to a more favorable outcome for her. Ultimately, the trial court awarded the husband 15% of the wife’s pension, and also ordered the wife to transfer her interest in the marital home to the husband (provided that the husband refinance the home entirely in his own name within 90 days).
The wife appealed this trial court determination. In her appeal, she argued that the husband had failed to file pleadings with her court in which he made specific requests for these things. In other words, the wife argued that, because the husband failed to ask for this relief specifically, he should be barred from receiving this relief. In support of her argument, the wife cited a 2016 Maryland decision which seemed to substantiate her position.
Ruling & Discussion
The appellate division rejected the wife’s argument and held for the husband. The husband retained the trial court’s judgment(which included part of the pension and full ownership of the marital house).In reviewing the case, we can see that the wife would’ve potentially been aided greatly with the assistance of an attorney. The wife’s mistakes during the trial itself made it very difficult for her to achieve her desired outcome in the end via appeal. If she had procured a competent attorney at the outset, there is a good chance she would’ve avoided those critical errors during trial. Although there is no guarantee that she would’ve attained her desired outcome, she likely would’ve been in a much better position to make that outcome happen.
Contact the Murphy Law Firm for Additional Resources
If you would like more information on handling cases pro se, the benefits of expert counsel, divorce litigation, or another related matter, contact one of the attorneys at the Murphy Law Firm today by calling 240-219-5243.
.png)
