"A person who represents himself ..." something or other.

I had no problem following the initial link Clicking on the forms link and eventually getting to this form:
http://www.pacourts.us/assets/files/...1/file-770.pdf

The form clearly allows someone to appoint a representative to a District Court hearing. The District Court is charged with handling Landlord/Tenant issues according to the Home page.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JudyKayTee

"A person who represents himself ..." something or other.

---

I am not representing myself.

I have represented my company SEVEN times in District. Court for traffic tickets and won all seven. Seems like a pretty good record for someone who is not a lawyer and is taking advantage of what the law allows.

Hello again, M:

A company is NOT a person. It follows then, that a real live PERSON, such as yourself, would need to appear in court FOR the corporation...

Your friend, on the other hand, is a person, and in my view, which has NOT changed, a non lawyer CANNOT represent a PERSON in court.

excon

The word "represents" troubles me. And we're back to NY/PA - in NY any non-Attorney claiming to "represent" someone will very shortly hear from the Bar Association.

I have certainly represented myself in Court. I have testified for other people. (By the way, if we're tallying points I've never won an argument about improper service.) I have never represented anyone else.

Maybe that's the hang up here.

I am amazed that a non-Attorney can represent a party in Court. Appear on behalf of? Yes. Represent - maybe it's the language that I don't like.

This, however, is what I'm finding: "Magisterial District Court. These are sometimes referred to as small claims courts because they conduct non-jury trials concerning civil claims where the amount in controversy does not exceed $12,000. The risk of pro se representation before this court is significantly reduced because a party can appeal a decision de novo to the Court of Common Pleas. De novo basically means the parties on appeal can present additional evidence to the appellate court. Therefore, if you failed to have the proper witness testify or, if the District Judge would not allow a critical document to be considered based on a rule of evidence, you get a fresh start on appeal and you can even hire a lawyer for representation on appeal. In Magisterial District Court proceedings, corporations and similar entities, along with partnerships and sole proprietorships, are permitted to represent themselves. Whether the benefits outweigh the risk depends on the circumstances." http://www.reageradlerpc.com/article..._Attorney.aspx

I have asked this Attorney for a clarification and hope I get one - what does "... represent themselves ..." mean in PA?

I have also asked about my particular interest, whether the landlord/friend can serve legal notice and then "represent" himself - ?

Hello again,

Quote:

---

I have also asked about my particular interest, whether the landlord/friend can serve legal notice and then "represent" himself - ?

---

This, of course, is an entirely separate argument... I don't know the legal thinking behind it, but the person making service must be "At arms length" from the interested party... In my view, EVEN if you're allowed to represent your friend pursuant to the statutes you're referring to, you'll be DISQUALIFIED from doing so because you made service.

I hope you attempt it, and I HOPE it works. I'm on YOUR side, after all.. I really hope you report back and let us know how it worked out.

Excon

Likewise I'm interested in the result. The "arms length" discussion is a good one.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JudyKayTee

The word "represents" troubles me. And we're back to NY/PA - in NY any non-Attorney claiming to "represent" someone will very shortly hear from the Bar Association.

---

I guess I have a broader interpretation of that word. To me it simply means to appear in the person's place not to be a legal advisor. Maybe the word agent is a better description.

I agree - it's "represent" that spooks me. Of course, it may or may not legally mean the same thing.

I'm interested in how this plays out.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ScottGem;

I had no problem following the initial link Clicking on the forms link and eventually getting to this form:
http://www.pacourts.us/assets/files/...1/file-770.pdf

The form clearly allows someone to appoint a representative to a District Court hearing. The District Court is charged with handling Landlord/Tenant issues according to the Home page.

---

It might be the other computer I was on. I can open the form from this one.

It refers to the Criminal Rules. I cannot find a link to them, and am interested in how that would work. If someone can find and post the text of the particular rule, perhaps the answer will be clear.

But it is tangental. LL/Tenant issues would not be governed by the criminal rules anyway, so this form would not apply.

The form I linked says nothing about Criminal rules. It refers to the Magisterial District Court and to the referenced action.

The form in question clearly allows an individual to represent another individual or and individual to represent a company / corporation.

I have done both. For an employee who was cited ( and was present at the trial) and for the company who was not otherwise represented at the trial.

I emailed the district court but did not hear back from them. I will just call them tomorrow. The judge is actually a former police officer that I used to work with. And before the naysayers come out of the woodwork , he was duly elected and serves in the same area in which we both worked. There has never been any formal complaint filed over some sort of conflict of interest. Actually , over half of the District Judges in my county are former / retired police officers. A law degree is not required to be elected.

To be a judge in Common Pleas Court at the courthouse does require a law degree. District judges hold trials for Summary Offenses and preliminary hearings for any Misdemeanor and Felony cases. And they do civil cases up to 12k. The most jail time they can pose s 6 months. Fines vary by statute.

Every ruling they make can be appealed to Common Pleas Court.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ScottGem;

The form I linked says nothing about Criminal rules. It refers to the Magisterial District Court and to the referenced action.

---

It reads "PURSUANT TO PA. R.C.P. M.D.J. NO. 207 (B)", does it not?

I can't find the text of that rule, but what do you suppose "R.C.P. ..." means? Rules of Criminal Procedure something, something, something.

Yes... RCP means Rules of Criminal Procedure. With the multitude of rules , I do not believe that there is any legal distinction between civil and criminal court. I hope to find out tomorrow.

Same as NY - MDJ is Magistrate District Judge.

I don't know why rules of criminal procedure would apply to civil court - ?

"Tomorrow" has come and gone. What was the answer?

How much longer do you suppose we'll have to wait to find out whether OP was right when he questioned the advice given to him?

The reply I got from the clerk who is assigned to the civil cases is as follows...

Since she was never on the lease , you can call the police and they can remove her as a trespasser. I do NOT believe that this is correct. While she was not on the lease she has resided there for about 4 months now and is even making utility payments.

According to what I know as a former officer and what I have read about LLT law... she has achieved status as a " resident " and needs to be formally evicted no different than a former tenant whose lease has expired and has refused to move out.

I have not heard back from the judge but I will probably see him Thursday night at an event and Willa bend his ear at that time.

Wasn't the question whether criminal and civil "rules" are the same?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mcsap9213

The reply I got from the clerk who is assigned to the civil cases is as follows....

Since she was never on the lease , you can call the police and they can remove her as a trespasser. I do NOT believe that this is correct. While she was not on the lease she has resided there for about 4 months now and is even making utility payments.

According to what I know as a former officer and what I have read about LLT law....she has achieved status as a " resident " and needs to be formally evicted no different than a former tenant whose lease has expired and has refused to move out.

I have not heard back from the judge but I will probably see him Thursday night at an event and Willa bend his ear at that time.

---

The advice you got from the clerk may very well be correct: she has been a trespasser for about four months. Still a trespasser.

A little bit OK knowedge is a dangerous thing. That's a very good reason to not allow former peace officers to try to practice law. And, by the way, if you have your heart set on playing attorney, don't talk to the judge about the case at the "event". That would be considered an ex parte contact and therefore highly improper. Most judges, rightfully, take offense at such attempts at ex parte contacts.

As Judy Kay Tee notes, you still haven't answered the question we were all wondering about.