33rd / 424th District Courts

This is apparently an unclear area. In a 1998 article in the bar journal
there appeared a brief discussion which will be paraphrased here.
Editorial. (July 1998) "Ethics -- With Pro Se On the Rise, Some
Important Concerns." Texas Bar Journal, Vol. 61, No. 7, 629. Concerns raised in the article include:

Unauthorized practice of law.
The opinion was that mere assistance was usually not a problem because
the nonlawyer undertaking self-representation is not engaging in the
unauthorized practice of law, by definition.

Limiting the Scope of Representation. Any limited representation must be undertaken only if the client consents after initial consultation
with the lawyer. The article properly points out that the effect of
such limitation on representation may depend on the complexity of the
legal matter and the ability of the client to understand the
implications of limited representation.

Note: The limited representation does not apply to permit consulting with or giving advice to, both spouses in a divorce matter.

One federal court (at the time of the article in 1998) found that a firm
which drafted forms for pro se clients without disclosing the
assistance to the court underminded the entent and purpose of ethical
rules and Fed. R. Civ. P. 11. Laaremont-Lopez v. Southeastern Tidewater Opportunity Project, 968 F.Supp. 1075 (E.D.Va. 1997).

Some Possible Ways Lawyers Might Assist the Pro Se Litigant.

The number of pro se litigants is steadily increasing. Lawyers can either
leave them to fend for themselves or can seek innovative ways to
provide effective services within the ethical boundaries. Possibilities
include:

The client must understand, and the lawyer must help the client to
understand, that self-representation is fraught with dangers. As the
complexities of society have increased so have the legal structures
that affect the litigant. Consider, for example, the outline used by
most judges in reviewing the request by a criminal defendant to for
self-representation. The discussion will include the following matters:

 

age;

occupation;

educational background;

previous court experience with criminal trials and whether that experience
includes representation by counsel or self-representation;

competency, whether or not defendant has experienced any mental or emotional
problems, has been adjudged incompetent, or considers himself or
herself illiterate, etc.;

indigency, and whether defendant has made attempts to hire counsel;

reasons for desiring self-representation, and whether or not his waiver is due
to duress, coercion, any hope of a lighter punishment, or sympathy;

awareness of:  the nature of the charges pending;

the total range of punishment;

any possible defenses;

awareness and knowledge of:

the rules of evidence;

trial procedure; or

that there is more to it than simply telling one’s story; and

that the defendant does not feel pressured into

representing himself or herself.

While that outline pertains to the criminal case, one can extrapolate from
there to the civil case and imagine the extensive discussion necessary.