Representing spouse pro se' (solution)

[trueq]

A few weeks back someone had commented about helping a spouse, pro se', without practicing law and reaping the ire of scumbag bar association and violating court procedures. I had the same problem. ADD YOURSELF AS A REAL PARTY IN INTEREST. I'm confident we will win the case, but my wife was the defenant and is terrified of court. Me on the other hand, I eat vultures for lunch and ask for more. Thus the problem, I can't make objections and reccomend objections without "practicing law" according to scumbag bar association. Adding yourself as a party allows you to argue the case as a party, a powerful tool when pro se', if you know what you are doing!!! (This also assumes a happy marriage, of course!) In WI it just requires a permissive notice to court and opposing counsel:

Notice of Permissive Joinder of Marital Spouse as a Defendant

Pursuant to Wisconsin State Statue 803.04 (3), Mr. Goodguy, marital spouse of Mrs. Goodguy, consents to join this action as a real party in interest, as a named Defendant, and Plaintiff Counterclaimant, in case #(555555) as brought by the plaintiff.

Defendant hereby consents to this notice.

__________________

Mrs. Goodguy

I consent to join in action #55555, as a Defendant and Plaintiff on Counterclaim, as a marital spouse under Wisconsin Statue 803.04(3).

________________________

Mr. Goodguy

Prepared and submitted by:

_________________________________________________

Mrs. & Mr. Goodguy

Certificate of service

I, Mr. Goodguy, certify that _________________, 2007, I mailed a true and correct copy of the above notice via USPS to: (named scumbag’s) agent for service of process.

______________________________

Mr. Goodguy

Please send a copy of all notices and correspondence to:

Mr. & Mrs. Goodguy

123 anywhere st.

Happytown, WI 55555

Your state law may vary, but most states should have something similar.

IMPORTANT EDIT: ANOTHER JUDGE SAID ITS MORE PROPER TO LABEL THIS AS A "MOTION TO INTERVENE". The balance of the document succeeded in getting me added as a real party in interest! She only had to speak once, and that was to agree to my intervention! So this is the solution for the spouse pro se' issue when the spouse being sued is afraid to talk in court!

[ShortBus]

Great info. Thanks!

[mwhizz]

This is awesome! I am going to check the Texas rules to see if this applies!!!

[macg]

I have a question: this makes the spouse personally liable if they lose, correct?

[BrokeBob]

In Wisconsin, the spouse is ALREADY liable. WI is the only community property state entirely east of the Mississippi (part of Louisiana is east of the Mississippi). For folks in non-community property states, check your state statutes.

[macg]

In Wisconsin, the spouse is ALREADY liable. WI is the only community property state entirely east of the Mississippi (part of Louisiana is east of the Mississippi). For folks in non-community property states, check your state statutes.

They can garnish spouse's wages and such in WI? That seems... wrong.

[BrokeBob]

I don't know the details, but that DID happen to a friend of mine. He got divorced a few months later, still having his wages garnished. Ouch!

There are advantages and disadvantages to living in Wisconsin. It's great if you love cold weather, wind and snow. Decent consumer protection laws as well. Community property laws are a double edged sword.

[FlaLawyer]

This sounds like a terrible idea to me.

[admin]

This sounds like a terrible idea to me.

Agreed.

[nascar]

This sounds like a terrible idea to me.

yep

[trueq]

One can avoid garnishment entirely by....

1.) not taking a judgment

OR, if you have a judgment.

2.) File a WI Ch. 128 plan. It costs $31. It allows state court to force judgment creditor into a 36 month, no interest. payment plan, and this plan it has all the "stay" power against a judgment creditor like BK. No assets to declare, no other creditors to deal with, just, you, the court, and the creditor. Creditor has no grounds to object either (usually).

So "garnishment" in WI is completely preventable.

[david9041]

Trueq , I have been trying to find a Florida rule or law that would allow me to join on her case for a long time , it is even more important now because the Judge is going to rule on her motion soon and if he deny's it I want to fight it .

Do you have any idea of where I would find it for Florida ?

______________________________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________________

ADD YOURSELF AS A REAL PARTY IN INTEREST. I'm confident we will win the case, but my wife was the defendant and is terrified of court

(3) Actions affecting marital property. In an action affecting the interest of a spouse in marital property, as defined under ch. 766, a spouse who is not a real party in interest or a party described under s. 803.03 may join in or be joined in the action.

[trueq]

"Motion to intervene"

You would have to give the court a reason. For instance in WI, marital property can be colllected on a judgement----a good reason for spouse to intervene.

Since FL is not a community property state, you would need to give court a good reason for your intervention---even though not a community property state---I'd state the same reasons.

[BrokeBob]

For those who are considering this, ask yourself these questions:

1. Would a judgment only against your spouse be as bad or nearly as bad for you as a judgment against both of you?

2. Would your participation in the case facilitate your defense?

3. Would your participation in the case be good for your marriage?

I am thinking about the CCs in my wife's name. For all of them, the answer for all 3 of the questions would be Yes. In that case, this would be a no-brainer. However, if they sue her, they would probably sue me as well, since I am an authorized user. In fact, I did all the negotiations with FNBO for her. She resented having to pay the 25%, but I think she realizes it is a lot better than 100%.

[admin]

Sure, go this way if you want to give your creditors an early Christmas gift.

Do you actually think that representing your spouse in court is legal? What is the legal basis for your right to "intervene".

I don't mean to be insulting, but this advice seems to be from an alternate legal dimension.

[Ms_Nomer]

If your wife has any known stress/psychological issues or is taking medication for anxiety, depression - you CAN get a note from her doctor, etc. to tell the court she would be under undue stress and therefor, cannot speak up for herself and requires your assistance. I've seen this work already.

[BrokeBob]

Intervening makes the spouse a defendant, who can then represent himself pro se'. This way, the spouse is NOT practicing law. At least that is the terminology used in Wisconsin. Perfectly legal here. And it makes perfect sense, being a community property state. Isn't AZ a community property state as well? Does AZ have a similar law?

At least in Wisconsin, the basis of the law is this: being a community property state, the spouse ALWAYS has an interest in the case. Since the spouse has an interest in the case, the spouse may intervene and be named a defendant.

However, every state has different laws in this regard. The community property laws in Wisconsin are different from the laws in Arizona. There is also a huge difference with the laws in Florida, which is why the legal experts in Florida are turning funny colors at the suggestion of this.

:confused::oops::rolleyes:

All I know is: in Wisconsin this makes perfect sense. In other states, it may not. Procede with caution.

[BrokeBob]

If your wife has any known stress/psychological issues or is taking medication for anxiety, depression - you CAN get a note from her doctor, etc. to tell the court she would be under undue stress and therefor, cannot speak up for herself and requires your assistance. I've seen this work already.

I did not know that. It makes perfect sense. The courts here are rather lenient about these things, most of the time. There were two small claims eviction cases in which my wife was the sole plaintiff, neither of which went to trial. In both cases, in the pre-trail conference (without a judge), I was permitted to attend and to speak. That was not only permitted, but encouraged. In one case, the defendant offered to move out on her own, but my wife was so upset she wanted a trial anyway. The defendant and the court official were both quite happy for me to unofficially intervene and take over at that point.

[admin]

Intervening makes the spouse a defendant, who can then represent himself pro se'. This way, the spouse is NOT practicing law. At least that is the terminology used in Wisconsin. Perfectly legal here. And it makes perfect sense, being a community property state. Isn't AZ a community property state as well? Does AZ have a similar law?

At least in Wisconsin, the basis of the law is this: being a community property state, the spouse ALWAYS has an interest in the case. Since the spouse has an interest in the case, the spouse may intervene and be named a defendant.

It may make sense - but what is the exact statute that you can invoke to make this legal. A doctor's note?? Really??

In AZ - you cannot represent another person even with a power of attorney. Period. This is practicing law without a license.

[nascar]

It may make sense - but what is the exact statute that you can invoke to make this legal.

Here's the one that makes it illegal ...

(2) Every person who appears as agent, representative or attorney, for or on behalf of any other person, or any firm, partnership, association or corporation in any action or proceeding in or before any court of record, circuit or supplemental court commissioner, or judicial tribunal of the United States, or of any state, or who otherwise, in or out of court, for compensation or pecuniary reward gives professional legal advice not incidental to his or her usual or ordinary business, or renders any legal service for any other person, or any firm, partnership, association or corporation, shall be deemed to be practicing law within the meaning of this section. Wis. Stat. § 757.30

Guys, these loopholes you think exist are going to get you in trouble.

[nascar]

If your wife has any known stress/psychological issues or is taking medication for anxiety, depression - you CAN get a note from her doctor, etc. to tell the court she would be under undue stress and therefor, cannot speak up for herself and requires your assistance. I've seen this work already.

Perhaps after award of conservatorship, but not with a doctor's note ...

[BrokeBob]

The Dr. note and the Intervention are two different issues.

I know nothing about the Dr. note. That is completely new to me.

Intervention, OTOH, is based on Wisconsin Statutes. I've seen the statute, but I forget which one. It would take me a while to look it up. TrueQ has actually done this in several cases. I've looked up his cases online. I found the cases in which he was granted a Motion for Intervention.

Intervention makes the spouse a DEFENDANT. A defendant can represent himself and his wife pro se', at least in Wisconsin. I've represented my wife in a case in which we were co-defendants. She never even showed up in court. She didn't need to. Nobody said a word about it.

[trueq]

You still, technically, cannot represent your spouse, but you are there as a real party in interest to the suit... so the motions, objections, and arguments you make apply to both Defendants, even though you are making them yourself.

If you are a non-party, you cannot make motions, objections, etc.

I've gotten intervention twice, but also have been denied intervention twice too! Same motion, same circumstances, different judge!

Fortunately, my wife just pulled arbitration card on those. In arbitration, this issue is completely relaxed because if you file, YOU CAN ADD YOURSELF TO THE ARBITRATION! (If they have to file...nothing happens!)

So ARBITRATION can resolve the marital spouse intervention issue if court does not give you intervention.

[BrokeBob]

I stand corrected. That is right. I have to make sure I never say in court that I am representing both myself and my wife. For any motions, papers, etc. I file with the court, both of us sign. So, the judge is hearing my arguments on behalf of myself for a motion my wife and I both either made or opposed. Thank you for the clarification. That avoids the illegal practice quandry.

[david9041]

I like this site and the way you take the time to point out the down side of things , it will tend to keep us out of trouble . I like the idea of the Motion for Intervention and it seems like it would work in Florida but I have no idea if it would. I do not want to risk a lean on our house though , because even if we end up with bankruptcy and it would have the lean removed it would cost extra to have it done . The best part is my wife is changing her mind and saying tell me how to handle it and she will do it , I like that .