Law Education for Non-Lawyers

Call Majorie Taylor Green, I'm sure she can recommend fascinating reading material, just as soon as it rolls off the Proud Boys printer.

Which past decisions?

Federal? Then you're talking hundreds of cases per jurisdiction per week (most are settled, but that doesn't mean a lack of decisions on things like motions). Another few hundred per week for appeals in the circuit courts. Supreme Court only? Then you're looking at a good 200 years of decisions which includes cases where they refuse certiorari. Spoiler alert: there are a lot more of those than there are decided cases.

Or would you prefer state? Which states? Which counties? Which courts? Criminal? Civil? Family? Traffic? Small claims? Patents? Magistrate courts?

In Delaware, there are equity courts. Want to count them, too?

As for your belief that lawyers have an outsized influence on society, we live in a litigious society. But without supply of material, there would be less of a demand for lawyers. They don't work in an utter vacuum. Fewer cases, fewer demands for seats in law schools.

Why do you imagine there are so many cases? One big reason is a stratified society where people see a lawsuit as an opportunity for a big payday. Guess who decides on how much to pay in damages? It's juries and claims departments. Both of these are rarely made up of lawyers, or at least the majority aren't lawyers.

And as long as people think it's awesome to get out of jury duty, then jurors will continue to just be people who couldn't get out of jury duty. Not always the best people to decide stuff.

Why are those numbers high? Medical care is through the roof in case you haven't noticed. Are lawyers to blame for that?

Many, many cases these days go to mediation or arbitration. Mediators and arbiters don't have to be lawyers although a lot of them are. Going to count them in your quest to read cases?

And do you also feel the need to read all the cases that these decisions are based on?

And what do you think you will do with this information once you have it? Write a strongly worded letter to Chief Justice Roberts?

Google is your friend. Start searching for cases from whichever court (s) you feel like reading. No one's stopping you. But I seriously doubt you get the magnitude of what you say you want to do.

There's kind of a reason why we have law schools and bar exams. There's a reason why lawyers can't just practice anywhere unless they've passed the appropriate bar or gotten a one-case waiver.

Or if you really want to see how the sausage is made, you can sit in as an audience member in many courts. Start with traffic court, and be sure to hang out all day, just like the judge does. And you will see just how daunting a task you are trying to set up for yourself.

jespah-

Which past decision varies with what I am reading about at the time.

I recognize the influence of lawyers results from the demands made on them (e.g., plaintiffs filing lawsuits) by the public.

I think that you are correct that people file lawsuits as an opportunity for a big payday. I think that this should be correctable. I don't think the law should provide compensation for non-pecuniary damage. If I were to slander or libel you, it is doubtful that it would cause you real harm. Yet a court might award you compensatory and punitive damages. To make me pay punitive damages might make sense but why should you receive the money? You are not out the money. I think that the law should be changed so that the punitive damages would be paid to a charity or to a government agency.

Our founders provided for juries because England provided for them. But today, England uses few juries. Do juries decide cases better than judges? I prefer bench trials. Less expensive. Less time duration. Get the verdict correctly more often.

I am not blaming lawyers for the state of affairs except for those lawyers who are members of the State legislature and voted for the tort liability laws.

I don't feel the need to read all the cases. However, occasionally I read about a case that appears to be of interest.

I probably will not do anything with the information that I learn. However, I am curious about many things. That why I live able2know.org!!!

Then as I said, Google is your friend.

And don't be so quick to yank $ away from slander/libel victims. If you say that I am a sex offender, and I'm not, then how employable do you think I would be?

Sheesh!

The country is the UK.

Scotland has it's own legal sysrem, but England AND WALES are on the same system.

Anyone has the right to trial by jury but many choose not to escalate their case to a higher court preferring instead to be tried by magistrates.

Civil cases are different. There is a celebrated libel case going on right now dubbed Wagatha Christie about the two wives of premiership footballers, Rebecca Vardy and Colleen Rooney. That is being tried by a judge.

Considering the case has attracted a lot of trolls who have threatened Vardy and her family it's probably best the matter is decided by a dispassionate judge.

Please in future do a bit of research instead of spouting ignorant unfounded opinions about my country.

Let's say I get caught speeding 40mph in a 30mph zone.

Now I can plead guilty by post and accept the points on my licence.

Or I could try to argue my case in front of a magistrate but if that doesn't suit I can insist on trial by jury.

If I did that I would be an idiot, not only would I be found guilty and made to pay the fine and accept the endorsements, the judge would most likely make me pay costs that would be thousands of pounds.

And our judges are non political, they are nominated by professionals who then have their recommendations rubber stamped by the government.