2. 考研
  3. Poor People Also Can Have a Lawsuit in American America’s courts are built on a system of rules and procedures that assume t

Poor People Also Can Have a Lawsuit in American America’s courts are built on a system of rules and procedures that assume t

admin2013-07-08  52
问题                 Poor People Also Can Have a Lawsuit in American
    America’s courts are built on a system of rules and procedures that assume that almost everyone who comes to court has a lawyer. Unfortunately, the reality is quite different. An increasing number of civil cases go forward without lawyers. Litigants who cannot afford a lawyer, and either do not qualify for legal aid or are unable to have a lawyer assigned to them because of dwindling budgets, are on their own prose. What’s more, they’re often on their in cases involving life-altering situations like divorce, child custody and loss of shelter.
    As the economy has worsened, the ranks of the self-represented poor have expanded. In a recent informal study conducted by the Self-Represented Litigation Network, about half the judges who responded reported a greater number of prose litigants as a result of the economic crisis. Unrepresented litigants now also include many in the middle class and small-business owners who unexpectedly find themselves in distress and without sufficient resources to pay for the legal assistance they need.
    As judges, we believe more needs to be done to meet this growing challenge: an inaccessible, overburdened justice system serves none of us well. California took a major step forward when it became the first state to recognize as a goal the right to counsel in certain civil cases. But this is only a beginning. It is essential that we promote other efforts to close the "justice gap". One such effort involves the "unbundling" of legal services. Forty-one states have adopted a model rule drafted by the American Bar Association, or similar provisions, which allow lawyers to take only part of a case, a cost-saving practice known as "limited-scope representation" that is responsive to new realities.
    Traditionally, lawyers have been required to stay with a case from beginning to end, unless a court has excused them from this obligation. Now, in those states that explicitly or implicitly allow unbundling, people or businesses can hire a lawyer to help them fill out forms, to prepare documents, to coach them on how to present in court or to appear in court for hearings. What could be wrong with this? Well, some lawyers have expressed concern that limited legal representation will encourage litigants to dissect their cases in an effort to save money, sacrificing quality representation that the litigant might otherwise be able to afford. We have also heard the argument that by offering too much assistance to self-represented litigants, the courts themselves are undermining the value of lawyers and the legal profession. Apparently, some are concerned that the court system will become so user-friendly that there will be no need for lawyers.
Why do many people worry about the rule of limited legal representation?
选项 A、Because the rule might harm the interest of lawyers.
B、Because the rule has helped litigants too much.
C、Because the rule might lower lawyers’ income.
D、Because the rule neglects the importance of lawyers.
答案A
解析 推理判断题。根据题干关键词worry about，limited legal representation定位到原文最后一段最后一句：Apparently，some are concerned that the court system will become so user—friendly that there will be no need for lawyers．很明显，一些人担心司法体系变得如此便捷，律师就会无用武之地。由此可知，人们担心有限范围代理可能会损害律师的利益，故选[A]项。
转载请注明原文地址:https://jikaoti.com/ti/UeYRFFFM
0

考研英语一

相关试题推荐
随机试题
最新回复(0)