Why I believe one should not hire an attorney


“Should I hire an attorney?”  is a question that each one must answer for themselves. 
To make a quality decision, consider the following:

1. An attorney's first duty is to what or to whom?  If We consult the latest Corpus Juris Secundum (C.J.S.) legal encyclopedia, volume 7, section 4, We will find that an attorney's
first duty is to the courts and the public; not the client:

Attorneys Duties


2. What is the legal relationship between an attorney and the client?  According to
Section 2 in said  Section 7, We find that clients are “wards of the court:”

Client Is Ward Of Court


3. What is a ward of the court? According to a court case, “wards of court” are infants
and persons of unsound mind:

Ward of court

Are you an infant or person of unsound mind?  Wards of a court need an attorney
to speak on their behalf.


4. Do you need to challenge jurisdiction?  Better read the following;
particularly "...because if pleaded by an attorney....."

In propria persona Definition


In My opinion, these are the conclusions I would make:

1.     When one hires an attorney, they become a ward of the court and accept the venue
and jurisdiction of the court for the matter at hand.

2.     One should not hire an attorney if one wants to challenge venue and jurisdiction.

3.     If one wants to challenge venue and jurisdiction, one must do so as a "sui juris"
and or "in propria persona" and without an attorney.

Therefore, should one hire an attorney?


In My opinion, ABSOLUTELY NOT!


What do you think?

Another bit of information:

A "retainer" is a sum of money paid by a client to secure an attorney's availability to work for a client. The fee paid is considered earned at the time of payment because the attorney is entitled to the money regardless of whether he actually performs any services for the client, and the funds shall not be placed into the attorneys trust account.

Baranowski v. State Bar, 154 Cal.Rptr. 752, 593 P.2d 613 (1979);
and the Washington State Bar News, Committee Reports, Formal Opinion No. 173.