Self-Representation: Pro Se Statistics Memorandum

Divorced in New York

By: Madelynn Herman and Yulia Vangorodska

The Knowledge and Information Service was asked to provide information on the numbers of self-represented litigants in the courts.

Courts are continuing to see an increase in the numbers of litigants who represent themselves. Self-represented litigants are most likely to appear without counsel in Domestic violence, such as Divorce, custody and child support, small claims, landlord/tenant, probate, protective orders, and other civil matters. While national statistics on the numbers of self-represented litigants are not available, several states and many jurisdictions keep track of the numbers of self-represented litigants in their courts. The following list of online reports provides a snapshot of statistics in various jurisdictions around the country, divided into four main categories:

State Court Pro Se Statistics

State Appellate Court Pro Se Statistics

Federal Court Pro Se Statistics

Other Pro Se Statistics

State Court Pro Se Statistics

Committee on Resources for Self-Represented Parties. Strategic Planning Initiative. Report to the Utah Judicial Council, July 25, 2006. (Report available through www.selfhelpsupport.org). This committee report provides recent statistics on the nature of self-represented parties in Utah:

Report of the Joint Iowa Judges Association and Iowa State Bar Association Task Force on Pro Se Litigation (May 18, 2005). American Judicature Society Web site. This report states:

Challenge to Justice—A Report on Self-Represented Litigants in New Hampshire Courts—Findings and Recommendations of the New Hampshire Supreme Court Task Force on Self Representation. State of New Hampshire Judicial Branch (January 2004). This recent report provides some statistics on pro se litigants in New Hampshire. For example:

California Statewide Action Plan for Self-represented Litigants. California Judicial Council Task Force on Self Represented Litigants (2004). See page 2 for statistics. For example:

Hough, Bonnie Rose. Description of California Courts Programs on Self Represented Litigants. A paper prepared for a meeting with of the International legal aid group—Harvard (June 2003). This report provides quite a few statistics on self-represented litigants in California. For example, the report states:

Pro Se Statistics from Florida Judge McDonald. 9th Judicial Circuit Court of Florida. Judge McDonald tracks pro se statistics in his family court in Osceola County Florida:

Percentage of Hearings where there was at least one Pro Se Litigant for 2001 = 73%.

Percentage of Hearings where there was at least one Pro Se Litigant for 2000 = 72%.

Percentage of Hearings where there was at least one Pro Se Litigant for 1999 = 66%.

John Voelker. Wisconsin Pro Se Task Force Report. The Wisconsin Pro Se Working Group. A Committee of the Office of Chief Justice of the Wisconsin Supreme Court (December 2000). This report states:

Report of the Boston Bar Association Task Force on Unrepresented Litigants (August 18, 1998). For example:

State Appellate Court Pro Se Statistics:

Montana 2005 Pro Se Statistics. Montana Supreme Court. The statistics provided in this report include civil, criminal, and inmate appeals. For example:

New Mexico Court of Appeals Pro Se Statistics. For example:

Federal Court Pro Se Statistics:

U.S. Bankruptcy Court Statistics. Eastern District of California. Pro se district filings are listed:

Statistics on Pro Se Filings in the U.S. Bankruptcy Courts for the District of Massachusetts. These statistics provide a comparison of pro se debtor cases to total bankruptcy cases.

Other Statistics:

Critical Issues: Planning Priorities for the Wisconsin Court System Fiscal Years 2006-2007 and 2007-2008. Wisconsin Supreme Court (May 2006); This report states:

Ryan Craig Munden. Access to Justice: Pro Se Litigation in Indiana (Fall 2005). From the American Judicature Society website:

Anne Zimmerman. “Going Pro Se.” Wisconsin Lawyer (December 2000). This article provides several statistics and quotes the 1991 American Bar Association study of family law cases in Maricopa County, Arizona:

The Future of Self-Represented Litigation: Report from the March 2005 Summit. Williamsburg, VA: National Center for State Courts (2005). This publication provides a wide range of papers describing several innovative solutions to meeting the needs of pro se litigants as well as provides various statistics. For example:

John Greacen. Self Represented Litigants and Court and Legal Services Responses to their Needs: What We Know. California Judicial Council, Center for Families, Children, and the Courts (2002). This article provides a host of statistics on pro se litigation in various jurisdictions as of 2002.

Ayn Crawley. Trends in Pro Se Litigation. Maryland Legal Assistance Network. Statewide statistics of over 40,000 self-represented users of programs in Maryland in 2002 show:

Self Help Program Models—Report to the Legislature (March 2005) California Courts, Equal Access Project links to several reports on specific self help program models are provided. Within these reports, many program statistics are provided. See also the many appendices. For example, Appendix G reports on customer satisfaction with self help programs.

Selfhelpsupport.org is a national clearinghouse for information related to self-representation. This (free) membership site provides links to over 1500 related publications, reports, or websites.

Exit mobile version