•  
  •  

Home > Journals > University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform > JLR > Volume 58 > Issue 2 (2025)

 

Abstract

The first step in any civil lawsuit, long before a court will contemplate awarding relief, is initiating the court matter: a plaintiff must always start by effectively pleading their case. The court system rests upon the presumption that an attorney will create and file the requisite court documents—including complaints, answers, and motions—on behalf of their client. The reality, however, is that an extraordinarily high number of litigants do not have legal representation and must therefore proceed pro se and submit these documents on their own. Most jurisdictions offer pro se litigants standardized, fillable court forms. These forms are intended to improve access to the court system and are often referenced as proof of a jurisdiction’s efforts to promote access to justice, but they can have the opposite effect. This Article seeks to advance the discussion of the court system’s accessibility by critiquing these ubiquitous standardized forms and questioning the forms’ efficacy in light of other, more intractable hurdles that underserved litigants must overcome to unlock the courthouse doors.

While the issues addressed herein affect all civil pro se litigants, they are of particular concern for litigants in family court. Family courts have significantly high rates of pro se litigants, and standardized forms proliferate in family court systems. Moreover, the unique nature of familial disputes—involving emotionally complex bonds and successive requests for court intervention—demand that more attention be paid to the issue of court access. This Article will examine standardized family court forms as a means to illuminate larger issues of access and justice in family court and beyond.

Download

Share

COinS