Former appeals judge: Get rid of lawyers

CHICAGO — Lawyers — who needs ‘em?! Not big companies defending themselves against small-time plaintiffs who can’t afford a lawyer of their own.

At least, that’s the opinion of recently retired U.S. Court of Appeals Judge Richard Posner, who seems to be taking as much delight in tweaking the egos of attorneys and his former colleagues from off the bench as he did when he was on it.

Instead of having lawyers face off in an adversarial battle, Posner, 78, says he’d like to see a judge order both sides in a case go to trial without their lawyers, just like on “Judge Judy.”

“There’s no constitutional right to an attorney in civil cases,” Posner pointed out to Chicago Inc., adding that plaintiffs “don’t necessarily need lawyers.”

“I’m looking for a judge who’s willing to say, ‘I’m not going to let either side have any lawyers . ... I don’t want to have the case clogged up with lawyers,’” he said, with a chuckle.

“A judge could do it ... and people are so reluctant to upset judges that they’d probably go along with it.”

Forcing a business’s officials to handle cases, rather than using high-powered attorneys, would level the playing field with less wealthy plaintiffs and speed up the process, Posner suggested, pointing to less confrontational arbitration hearings and the judge-led, nonadversarial legal systems used in some European countries as models. (An American Bar Association spokesman declined to comment, saying Posner’s proposal was “too vague” to respond to.)

Long feared by attorneys for his withering intellect, Posner — a prolific and acclaimed author as well and the most widely cited American legal scholar — has never been shy about criticizing his former colleagues. He has described the quality of Supreme Court justices as “awful” and often rails against the standard of legal writing.