Why do PA residents allow the Courts to conduct pre-trial conferences with lawyers only in divorce cases ?

Plaintiff's and defendants are prohibited from attending case conferences as well as pre-trial conferences. There is currently no law on the books which would indicate that the parties' are precluded from such conferences. Pursuant to rule 2402 (a) parties need not be present and attorneys should have the consent of their client to attend these conferences and enter into negotiations. When I engaged the services of an attorney, I did so under the expectation that the attorney would accompany and represent me at any and all court proceedings. I never thought that a court would violate one's constitutional rights by requesting any attorney to appear in lieu of their client's presence once a client has indicated in writing that they were opposed to being excluded from such proceedings.Why do PA residents allow the Courts to conduct pre-trial conferences with lawyers only in divorce cases ?
Your constitutional rights are to represent yourself, not to be present when someone else is representing you.





Yes, I agree that the regulation is bad. But until you get a court to overturn the regulation, it is still the law.





The reason for it, particularly in divorce cases, is that parties are often too irrational to participate effectively in settlement talks. This ignores the fact that many parties are not irrational, and that divorce mediation works in 49 other states with the parties being involved.





Pennsylvania has a lot of stupid and irrational laws. This is just another example on the list.Why do PA residents allow the Courts to conduct pre-trial conferences with lawyers only in divorce cases ?
Although I'm not admitted in Pennsylvania, I do handle matrimonial cases.





With that as a prelude, I believe you are incorrect in asserting that parties are prohibited from attending case conferences or pre-trial conferences. Rather, their attendance is likely discouraged. not just in Pennsylvania but in many states, because - in a matrimonial case - where the emotions of the parties can be very highly charged, the attorneys can often deal with routine procedural matters and discuss frankly the strengths and weaknesses of the case more readily in the absence of the client.





It also gives the judge more latitude to give attorneys some guidance as to how the case is seen by the court, without one or both of the clients suggesting that the judge is prejudiced.





These frank discussions are often very helpful in the resolution of a case, and end up saving clients a substantial amount of money, because the attorney can come out of the conference and offer more precise advice...which, of course, the client is free to take - or disregard.





Clients are always advised fully and there always is an on the record, in court session before anything of substance is decided.





If that didn't happen in your case, it may be grounds for appeal.
pennsylvania is the worst state,50years behind the times,corrupt and on and on..........................