I will not speak for all lawyers or paralegals. My opinion is that there is no unequivocal answer like “yes, look for a paralegal” or “no, just a lawyer”. I will express only my point of view, which has the right not to coincide with other points of view. There are such options: find an experienced paralegal near me who would organize your case (which is cheaper) and make every possible effort from you so that the case does not go to court. If the case is nevertheless referred to the court, look for a lawyer who would take up your case (we add the services of a lawyer to the services of a paralegal, which are likely to be higher if you contacted him immediately, regardless of whether the case would pass an interview or No). And the next option is to contact a lawyer directly, who will most likely offer you a package of their services right away. In case the case goes through an interview (in this case, the lawyer most likely delegates the organization of the case to his paralegal). And if the case goes to court, then a couple more $$$ will be added, the amount of which will most likely be less than if you turned to him after working with another paralegal. As for negligence, making mistakes and deceit, you are not insured against all this either in the case of working with a lawyer or in the case of working with a paralegal. Your strong case is only in your hands. And in your case, I would keep my finger on the pulse both with a lawyer and with a paralegal. It's up to you to decide. Sorry for the confusion, all examples of this message are from personal experience, so they have the right to comment.

Who agrees with me?