Goals of the Small Claims Court INTRODUCTION This research examines the inst

THE INSTITUTION OF THE SMALL CLAIMS COURT

The small claims court is so called because of the limitation placed on the monetary value of any findings made by the court.1 The monetary limitation on cases which may be brought before a small claims court does not indicate, however, that all such cases are simple. In fact, the issues involved in many cases brought before small claims courts are quite complex.2

Monetary limits in small claims courts vary from a low of $750 in Wyoming, to a high of $10,000 in Tennessee.3 In 33 states and the District of Columbia, however, the monetary limits range from $1,000to$2,000, while an additional eight states have a monetary cap of $2,500.4

Only nine states prohibit outright representation by attorneys in small claims courts. Hawaii, however, prohibits representation by attorneys in landlord/tenant disputes, Illinois permits representation by attorneys only for defendants, and Kansas limits representation by attorney to post judgement actions.

The appeal of small claims court judgements are prohibited in eight states. Appeals are permitted without qualification in the remaining states and the District of Columbia.

In 19 states, including the District of Columbia, a small claims court judge is permitted to a

. . .
thers are not harmed in the process. Further, the concept holds, according to Shotter, that whatever people or firms earn they have a right to keep. 7 The free market concept holds that economic welfare will be generated through the selfishness of the members of the economy. The concept also holds that economic injustice will be precluded by competition within the economy. Through such arguments as the invisible hand, proponents of the free market concept contend that application of the concept will provide a distribution of economic benefits almost equal in equity to that which would be provided under ideal conditions. Further, the proponents claim that the greater economic efficiency provided by the free market concept will increase output over that which would occur in a different system. Critics of the free market concept contend that indivi dualism and selfishness are not necessarily attributed to be promoted in society, even if they do contribute to the devel opment of a more efficient economy. Additionally, however, these critics can point to the Japanese economy (where indi vidualism and selfishness are not ideals) for an example of how other attributes can also promote economic efficiency. Other critics poin
. . .

Some common words found in the essay are:
Society Review, CLAIMS COURTS, World War, Neil Vidmar, Andrew Shotter, Friedman Friedman, Fourteenth Amendment, Research Journal, Kingdom Shotter, Academic Press, claims court, power elite, claims courts, free market, free market concept, market concept, law society review, american society, law society, court institution, brought claims, society review, claims court institution, establishment power elite, research reported article,
Approximate Word count = 3539
Approximate Pages = 14 (250 words per page)