The court also found that written findings were required under Trial Rule 52 and remanded for entry of findings. While Indiana has separate rules for small claims cases, the general proposition is that the Rules of Trial Procedure apply in small claims court unless the particular rule in question is inconsistent with something in the small claims rules. Here, the question is whether Trial Rule 52 on findings of fact and conclusions of law is inconsistent with the small claims rules. It is a method for formalizing the ruling of the trial court, providing more specific information for the parties, and establishing a particularized statement for examination on appeal. Small claims court is intended to be a place where such formality is not the order of the day.
Similar informality extends to the written entries memorializing small claims decisions.
We exempt the judgments issued in small claims courts from the requirements prevailing in other civil cases. Judgment shall be subject to review as prescribed by relevant Indiana rules and statutes. The formal entry of findings of fact and conclusions of law is contrary to the policy enunciated in Small Claims Rules 8 and 11. Small claims courts and the small claims divisions of general jurisdiction courts are intended to be places where justice may be dispensed inexpensively and promptly, and indeed, Indiana's courts bring nearly 250,000 such cases to final judgment each year. The trial court was correct in refusing the request to issue Trial Rule 52 findings.