Probabilities of Small Claims Judgment Satisfaction and Factors Influencing Success

On March 15, 1962, President John F. Kennedy presented a historic message to Congress devoted entirely to consumer interests. Among the four rights he specified for consumers was the right to be heard. When complaints cannot be resolved through direct negotiation between buyer and seller, small claims courts are an important legal mechanism for achieving the right to redress. A claim adjudicated in small claims court is not substantively resolved until the judgment rendered has been received by the winning plaintiff. Despite its importance to winning plaintiffs and to the successful operation of this vital component of the U.S. judicial system, little is known about the judgment satisfaction process. Which plaintiffs are more likely to experience collection difficulties? Which plaintiffs are more likely to collect if difficulty occurs? How much is being recovered? This examination of cases in the Small Claims Court in Boone County, Missouri, has been designed to fill some of this information void. More specifically, the purpose of this study is to determine the degree of judgment satisfaction of small claims court awards and to explore the impact of selected factors on the satisfaction experience. With the determinants of the probability of judgment satisfaction in hand, plaintiffs and potential plaintiffs will be in a better position to evaluate whether and how far to pursue a small claims suit. Consumer advocates, legal scholars, and legislators will have a factual basis for urging court reforms. This study also offers a technique that can be replicated for evaluating the success of small claims courts in other jurisdictions. Because court personnel and rules governing small claims courts vary from state to state and even from court to court within some states, it cannot be assumed that small claims cases in Boone County are filed and disposed of in a similar manner in other courts. However, to the extent that other courts and their litigants are similar to this particular court's processes and its litigants, the findings do provide insights into the small claims satisfaction process and a potential research model for studies in other jurisdictions. JUDGMENT SATISFACTION Hampered by incomplete court records and poor survey response rates, detailed and analytical critiques of the satisfaction process are scarce. Records seldom indicate whether or not the winner received an award or the problems that arose in collecting (Gould 1972; Hollingsworth, Feldman, and Clark 1973; Ruhnka, Weller, and Martin 1978; Steadman and Rosenstein 1973). An examination of a Honolulu Court's records showed that only three percent of winning plaintiffs filed a statement of satisfaction (Muir 1976). Attempts to gather information through telephone and mail survey techniques also had dismal results. In studies of courts in nearly two dozen local communities, information was rarely collected from more than one in three plaintiffs (Gould 1972; Leshin 1984; Ruhnka, Weller, and Martin 1978; Weiss 1972). Two notable exceptions were projects administered in Ohio. An investigation in Toledo had a response rate of 60 percent and a study of Hamilton and Clermont Counties was able to insure representativeness at the 95 percent level of confidence (Downing, Peters, and Sankin 1975; Hollingsworth, Feldman, and Clark 1973). A few researchers who were unable to obtain data on a representative sample of cases reported their findings from those litigants who did respond. At least 25 percent and as many as 40 percent of these respondents who had won stated that they were unable to satisfy even part of their judgments (Graham 1981; Leshin 1984; NYPIRG Citizen News 1979; Yngvesson and Hennessey 1975). The two projects with more representative response rates furnish additional support that judgment satisfaction is a problem. In the Toledo Court, 44 percent of judgment creditors (both individuals and businesses) were unable to collect anything (Downing, Peters, and Sankin 1975). …