Wow, someone after my own heart. I adore Marilyn Milian of The People's Court, followed by Judge Judy. As MM says, in small claims it's often not about the money, it's the principle. I don't watch as regularly as I used to, but every now and then a good court show binge is necessary :-)

Judge Judy and The People's Court are only litigating matters that would otherwise be heard in Small Claims Court. In California, Small Claims Court litigants cannot have attorneys represent them or appear on their behalf in any way. The person who files the suit (the Plaintiff) is bound by the judgment, but the person being sued (the Defendant) can appeal to case to the Superior Court if s/he loses. However, if the Defendant files a countersuit against the Plaintiff, and the Plaintiff loses the countersuit, the Plaintiff can file an appeal (but both the original suit and the countersuit will be heard in full in Superior Court).

When litigants agree to appear on Judge Judy or The People's Court, they are signing legal documents that waive their right to appeal. So, the Defendants who lose, even though the judgment is paid for them by the show, are ticked off that they cannot file an appeal. They will always have the stigma of having lost. And the Plaintiffs who win are ticked off that the losing Defendants don't have to pay the judgment out of their own money.

That makes sense. I just thought they would be very happy when the show pays the $5,000 for them. (Less or no money is won in most cases, but still). A free trip!

Maybe they're told to look angry for the show? My mom was contacted by one of those judge shows a few years back - she had filed a claim against someone who sold her some junk farm equipment and then never refunded her money after he took the stuff back. She was out several thousand dollars and would've loved to go on the show just to get her money back. Apparently the guy didn't agree to it (or they couldn't find him) so nothing came of it.

Scott, the upper limit for Small Claims cases in California is $10,000. I can remember when it was $1,500!

"Both the plaintiff and the defendant have been paid from a fund for their appearance. The amount, if any, awarded in the case, is deducted from this fund, and the remainder is divided equally between both litigants. The amount of the fund is dependent on the size of the judgment."

That's the rub for some of the folks that appear... Let's say the Plaintiff is suing for $1,500 and wins. The fund pays the $1,500 to the Plaintiff leaving a balance of $8,500. That balance is divided between the litigants, so the Plaintiff ends up with $5,750 and the Defendant gets $4,250. The Plaintiff is ticked off that the Defendant gets more than the judgment amount for losing. Now let's say the Plaintiff loses the case, so the fund is divided equally. The Defendant is ticked off that the Plaintiff gets $5,000 even though s/he lost the case.

Share_oh, My DH was contacted by Judge Jeanine, when she had her show. The other party did not agree and DH had to negotiate in town court.

The other person was "known" to the judges and the agreement was to split the difference. But, even a first grader looking at the evidence would have favored my DH. The other party was clearly wrong and that is why he probably didn't agree to go on TV.

Lindsey, the maximum in Ohio is only $5,000.

I always laugh when people sue for the state maximum & get nothing. Or even worse, the other person wins!

I've also read there are only a limited amount of cases where money is actually awarded. (So the show doesn't go broke). I've noticed Judge Judy dismisses a large percent of cases.

Hot Bench is always on the TV in the locker room at my gym. Three judges ask questions than deliberate with each other for the outcome. They are usually all in agreement.

What does strike me about this show, and others similar, is that the people going on have a high likelihood of being embarrassed. Things come out, he said/she said etc. that they might not have wanted the viewing audience and possibly friends/ family to know.

I guess the possible payout has to be worth it.

Not a fan of them, but have watched a couple of episodes of Judge Judy.

"I've also read there are only a limited amount of cases where money is actually awarded. (So the show doesn't go broke). I've noticed Judge Judy dismisses a large percent of cases."

Anyone can file a lawsuit against anyone else, for any reason. Whether or not there are merits to the case is another matter altogether.

I often watch Judge Judy. I persist in referring to her as Miss Judy because that was the star of a children's show my kids watched when they were little. Believe me, the two characters were very different. :-)

I've learned a few things from watching Judge Judy. Like how not to dress, how not to wear my hair, and the strange evolution of eyebrow fashion.

I had a coworker that went on one of those shows. His case was "stoopid". He lent his car to a coworker who needed to transport something in it, who then lent his motorcycle to him so he could get to work. He totalled the guys motorcycle(he jumped off with a scratch) and thought since he had NOT asked to borrow it, he should NOT have to pay for the damage.....really?! The case went very quickly. I remember seeing it a 2nd time as a rerun. :0) We ALL tuned in when it aired.....

Lindsey, I meant that the producers of these shows search America to find specific cases that definitely would have been dismissed anyway in the county court but also have entertainment value.

Yes, anyone can sue anyone for anything, but many I see lately are "you've got to be kidding"? In my opinion.

I beleive that some legitimate cases out there wouldn't make it on TV.

Also, I sort of like the show Hot Bench that was referred to above. It was created by Judge Judy. However only the blonde on the show was a real Judge prior to her TV career. The other 2 are just attorneys in the role of judges. Also a couple other Judge shows are mediated by prior attorneys, not ex-Judges.

I guess it doesn't matter anyway as you have to be an attorney to become a judge anyway. And you can't be an active judge on TV, so I guess it's fair.

I like the shows because I've actually learned quite a few good things. For example, I'll NEVER take my dogs to a dog park. Nope. Never.

The producers search the dockets of the courts to find cases that have been filed but not yet adjudicated that they think will have some entertainment value. I don't agree that they look for cases that would have been dismissed anyway. I haven't watched any of the shows in years, but when I did see some of them (Judge Wapner on The People's Court for example), the cases that I did see had some merit to them.

"... only the blonde on the show was a real Judge prior to her TV career. The other 2 are just attorneys in the role of judges."

Because of the overwhelming number of lawsuits that are filed in California, and the backlog that results, California uses attorneys who sit as a judge pro tempore (most often just said as judge pro tem). In order to be a judge pro tem, you must be an attorney licensed to practice in California for at least 10 years, be in good standing with the California State Bar, have no disciplinary actions pending, and have no felony convictions. If the courts are really short on judges, attorneys with at least 5 years of practice in California and who meet the other requirements can serve as a judge pro tem.

You also have to take (and pass, of course) two specific training courses, as well as additional training courses in the subject areas for which you wish to serve as a judge pro tem. For example, family law, unlawful detainers, small claims, civil non-jury trials, and traffic cases.

The California State Bar exam is a three-day exam, and is the toughest bar exam in the United States. New York's is a close second.

Thanks Lindsey. I didn't know they had attorneys sit in as judges but it makes sense with such a backlog.

Did you know that JJ's salary is 47 MILLION dollars a year? I mostly love her, but that's insane. The ratings must warrant it, though.

Some "celebrities" get paid like that ( and J J has become long-term a celebrity, no?).

Some movie stars get paid like that ... as do some sports' "heroes".

When a number of people who watch those programs, and have become jobless due to downsizing, whether due to automation, or jobs being shipped overseas ... one can understand their frustration.

And voting for a guy/billionaire who "speaks their language".

ole joyful