Small Claims judge seemingly ignored ruling during monetary settlement phase

[Jay968]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? California

My wife filed a small claim against her stepdad in order to have him turn over 2 items inherited by her mom who had died 2 years ago.

The small claims court judge ruled in my wife's favor and said that they should reappear in 3 weeks for a monetary settlement should her stepdad fail to comply.

The stepdad handed over one item but not the other.

Today, back in court the case was handled by a different judge who listened to the stepdad, did not allow my wife to talk at all, and told her that her stepdad owed her nothing.

1 - Can a judge do this?
2 - What recourse if any does my wife have?

 

[CourtClerk]

Yes, they can do it, since there was no judgment.

Small claims judgments are final as the the plaintiff so she's screwed.

 

[Jay968]

Yes there WAS a judgement. That's my point. The first judge ruled in my wife's favor and looked directly at her stepdad and said "I strongly suggest you hand over the items or we will meet again in 3 weeks and there will be a monetary value put on them."

This second judge totally ignored that, listened only to the stepdad tell a bunch of lies, told my wife to be quiet and told my wife that she can sue his estate once he dies.

Again the first judge did make a judgement, stating that she is entitled to the items because they were inherited by her mom, meaning (in California) that they are NOT community property.

 

[CourtClerk]

Yes there WAS a judgement. That's my point. The first judge ruled in my wife's favor and looked directly at her stepdad and said "I strongly suggest you hand over the items or we will meet again in 3 weeks and there will be a monetary value put on them."

There can't be a judgment AND a continuance. That doesn't happen in small claims. Not in CA. Once there is a judgment, the case is done. They don't do OSC's, nothing else. It's a done deal.

Again the first judge did make a judgement, stating that she is entitled to the items because they were inherited by her mom, meaning (in California) that they are NOT community property.

That's a family law issue, not a small claims issue...

 

[Jay968]

>>There can't be a judgment AND a continuance. That doesn't happen in small claims. Not in CA. Once there is a judgment, the case is done. They don't do OSC's, nothing else. It's a done deal.<<

So, you are basically telling me that when the first judge told the step dad to hand over the items and told them that they did not have to come back if everything was handed over that this was not rendering a judgement? Doesn't this give the defendant an unfair advantage? All he has to do is ignore what he was ordered to do by the first judge, thereby buying himself 3 more weeks to bull**** the judge into listening to only him and not a word from my wife!

>>That's a family law issue, not a small claims issue...<<

Well, this was handled in a small claims court by a small claims judge, so I don't understand the relevance of the above statement.

 

[CourtClerk]

So, you are basically telling me that when the first judge told the step dad to hand over the items and told them that they did not have to come back if everything was handed over that this was not rendering a judgement? Doesn't this give the defendant an unfair advantage? All he has to do is ignore what he was ordered to do by the first judge, thereby buying himself 3 more weeks to bull**** the judge into listening to only him and not a word from my wife!

In my experience, everyone says "the judge didn't let me say a word" even when I was in there, and they had plenty of talk time. I can't believe your wife went in there and never uttered one single, solitary word. If that truly did happen, then your wife (not you) should contact the supervising judge so that they can review the hearing and explain to the bench officer that everyone has a right to be heard in court. Perhaps a little continuing training would be necessary.

Does it give the defendant an unfair advantage? Maybe, maybe not. Rendering of a judgment means that a Notice of Entry of Judgment was sent to all parties and the case was legally and properly disposed of. If those things didn't happen, there was no judgment, and again, if those things DID happen, there there is no reason for a continuance.

Well, this was handled in a small claims court by a small claims judge, so I don't understand the relevance of the above statement.

Issues of what is community, quasi community or separate property are issues dealt with in family court, not civil court.

 

[Jay968]

The judge allowed the step dad to talk on and on and on and every time my wife said anything, she was told to be quiet. She never was allowed to dispute anything he was saying.

I understand what you are saying about continuance, however please realize the first judge ORDERED the stepdad to hand over the items. He did not do as we was told. That first judge also said " you do not need to come back here if the items are handed over. If they are not, then we will meet again to determine a monetary value. He also said to the step dad that it was in his best interest to comply or it would cost him. I think he said this because the step dad had said he wasn't sure where one of the items was and wasn't sure he could give it to her.

Now you know a WHOLE lot more about this than I do, but today almost seemed like an appeal more than anything else. The case had already been settled but the step dad was allowed as much time as he wanted to REplead his defense...and my wife was allowed nothing!

BTW, just as an added bit of information, the judge today was a replacement sent over from another court, did not know at the beginning that there would be any small claims cases today, and througout the entire time had his cell phone in his robe ringing several times, and he even answered it and had a conversation on it during the hearing.

 

[Zigner]

...however please realize the first judge ORDERED the stepdad to hand over the items. He did not do as we was told. That first judge also said " you do not need to come back here if the items are handed over. If they are not, then we will meet again to determine a monetary value.

In California, the judge only has the authority to award a monetary judgment. As such, the case WAS continued. The judge did NOT order the items to be returned because the judge CANNOT do that in small claims court in California.

ETA:

The first ... looked directly at her stepdad and said "I strongly suggest you hand over the items or we will meet again in 3 weeks and there will be a monetary value put on them."

That is NOT a judgment, nor is it an order. When you returned in 3 weeks the judge DID put a monetary value on it. Unfortunately for you, the value was zero.

 

[CourtClerk]

In California, the judge only has the authority to award a monetary judgment. As such, the case WAS continued. The judge did NOT order the items to be returned because the judge CANNOT do that in small claims court in California.

Actually, the CCP was amended a year ago to allow equitable relief in small claims.

 

[Jay968]

While I appreciate the responses, I am still a bit confused.

I keep mentioning that the first judge stated that no one had to return to court yesterday if both items were handed over to my wife. Then he said, if they were not, they should return in order to place a monetary value on them which would have to be paid by her step dad to her.

You keep mentioning procedural rules about how this is not a judgement, but what I am asking is that if it is not, what then is its purpose at all? It was just one big waste of time! Why did the judge say ANYTHING at all? Why not just say, "you guys have 3 weeks to work this out and if you can't, come back in 3 weeks and we will make a final decision then!" That's what this almost sounds like!

Why on earth would ANY defendant hand over ANYTHING knowing that if he does not, he then has a second chance at pleading his case once they return? Anyone who does not like the judge's ruling can just ignore it and be given a second shot at it!

Or better yet, why didn't the first judge just say "sir I am ordering you to hand over the items to your step daughter. If you don't, I will tell you how much money you will have to give her instead. If on the other hand, you choose to ignore me, you can come back in 3 weeks and we will reconsider."

Very strange!

 

[latigo]

Adding to your misery is that in Californian the plaintiff in small claims court has no right of appeal from a judgment on its claim. *

I suppose the only recourse would be for you to gather as much documentation as is available verifying the original judge's ruling and then ask for reconsideration.


[*] “(a) The plaintiff in a small claims action shall have no right to appeal the judgment on the plaintiff's claim. . . “ California Code of Civil Procedure Section 116.710.

 

[Zigner]

Actually, the CCP was amended a year ago to allow equitable relief in small claims.

Thank you for the update CC

Unfortunately, for the OP, the judge determined the monetary value to be zero (at the second phase)

 

[Jay968]

>>>Unfortunately, for the OP, the judge determined the monetary value to be zero (at the second phase)<<<

Actually THAT'S an explanation I can live with!

Too bad he was so rude as to not even allow my wife to speak after all the lies her step dad told (and yes he sure did lie).

 

[CourtClerk]

Ok... this can go on for pages and pages (and I sincerely hope it doesn't).

Legally, your wife doesn't have a leg to stand on.

Have a nice day.

 

[Jay968]

Not a leg to stand on. Oh I know that, I am just expressing frustration at what is essentially a micky mouse system in this country. I am sorry.

Years ago, I served on a jury in New York and vowed never again. I got a taste of how idiotic the system is and how it's more a game of 'lets see how well we can sway the jury to vote along with us, no matter whether the guy is innocent or not." No one was ever interested in serving justice, only in playing this game of rules that basically allowed people to play mind games with jurors. Even the judge was a joke, several times delaying what should have been a one week case into what turned out to last for 3 months because he kept insisting on telling us stories about such ultra important things as his Thanksgiving dinner!

What this country needs are judges who do not think of themselves as god, and a professional jury system so that the bottom of the barrel isn't picked to determine people's futures.