As Plaintiff, do I have to appear in Small Claims court in person?

[washington2017]

Missouri
I currently live in Washington State, and I am planning on filing a Small Claims case against a former business partner who still lives in Missouri.
If I file the Small Claims documents, will I be required to personally appear in court in Missouri, or will they take into consideration how far away I live?
Perhaps telephone conference on day of court??
Thank you!

 

[quincy]

Missouri
I currently live in Washington State, and I am planning on filing a Small Claims case against a former business partner who still lives in Missouri.
If I file the Small Claims documents, will I be required to personally appear in court in Missouri, or will they take into consideration how far away I live?
Perhaps telephone conference on day of court??
Thank you!

You should plan on appearing.

 

[Taxing Matters]

Missouri
I currently live in Washington State, and I am planning on filing a Small Claims case against a former business partner who still lives in Missouri.
If I file the Small Claims documents, will I be required to personally appear in court in Missouri, or will they take into consideration how far away I live?
Perhaps telephone conference on day of court??
Thank you!

If you want to win, you need to be there. If you don’t show, your case will get dismissed for lack of prosecution. The court isn't going to do a trial by telephone. Some hearings in regular court are done by telephone, but not trials. The judge will want to see your demeanor in court when you testify, something that cannot be done with you on the phone. You need to be there too to present any documents or other physical evidence you may have.

 

[Just Blue]

If you want to win, you need to be there. If you don’t show, your case will get dismissed for lack of prosecution. The court isn't going to do a trial by telephone. Some hearings in regular court are done by telephone, but not trials. The judge will want to see your demeanor in court when you testify, something that cannot be done with you on the phone. You need to be there too to present any documents or other physical evidence you may have.

OP was told this in his other thread from August.

 

[quincy]

If you want to win, you need to be there. If you don’t show, your case will get dismissed for lack of prosecution. The court isn't going to do a trial by telephone. Some hearings in regular court are done by telephone, but not trials. The judge will want to see your demeanor in court when you testify, something that cannot be done with you on the phone. You need to be there too to present any documents or other physical evidence you may have.

Agreed. As a plaintiff, you are expected to be in court to present your case. If you aren't going to take your case seriously, the court has no reason to take it seriously.

From St. Louis, a small claims guide: https://www.stlouisco.com/Portals/8/docs/Document Library/circuit court/circuit court pages/SmallClaimsPamphlet2011.pdf

(edit: I forgot to check the posting history)

 

[latigo]

Missouri
I currently live in Washington State, and I am planning on filing a Small Claims case against a former business partner who still lives in Missouri.
If I file the Small Claims documents, will I be required to personally appear in court in Missouri, or will they take into consideration how far away I live?
Perhaps telephone conference on day of court??
Thank you!

No, you cannot try your lawsuit in absentia.

Furthermore, if you file in Missouri and don't show up, the court will either (1) dismiss your claim, or worse (2) receive evidence from and find for the defendant on the merits of your claim rendering the adverse decision "res adjudicata". Which would be an absolute defense to your attempt to pursue the same claim in any forum.

But have you read your state's Long Arm Statute (WRC Section 4.28.185)? Are you certain that it doesn't allow a Washington court to assume personal jurisdiction over the non-resident former partner?

 

[quincy]

No, you cannot try your lawsuit in absentia.

Furthermore, if you file in Missouri and don't show up, the court will either (1) dismiss your claim, or worse (2) receive evidence from and find for the defendant on the merits of your claim rendering the adverse decision "res adjudicata". Which would be an absolute defense to your attempt to pursue the same claim in any forum.

But have you read your state's Long Arm Statute (WRC Section 4.28.185)? Are you certain that it doesn't allow a Washington court to assume personal jurisdiction over the non-resident former partner?

I believe this was addressed (by you, in fact) in washington2017's previous thread.

 

[quincy]

Latigo, in washington2017's previous thread, you said the following:

"There is nothing here by any theory that would give a Washington state court jurisdiction. Consequently you must sue the person in the country [sic] of his residence."

A link to the thread: https://forum.freeadvice.com/business-contracts-franchises-85/where-do-i-file-small-claims-state-where-contract-signed-where-property-637345.html

 

[Taxing Matters]

But have you read your state's Long Arm Statute (WRC Section 4.28.185)? Are you certain that it doesn't allow a Washington court to assume personal jurisdiction over the non-resident former partner?

Of course, even if the Washington state long arm statute might confer jurisdiction over an out-of-state defendant there is still the issue that the Constitution requires at least minimum contacts in that state to be subject to personal jurisdiction there. So far we have no indication the former business partner has any connection to Washington.

 

[quincy]

Of course, even if the Washington state long arm statute might confer jurisdiction over an out-of-state defendant there is still the issue that the Constitution requires at least minimum contacts in that state to be subject to personal jurisdiction there. So far we have no indication the former business partner has any connection to Washington.

The previous thread helps in understanding the situation described here. I provided a link for easy access to the important additional information.

Latigo correctly concluded in the other thread that a Washington court would not have jurisdiction based on facts presented there that are not presented in this thread.