• FreeAdvice has a new Terms of Service and Privacy Policy, effective May 25, 2018.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our Terms of Service and use of cookies.

when the claim amount exceeds state limits for a small claim, how to "waive the excess"

Accident - Bankruptcy - Criminal Law / DUI - Business - Consumer - Employment - Family - Immigration - Real Estate - Tax - Traffic - Wills   Please click a topic or scroll down for more.

Status
Not open for further replies.

pickaname

Active Member
What is the name of your state? OH

My complaint looks roughly like this:
  1. claim 1 actual (compensatory) damages: $4k
  2. claim 2 punitive statutory damages: $1k
  3. claim 3 punitive statutory damages: $1k
  4. claim 4 punitive statutory damages: $1k
  5. claim 5 punitive statutory damages: $1k
Wherefore plaintiff prays judgment against defendant in the sum of $ 6000 interest of 5% plus costs.

The amount I could claim exceeds the state's $6k limit. My original intent was to "waive the excess" to keep it as a simple small claim.

What I expected: The court would decide which of the punitive statutory claims to award and at what amounts (the legal range for the punitive statutory damages is $100 to $1000). If the total exceeds $6k the judgement would be for $6k.

What actually happened: Strictly speaking, the judge is fine with hearing the case as a single small claim, but (to my surprise) said I either must remove some of the claims or I need to reduce some of the claims to get a total of $6k. This step needs to happen before the litigation and judgement. Incidentally, the case was continued for a later date so I can plan my next move.

So I could decide to drop claim 3 and 4, for example, and the court could reject claim 2 or 5, but would otherwise accept claim 3 or 4. Or suppose I decide to drop the amounts on each claim proportionally, but then if the court decides to reject any of the claims, then the overall award is shorted by the initial reduction on the other claims. What I want to do at this point is split this into two cases. I will motion to amend the complaint, to drop all the punitive claims based on statutory damages. My ultimate question here is how to word that. I want the option to open a new case for the punitive the statutory damage claims in the future. My concern is that if I amend my complaint to remove them and later open a new case for those claims, the other party will argue "double jeopardy -- those claims already appeared on a past complaint". Should my motion ask the judge to "dismiss claims 2-5 without prejudice", or is "dismiss" the wrong term? If I simply amend the complaint to "remove 2-5", is there a risk that I won't be able to list them on a new case?

(edit) I originally misunderstood the meaning of punitive damages & confused them with statutory damages. Thanks @Taxing-matters for clearing that up.
 
Last edited:


Zigner

Senior Member, Non-Attorney
You cannot split the cases. All of the items have to be heard in one case (since they're all related to the same cause(s) of action). If you sue in small claims, then the MAXIMUM you can be awarded is the $6,000. If you want more than that, then you need to move the case to a higher court.
The other party won't argue that it's double jeopardy, they will argue res judicata. (The legal term.)
 

pickaname

Active Member
I must clarify that in this case the punitive damages are unrelated to the actual damages. I filed this all as one case because it involves the same party. But the action that caused the actual damages is not the same action that triggered the punitive damages.
 

Zigner

Senior Member, Non-Attorney
I must clarify that in this case the punitive damages are unrelated to the actual damages. I filed this all as one case because it involves the same party. But the action that caused the actual damages is not the same action that triggered the punitive damages.
It doesn't work that way. You are, as pointed out by the Ohio attorney in your other thread, in way over your head here.
 

Just Blue

Senior Member
For goodness sake! Stop starting a new thread for every little thought/question that pops into your head! All of your thread are about the same case...pick a thread and post all questions there. Thanks.
 

pickaname

Active Member
You may also be interested in knowing that, in Ohio, you cannot (generally) recover punitive damages in small claims court.

http://codes.ohio.gov/orc/1925.02v1

There are exceptions...does your case fall under one of those exceptions?
Thanks for the tip. I've read that before and thought since it's not over "Libel, slander, replevin, malicious prosecution, and abuse of process actions" that the small claims court would have jurisdiction. Perhaps I'm misusing the term punitive.. which I thought was simply private rights of action to punish the defendedant. E.g. I've sued telemarketers before and did not have to show actual damages. The law says "X amount may be claimed".
 

pickaname

Active Member
You may also be interested in knowing that, in Ohio, you cannot (generally) recover punitive damages in small claims court.

http://codes.ohio.gov/orc/1925.02v1

There are exceptions...does your case fall under one of those exceptions?
Thanks for the tip. I've read that before and thought since it's not over "Libel, slander, replevin, malicious prosecution, and abuse of process actions" that the small claims court would have jurisdiction. Perhaps I'm misusing the term punitive.. which I thought was simply private rights of action to punish the defendedant. E.g. I've sued telemarketers before and did not have to show actual damages. The law essentially says "X amount may be claimed without showing actual damages".

(edit) I just realized I overlooked (iii) when I first read it and when you directed me to it. So indeed the punitive claims are out of place anyway.
 
Last edited:

pickaname

Active Member
For goodness sake! Stop starting a new thread for every little thought/question that pops into your head! All of your thread are about the same case...pick a thread and post all questions there. Thanks.
If I understand you correctly, you believe threads should be organized on a per person basis, not per subject matter. Yet this is not what I'm seeing here. I don't see thread titles like "Just Blue's thread" or "Joe's thread". How well do you think the search function would work if threads were per person? Don't you think the same questions would be asked repeatedly with that style of organization? How would you know which threads of interest to step into if each one were a collection of unrelated questions covering topics orthoganol to each other?

Not only do I have multiple different cases going at a time, but sometimes my topics are general and not related to any particular case.
 
Last edited:

Zigner

Senior Member, Non-Attorney
If I understand you correctly, you believe threads should be organized on a per person basis, not per subject matter. Yet this is not what I'm seeing here. I don't see thread titles like "Just Blue's thread" or "Joe's thread". How well do you think the search function would work if threads were per person? Don't you think the same questions would be asked repeatedly with that style of organization? How would you know which threads of interest to step into if each one were a collection of unrelated questions covering topics orthoganol to each other?
Your questions are not unrelated. They are all about the same matter, just different aspects of it.

If you're in a car crash and you have questions about various legal issues about that crash, then they should all be in the same thread, even if they're different questions. If you then decide to sign a modeling contract and have questions about that, then those questions should be in their own thread.
 

Taxing Matters

Overtaxed Member
Perhaps I'm misusing the term punitive.. which I thought was simply private rights of action to punish the defendedant. E.g. I've sued telemarketers before and did not have to show actual damages. The law essentially says "X amount may be claimed without showing actual damages".
That's not punitive damages. Take the federal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA) as an example. It says that consumers who sue a collection agency are entitled to get the greater of (1) their actual damages or (2) up to $1,000 for each violation of the Act. The $1,000 in damages are known as statutory damages, not punitive damages, because the amount of the damages is set by statute.

Punitive damages are damages in addition to actual or statutory damages that are awarded in some types of claims for truly wrongful conduct of the defendant, e.g. recklessness, malice, or deceit. Simple negligence is not a basis for a punitive damage claim and punitive damages are generally not available in contract claims. As a result, punitive damage claims are not something you see in most lawsuits.

When suing in a small claims court and your total claims potentially exceed the maximum allowed, you have to limit your claim to the amount (in this case $6,000). Generally you do that by simply limiting the amount of damages you seek on on each claim so that the total does not exceed $6,000 or you limit the claims you choose to bring to get under the $6,000 limit. For example, a claim might be worth $7,500 but you could sue and set out that you are seeking only $6,000 for that claim. Doing that means you forever give up the extra $1,500. But if all the claims arise from the same event or operative set of facts you must include all the claims together; so if you exclude any related claims to get under the $6,000 then you are forever giving up on those because you cannot sue for those separately.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Find the Right Lawyer for Your Legal Issue!

Fast, Free, and Confidential
data-ad-format="auto">
Top