Update: my friend spoke to his insurance company. They told him that he had to go to court, but even if he lost and had to pay the entire amount, that they would pay it for him. That he would be out zero dollars. They also said that if he was being sued in regular court, that he wouldn’t even have to go, that they would handle the whole thing.
Thanks for all the help. Now he’s just wondering if he need to counter-sue for his own damage. Any downside to doing that?
Was there no accident report because the cops didn’t show up? Were there witnesses? Pictures taken at the time? If it’s just he said/he said, your friend seems to have the same chance of winning as the other guy. Seems like a counterclaim might bolster his side of the story. If he didn’t counterclaim, would it not appear that he was pretty much agreeing with the other guy’s rendition of the situation? Wish him good luck.
I am a lawyer, but I am not your or anyone else’s lawyer. I don’t represent anyone at this time and I am not licensed to practice in California. This is not legal advice. Just common sense advice on an anonymous message board. And I could be lying, so conduct yourself accordingly.
Data point. Different state. Insurance companies pay me to represent clients in small claims court. While I usually remove it to a higher court (since every small claims decision is instantly appealable de novo), I’ve sat at the table while a roomful of tenants and landlords looked on and held a bench trial over a petty road wreck.
It’s kind of fun to not have to worry about the rules of evidence.
Likewise here in Ohio. I often hear small claims cases as a muni court magistrate, and I assure those who show up without counsel that they’re not at any competitive disadvantage if the other side has a lawyer. It’s my job to see that everyone gets a fair hearing and that justice is done regardless of who’s lawyered up and who isn’t. Small claims really is designed for people to represent themselves, but if a corporation is a party, it must be represented by counsel unless the lay representative of the corporation wishes to forego cross-examination and making motions, which are acts of advocacy reserved to counsel in the courts of this state. Quite a few small, Ma-Pa businesses decide to proceed without counsel, and usually it’s not a problem.
Insurance company counsel appear before me with some regularity in subrogation cases, both small claims and otherwise. On all civil dockets, I grant dismissals without prejudice (where the plaintiff doesn’t show up) and default judgments (where the defendant doesn’t show up) often. I’d estimate 90% of such rulings are not objected to or appealed.
Why not enter a defense judgment if the plaintiff is no-show?
I see more upside than downside.
I am a lawyer, but I am not your or anyone else’s lawyer in connection with this matter. This is not legal advice. I could be lying, so conduct yourself accordingly.
A dismissal is not a ruling on the merits, and is more easily vacated if there’s an objection. That’s just our long-established practice. If the defendant appears and has a counterclaim, and the plaintiff fails to appear, I’ll typically rule in defendant’s favor on the counterclaim and enter a defense judgment on the complaint, though.