Legal types - how real is The People's Court?

Sorry to double post, but everything I just read online that mentions where The People’s Court is filmed lists it as being in Manhattan.

What’s so wacky about that? The plaintiff’s award is skimmed off of the top because the defendant done wrong, and the remainder goes to them equally for providing gist for the camera. Seems fair to me.

The plaintiff is no worse off than in a real court – he gets an award presumably the same as a sitting judge would have given him, and maybe a little extra. The defendant is even better off – no money paid even if he loses, and may a bit in his pocket as well, something no rel small-claims court would get him.

I haven’t seen the show in ages (like decades) but I imagine the small-claims max. has risen considerably since Wapner, and the show’s appearance fee has done likewise.

Could it be that there was no way of proving that he had written the song first? Sure, it’s still copyrighted, but if he can’t provide evidence (like a registration), then he might well be out of luck.

It doesn’t distribute the money fairly. The idea of an appearance fee seems like it would be payment for going on TV with your case - a straight sum independent of the judgement. So if the fund the show is willing to pay to the litigants is $1000 total (for the sake of an even number), cases would play out thus:

Case A: Plaintiff loses case. Plaintiff and defendant are paid $500 each for appearing.

Case B: Plaintiff wins case for $250. Each are still paid $500 for appearing, but the judgement is levied at the point of payment, so $250 of the defendant’s money goes to the plaintiff and in effect the plaitiff is paid $750 and the defendant is paid $250.

Case C: Plaintiff wins case for $500. Each are still paid $500 for appearing, but now in actuality the plaintiff walks away with a check for $1000 and the defendant gets nothing (but owes nothing).

Case D: Plaintiff wins case for $1000. Plaintiff walks away with $1000 of the show’s money ($500 for his appearance, plus the $500 the defendant would have received for her appearance), and the defendant still owes the plaintiff another $500 of her own money.

I don’t know if, in reality, it is done this way or the way you described. But the way you described just doesn’t create the correct redistribution of money (in case D above, the plaintiff would only get the $1000 he sued for, since it is the show’s maximum payout, effectively not being paid anything for his appearance - whereas in case A he would get $500 for it even though he lost his case)
P.S. the ticket people called me back and told me the show is indeed taped in NYC. :frowning: