No cites handy, this is all from memory, so feel free to correct me if I’m wrong.
Let’s take Judge Judy for example. As an arbitration proceeding, each party has to sign an agreement saying that Judge Judy’s ruling is binding, and they will not pursue the matter further in any court system. I believe the types of cases she handles are just small claims, and each case is eligible for a maximum of up to $2,000.
I read somewhere (her website perhaps?) that judgements are not paid by the party ruled against – rather, the producers of the show pay out whatever Judge Judy rules. Ergo, there’s no monetary loss to either side of Judge Judy awards $2,000 to someone to fix their car.
My question is this-- what’s preventing two people from teaming up to exploit the show? Two friends get together and decide to make up this wildly imaginative case wherein party A causes damage to party B’s car, for $2000 worth. Party B’s car, though, actually already had damages and brings in photos to prove the “damage done by party A.”
Judge Judy makes fun of one of the people and gives a quick ruling of $2000 to Party B. The producers pay out, and the two friends split the money.
So, do the producers have some way of verifying that some badness happened? Or do they even care who they pay, as long as it makes for good tv?
I believe this has been tried, w/ at least one case reaching the production and airing level. I’m fairly certain that they vet the participants to try to avoid these circumstances. I would also guess that participants must sign a release, w/ financial penalties for lying, that their case is genuine.
Have any slipped by these precautions? probably.
Does the winning party recieve anything above and beyond the judgement, though? Assume a legitimate case where B sues A for $2000. The “judge” awards B $2000. A isn’t out any money as the producers pay it, but B doesn’t really have any incentive to go before Judge Judy any more than regular small claims court. Only A would have an incentive.
It seems it would make more sense to pay each party $2000, and be adjusted by the judgment, so B walks away with $4000, and A walks away with nothing.
I understand that they take their cases from cases filed in small claims courts in the area where they are produced. I had a client that I was representing in small claims court (not my usual venue, but this somewhat crazy client – he fancied himself both a real estate developer and record impressario – wanted to go to the mat on a $900 claim; he didn’t last long as a client) my client said that he had been approached by the producers of one of the “judge” shows.
If getting on the show requires an actual court filing, collusion wouldn’t work without risking filing a false court claim and then trying to get picked.
My understanding is that they have a fund sert aside fopr paying the participants, say $5000. Any judgement gets taken from that, and the rest is split between them. So in the case of a $2000 judgement, the plaintif gets $2000, plus half the remainder, or $1500, for a total of $3500. The defendant would get $1500. I think both sides always come out ahead, but I’m not sure.
I think has something to do with what got them to the point of litigation in the first place – the belief that each one is right about whatever it is they’re fighting about, and that principle is worth gettin’ het up about, even in the TV payout format.
On occasion, I have gotten the feeling that some of the litigants are merely doing it for public relation purposes. Their testimony sometimes sounds more like a commercial than testimony.
Some shows limit what a defendant can get by what their state allows. However, some shows have a more liberal policy: Awarding court costs and assessing contempt fines, as well as, splitting multiple claims into multiple awards as in the case of two plaintiffs.
See the post above yours. The judgment comes out of the money they get for appearing.
A relative of mine appeared on People’s Court in the mid-80s. At that time, each litigant got $1500, and if the plaintiff prevailed, the judgement came out of the defendant’s $1500.
It happened like this for the one person I knew (slightly) that was on one of these shows. (People’s Court with Judge Jerry Scheindlin) She was suing her ex-boyfriend in small claims court in Suffolk County, NY. The produceres approached her. She went on the show and won. She actually went on again with a further related matter, but I don’t know if she filed in “real” court first for that second one or just went on the show. She won again.
As for why she did it? I guess the usual reasons of wanting to be on TV and all. Plus, she thought she’d have a better chance of actually getting the money in a timely manner! She knew she had a solid case, but feared that the ex would find a way to weasel out of actually paying, or delay paying for a really long time.
And to address chowder’s question–the ex did get really upset and nutty on the show. He was just really emotionally involved and wanted to prove he was “right” with everybody watching.
You’ve all just cleared up something that completely baffled me before. I saw an episode of “Divorce Court” where two people pretended to be married and sought a divorce. The judge found out because the man’s real wife showed up. The judge was furious and I couldn’t, for the life of me, figure out what the motivation for all of that was, but hearing that neither litigant loses money fills in the blanks.
I just looked all over for a clip or something, but all I could find was a rather weak synopsis.