Litigant Satisfaction Versus Legal Adequacy in Small Claims Court Narratives

Abstract

This article examines litigant narratives in small claims courts from two perspectives: the degree to which relaxed procedures and evidentiary constraints provide greater satisfaction to litigants than more formal courts, and the problems litigants encounter in providing legally adequate accounts without the assistance of attorneys. Data for this study are 55 trials in two states (North Carolina and Colorado). The findings show that narratives in small claims court bear many resemblances to everyday talk about trouble, provide litigants significant opportunities to tell their stories in court, but frequently fail to include critical components of legally adequate claims.