is expert testimony needed in small claims?

[goofy78270]

Jurisdiction

Colorado

I recently had small claims hearing in which I showed that my vehicle was warrantied for an issue before and immediately after the repair shop worked on it. I also showed that I reported the issue to the shop, 7 days after I recieved my vehicle back along with a myriad of other issues, and that they said they could not have caused the issue, but it could be due to the battery being disconnected for an extended period or coincidental mechanical issue. They lost parts, did not install a part as noted in the original repair order, damaged an unrelated part, left remnants of the repair in the vehicle (white dust from sanding), and paint issues. The shop addressed the other issues, but never addressed this one. After 6 months of back and forth, no diagnostic of the issue itself and other repairs being addressed, I had my own diagnostic completed, which uncovered an additional related issue. I asked that they submit the original issue to the insurance company that was covering the repair. They reported the originally issue falsely to the insurance, as they reported the newly found issue as what i was looking to have covered, to which the insurance denied. I clarified the issue, yet the denial stood dye to the additional issues, but with no explanation other than they researched the issue and the denial stood. I proceeded to file in small claims, for this issue while continuing to have the shop address other issues, and had 2 other diagnostics completed to show the issue is still present. In court, I explained the issue as well as the issue being covered under the initial vehicle warranty had I addressed it then rather than being told it would go away. I also detailed all the other issues that I had to take my vehicle back to the shop for. The judge listened to my side only, and ruled for the defendant due to no expert testimony present.

I thought the rules of evidence were not strictly adhered to in small claims. If an expert testimony is needed, how would anyone ever win a case without an expert (likely the cost of what you would be able to win in court) being required. Why would an existing warranty that would have covered the issue, images showing the issue, dealership diagnostics, and continued communication not be sufficient for the claim?

 

[justblue]

I recently had small claims hearing in which I showed that my vehicle was warrantied for an issue before and immediately after the repair shop worked on it. I also showed that I reported the issue to the shop, 7 days after I recieved my vehicle back along with a myriad of other issues, and that they said they could not have caused the issue, but it could be due to the battery being disconnected for an extended period or coincidental mechanical issue. They lost parts, did not install a part as noted in the original repair order, damaged an unrelated part, left remnants of the repair in the vehicle (white dust from sanding), and paint issues. The shop addressed the other issues, but never addressed this one. After 6 months of back and forth, no diagnostic of the issue itself and other repairs being addressed, I had my own diagnostic completed, which uncovered an additional related issue. I asked that they submit the original issue to the insurance company that was covering the repair. They reported the originally issue falsely to the insurance, as they reported the newly found issue as what i was looking to have covered, to which the insurance denied. I clarified the issue, yet the denial stood dye to the additional issues, but with no explanation other than they researched the issue and the denial stood. I proceeded to file in small claims, for this issue while continuing to have the shop address other issues, and had 2 other diagnostics completed to show the issue is still present. In court, I explained the issue as well as the issue being covered under the initial vehicle warranty had I addressed it then rather than being told it would go away. I also detailed all the other issues that I had to take my vehicle back to the shop for. The judge listened to my side only, and ruled for the defendant due to no expert testimony present.

I thought the rules of evidence were not strictly adhered to in small claims. If an expert testimony is needed, how would anyone ever win a case without an expert (likely the cost of what you would be able to win in court) being required. Why would an existing warranty that would have covered the issue, images showing the issue, dealership diagnostics, and continued communication not be sufficient for the claim?

Please, do not start new thread for every question you may have on same issue.

Add this question to your original thread: subpoena requirements if court date is moved · TheLaw.com

Thank you.

 

[Tax Counsel]

The judge listened to my side only, and ruled for the defendant due to no expert testimony present.

I thought the rules of evidence were not strictly adhered to in small claims.

They are not applied like they would in Colorado District Court or in a non small claims proceeding in County Court. The Colorado Small Claims Court Rules simply provide in Rule 513:

The hearing of all cases shall be informal, the object being to dispense justice promptly and economically between the parties. Rules of evidence shall not be strictly applied; however, all constitutional and statutory privileges shall be recognized. The parties may testify and offer evidence and testimony of witnesses at the hearing.​

The problem is that if you dont have any expertise in the matter then the judge can't put much weight on that. And as the plaintiff, you bear the burden of convincing the magistrate judge that you should win the case. The court would not apply the same requirements for an expert that would be needed in other courts, nor would an expert's report be needed. But when introducing evidence that the mechanic screwed up and did not do work that is up to the minimun standards a mechanic should have, it's helpful for you to have a mechanic as your "expert witness" to explain how it was messed up, how it should have been done, and what it would cost to fix the defendant's mistakes. The idea here is that having someone knowledgeable about this stuff that doesn't have a stake in the outcome of the case is presumed to be nonbiased and, having knowledge of car repair, the mechanic's testimony should be good enough to rely upon. You'll see the same recommendation for a mechanic as your "expert" in the Colorado Courts Small Claims Court Guide at the bottom of page 6.

While the rules are more informal, there are things you do need to do and things that, while not strictly required, are nevertheless important things to consider when preparing your case. Some thought has to be made about how best to present each point of your case. I'm guessing that you probably did check the web site for the Colorado courts for the rules and any guides it may have. Most states provide a guide for small claims litigants, either written by the Courts, the state consumer protection office, or the state bar association. These guides can be enormously helpful for a person in a small claims case. While it's too late to help you in the case you just completed, this information may come in handy should you find yourself in small claims court again.

Also, the two schools in Colorado, the University of Colorado School of Law in Boulder and Denver University Law School (in Denver, of course) often offer clinics available to provide free legal help to the public. The information and advice you get will be from law students who have taken litigation courses and are supervised by either by a faculty memer, who will be a lawyer, or by an outside lawyer volunteering to be the advisor for the students. The students can look over what you have for your case and tell you how strong it is and what other evidence or witnesses you might want to get to make your case stronger. So if you live reasonably close to the Denver-Boulder metro area, that may be a good resource for you.

If you want to win your case, put in the time to do a good job of preparing for it. Good preparation makes for a better case and helps ease anxiety you may have about talking in court. Read up on the rules, read whatever guides are available, and if a law clinic is available near you, you may want to take the time to visit the clinic.

You might even present your case to friends or relatives who don't know much about it and see if they clearly understand your case and what questions they'd like answered if they were making the decision. If they have those questions, the magistrate judge may also want to know that, so having that input can assist you in covering up gaps in your case that you didn't notice yourself.

 

[adjusterjack]

Additional question from Goofy:

I filled a subpoena in small claims court, for the defendant to produce a complete copy of communication and my file, as it relates to my repair of my vehicle. The initial trial was 1-17 and the subpoena was set for the same date and time. Upon arrival to trial, the judge was unavailable, and the court date was pushed to 2-1. No documents were provided as per the sibpoena on 1-17. I contacted the court numerous times, but never recieved a reasons until the day of the new trial, stating it was OK for the subpoena to be fulfilled at the new court hearing although I never requested a change to the date, nor was never formally informed.

Since the trial is over, I am curious if there is any recourse I have on not having received the items as requested, against the defendant and or court itself.

Additionally, the subpoena was obviously incomplete as there were only 5 documents included, while the defendants exhibits included quite a few pictures of my vehicle during the repair process.

Too late to do anything about the defendant's recalcitrance.

If you think the judge made an error in interpreting the facts or applying the law you can file an appeal.

Colorado Judicial Branch - Self Help - Small Claims or County Civil Appeal (state.co.us)

You have 14 days from the date of the judgment.

I suggest you carefully study the rules as an appeal is not a do-over and the appellate rules are not informal.