Small Claims Online Dispute Resolution Launches in Utah as Lawyers Ponder Disruption
Online dispute resolution (ODR) for small claims court in the United States shouldn't disrupt lawyers' practices, but provide better access to people who need to settle small dollar-amount disputes, said lawyers.
September 24, 2018 at 12:00 PM
4 minute read
A small claims court in a suburb outside of Salt Lake City has rolled out an online dispute resolution pilot program, and a Utah State Courts spokesperson said there are plans to extend the online program to all small claims courts statewide. Lawyers working with the project say that online dispute resolution for small claims court in the United States shouldn't disrupt lawyers' practices, but instead provide better access to people who need to settle small dollar-amount disputes.
On Sept. 19, the West Valley City Justice Court in Utah unveiled an online dispute resolution (ODR) program for its small claims court. Participants file the small claims affidavit and summons and send it to the West Valley City Justice Court. Filers will be sent an email containing a registration link, and registration must be completed no more than seven days after filing the summons and affidavit.
A defendant has 14 days after receiving the affidavit to register at the Small Claims Dispute Resolution West Valley City Justice Court web portal to settle the case. If a defendant doesn't register within 14 days, judgment may be entered against them. If the defendant isn't able to access a computer or the internet, they'll be excused from ODR and will settle the matter in a courthouse. If both parties agree to use ODR as a facilitator, a neutral trained to resolve disputes, will help the parties reach a solution.
The program took roughly two years to come to fruition. Geoffrey Fattah, Utah State Courts spokesperson, said they received feedback from mediators, judges and others on the program prior to releasing it to the public. He said the Utah State Courts is set to make the ODR portal accessible for all of Utah's small claims courts by the end of fall or by early winter.
“We are always on the lookout that we can bring justice services to the people,” Fattah added.
Brent Burningham, chair of the Utah State Bar's solo, small firm and rural practice section, said in an email that he doesn't anticipate it will have much effect on most solo practitioners or small firms, due to differences between rules in Justice Court and district court. “Rules of civil procedure applicable to small claims brought in the Justice Court allow parties, even businesses, to represent themselves. Thus, parties use attorneys less frequently in Justice Court than in district court already.”
But the Kaysville, Utah-based attorney could forsee a possible disturbance in the legal industry.
“One group of attorneys that may be more impacted than others is those that engage in high-volume debt collection on accounts with balances below the district court's jurisdictional threshold for amounts in controversy.”
However, Burningham clarified that he hadn't used the pilot program and doesn't know if it'll reduce debt collectors' workload by allowing their typical clients to bypass using an attorney in the debt collection process.
In Utah, the maximum amount awarded in small claims court is $11,000, which excludes court costs and interest.
Grace Acosta, an adjunct associate professor at the University of Ohio College of Law, said ODR shouldn't be “alien” to lawyers. She said online-based resolutions for monetary claims aren't new and cited insurance companies as an industry that already uses web-based portals to resolve monetary disagreements.
She sees the Utah program as “equaling the playing field.” On the benefits of ODR, she explained, “You don't have to go to court, you don't have to leave work, you don't have to hire an attorney.”
To be sure, ODR has been used by others outside of Utah to help streamline small claims cases. JAMS, the international arbitration and mediation company, has also zeroed in on online dispute resolution for “low to moderate value claims” by offering Endispute, a program where JAMS mediators are accessible online for a two-hour internet-based session for claims that don't surpass $100,000 for a flat fee of $500.
Modria is another online dispute resolution program that allows courts to provide “out-of-the-box resolution flows” for courts' debt, landlord/tenant and small claims matters, according to Modria's website.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllTrending Stories
- 1Read the Document: 'Google Must Divest Chrome', DOJ Says, Proposing Remedies in Search Monopoly Case
- 2Voir Dire Voyeur: I Find Out What Kind of Juror I’d Be
- 3When It Comes to Local Law 97 Compliance, You’ve Gotta Have (Good) Faith
- 4Legal Speak at General Counsel Conference East 2024: Virginia Griffith, Director of Business Development at OutsideGC
- 5Legal Speak at General Counsel Conference East 2024: Bill Tanenbaum, Partner & Chair, AI & Data Law Practice Group at Moses Singer
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250