O'Barr's Lay Expectations

O'Barr's article Lay Expectations of the Civil Justice System interviewed nineteen plaintiffs in litigation cases processed in Denver during the summer of 1986, about their experience with and satisfaction derived from their dealings with the small claims court. The first plaintiff interviewed is Edward Atkin, whose motorcycle was damaged by a drunk woman and to whom was only paid part of the cost of repair for the bike. During his interview, Atkin had prepared his testimony or that of his witnesses; he seemed confident that the truth would see him through. Another case involved Mr. and Mrs. Winner, a couple who loaned $390 to old friends, who then defaulted on the loan. Though the Winners, uh, won their case and were awarded $400, the couple seemed dissatisfied with the system because they had hoped for some greater punishment to their old friends and were apparently unhappy that the small claims court could not inflict the kind of punishment (public humiliation and perhaps a greater monetary reward) that they expected. In the last case presented, James Parker is a man who owed his landlord $35 and was prompted tossed out, with his possessions seized. After two weeks of living on the street, he set in motion a suit against the landlord. When he was interviewed, Parker was unsure about the procedures of the case but seemed unconcerned about his case, or his landlord’s own case; like Atkin, he maintained certainty that the facts would come to light, and that he would be proved right. A theme in these stories is that people attributed greater power to the court than it actually possesses; also, plaintiffs seemed ignorant of the adversarial nature of the system, and did not anticipate any strong or convincing argument from their defendants. Rather, they believed that the truth would come out and that the plaintiffs would prevail.

What interests me is that both themes speak of a deep trust of the law and equating it to truth. Despite their litigious suits, these plaintiffs are not “with the law,” because they believe in the rightness of it and consider it more seriously than one attributes to a game. They are probably “before the law,” because they seem engaged in the idea of truth and justice – and they believe that the law will bring them that. Whether they got this message from the ever-popular (and cited by interviewees in the article) People’s Court television show, or have learned to trust the legal system, it is clear that the plaintiffs expect justice, and they equate that with the truth. Unfortunately, further dealings with the legal system may not always yield such optimism – or so we’ve read.