What happens if a person does not pay for the sentence in a small claims court? The Small Claims Court in California say that they cannot collect the value awarded by any sentence that they deliver. What happens to the defendant if he/she is sentenced to pay the plaintiff but refuses to pay the claim? Is the defendant liable of further penalties? Should the case proceed to a higher court? The Small Claims website does says about "more serious steps", but it is not clear what these are.
Nope. Say I sue you successfully, and the court delivers a judgement that awards $1000 in damages. It is not the responsibility of the small claims court to ensure that the judgement is fulfilled. In fact, the debtor (person who lost) can outright refuse to pay the creditor (or the person who won). They are not in violation of any law at this point. However, the creditor can ask the court for options on enforcing their judgement, and these can include, but are not limited to: Garnishing wages Providing a court order Seizure of assets (through court sheriff, don't use this yourself or you end up getting into criminal matters) and others to enforce the judgement. The debtor isn't liable for refusing, unless when they are in violation of a court order. Violating a court order is a criminal matter, and the debtor could possibly be found guilty of contempt of court. Oh, and the case wouldn't move on to a higher court. Cases go to a higher court when an appeal is made, generally when there has been an error in enforcing the law. You also need to be provided leave to make an appeal.
Hit and run, with no injury, is subject to Vehicle Code 20002. A person who fails to stop and notify has committed a misdemeanor and, upon conviction thereof, shall be punished by imprisonment in the county jail not exceeding six months, or by a fine not exceeding one thousand dollars ($1,000), or by both that imprisonment and fine. The description of the crime is that The driver of any vehicle involved in an accident resulting only in damage to any property, including vehicles, shall immediately stop the vehicle at the nearest location that will not impede traffic or otherwise jeopardize the safety of other motorists. Moving the vehicle in accordance with this subdivision does not affect the question of fault. The scary language of the statute notwithstanding, one element of the crime is missing, namely knowingly doing so. The corresponding jury instruction incorporates the full law including caselaw requirements, in particular To prove that the defendant is guilty of this crime, the People must prove that: While driving, the defendant was involved in a vehicle accident; The accident caused damage to someone else’s property; The defendant knew that (he/she) had been involved in an accident that caused property damage [or knew from the nature of the accident that it was probable that property had been damaged]; AND The defendant willfully failed to perform one or more of the following duties: (a) To immediately stop at the scene of the accident; OR (b) To immediately provide the owner or person in control of the damaged property with (his/her) name and current residence address [and the name and address of the owner of the vehicle the defendant was driving] This means you either need to learn how to defend yourself in court against an experienced lawyer (if you didn't know this aspect of the law, you probably shouldn't assume you can carry off this defense), you give in and plead guilty and take your chances, or you hire an attorney. Just saying &quot;I didn't know&quot; is not good enough, so lawyer up.
If the stranger was aware of the reward offer at the time of the return you have a legally binding contract - you made an offer to the world, money for return of the phone, and they accepted it by returning it. If they were ignorant of your offer and returned the phone then there is no contract and you do not have to pay: albeit at the cost of being a jerk. Of course, if they obtained your phone unlawfully (e.g. by stealing it) the contract is void.
Does the law or judge ever make exceptions for events such as this? From a legal standpoint, your friend is at high risk of being found in contempt and thus be sentenced to imprisonment. Your friend should have called 911 rather than violate the protection order under pretext of consoling her. Asking from the standpoint of whether judges ever do this or that is pointless. The answer would be &quot;yes, they make exceptions&quot; even in scenarios which are plain aberrant. However, a judge's departure of the law quite often is not a reliable standpoint for understanding the law, but the result of his/her ineptitude and unfitness for judicial office.
Generally speaking, ex parte communications with a judge (i.e. communications to which all parties to a case are not notified) are prohibited, both by law and as a matter of judicial and attorney ethics, subject to some narrow exceptions (e.g. applications for arrest warrants prior to the arrest warrant being carried out). Generally speaking, communications with the court (which is to say with judges or their subordinates) are made a matter of public record, and if the communication is about a particular case, all attorneys in the case must be given notice of it (if someone is not represented by an attorney, the notice goes to the defendant rather than their non-existent attorney). The attorney may then communicate the communication to their client, and generally speaking should communicate it to the client. I don't see anything in the question that suggests that this proposed communication would fall outside the general rule. But, the question isn't very specific and I wouldn't rule out the possibility that an exception might apply in a case with very unusual facts. Also, usually, a request to reconsider a sentence has to be made by a formal motion filed by the prosecutor or the defendant. Generally speaking, a third-party cannot file that motion unilaterally. A third-party or victim would usually only have input into the decision through the prosecutor's office. Third parties and victims are not generally permitted to file motions to reconsider sentences that have been imposed even in states with "victim's rights" statutes, but can publicly provide input to the court before a sentence is imposed, usually at the behest of either the prosecutor or the defendant. Furthermore, generally a criminal defendant has a constitutional right to not have a sentence made more severe after being sentenced the first time around. Reconsideration of a sentence once it is imposed may only be in the direction of leniency. Once a sentence is imposed, it can't be reconsidered to be made more harsh.
Short Answer If a judgment debtor is unable to pay the full amount of a judgment entered against the judgment debtor in a lawsuit, then the judgment creditor doesn't get paid until the judgment debtor is able to pay and the judgment creditor takes action to enforce the judgment at that time. To the extent the a judgment debt has an ability to pay as determined from assets and income which are not exemption from creditor's claims under the relevant state law, there are a variety of court supervised means by which a judgment creditor can involuntarily have that those assets and that income turned over to the judgment creditor. Many judgments are never paid in full. Long Answer Judgment Creditor's Rights, In General A money judgment entered in a lawsuit is a right of a judgment creditor represented by a court registry entry or piece of paper to use involuntary debt collection methods to obtain property (defined broadly) from a judgment debtor. Until the judgment is paid in full, the judgment creditor can continue to use these methods so long as there are assets not exempt from creditors, or income not exempt from creditors that the judgment debtor has available to them. Judgment creditors can't collect from someone who has no assets or income that is not exempt from creditors claims (a complicated list that varies from state to state and can be different as a general rule, in bankruptcy, in probate, and for special kinds of debts like child support debts). When a judgment debtor has no non-exempt assets or income worth that are cost effective to collect, the judgment debtor is called &quot;judgment-proof&quot; and the judgment creditor has no ability to collect further until the judgment debtor ceases to be judgment-proof. Despite the long list of options for judgment creditors set forth below, in practice, lots of judgments are paid voluntarily and lots of judgments expire before they are paid in full because the judgment debtor is judgment-proof or are discharged in bankruptcy. Formal means of involuntarily collection discussed below are the exception rather than the rule. This is, in part, because having unpaid judgments is horrible for your credit, in part, because collection activity is extremely disruptive to the judgment-debtor's life, and in part, because judgments accrue post-judgment interest which is often at a high interest rate so there is an incentive to pay it off sooner so that the judgment debtor owes less to the judgment creditor overall. Another factor is that most people get judgments against them because they owe debts that they don't have an ability to pay (e.g. due to a lost job) and the existence of a money judgment against them doesn't create an ability to pay. Voluntary compromises between judgment creditors and judgment debtors pursuant to agreed payment plans with judgment creditors not taking collection action way judgment debtors are current on payment plans are also very common, since they solve many hardships arising from formal collection for the judgment debtor and reduce collection costs for the judgment creditor. The relevant law of creditor's rights and debtor's remedies, with the exception of bankruptcy and a few nationally mandated exemptions from creditors is predominantly a matter of state law. For almost all practical purposes, the remedies available for failing to pay a federal court civil judgment are the same as those available for failing to pay a state or local court civil judgment. Typical Collection Methods Typically, a judgment creditor can: Impose judgment liens on real property owned by the judgment debtor (subject to a homestead exemption) and foreclosed on that lien to get the property in full or partial payment of the debt. It is also possible to impose a judgment lien and refrain from foreclosing and instead to wait until property is sold and collect from proceeds at a closing upon that sale of property subject to a judgment lien. Judgment liens have a very high priority in bankruptcy once they have been imposed on property and all formalities for doing so are completed. Garnish bank accounts, wages, and other amounts owed by third-parties to the judgment debtor. Set off money owed by the judgment creditor to the judgment debtor against money owed by the judgment debtor to the judgment creditor. Seize tangible personal property (e.g. cars, gold bars) that are not exempt from the claims of creditors from a third-party, and also some intangible property (e.g. shares of stock in a corporation). Compel the judgment debtor to disclose the judgment debtor's assets and income sources under oath to the judgment creditor. Imposing a &quot;charging order&quot; on a pass through entity interest like an LLC. Sue people to whom the judgment debtor transferred property without substantially equivalent value within the applicable time period to &quot;claw back&quot; those assets that were given away or sold in bargain sales within the applicable statute of limitations. Assets subject to liens or mortgages can be placed in receiverships pending their seizure in foreclosure sale. In unusual circumstances, a court can order that specific property be transferred or delivered by the judgment debtor to the judgment creditor in exchange for a specified credit against the judgment. Additional remedies are available to child support creditors (and in rare cases certain other creditors). For example, denying child support debtors driver's licenses, professional licenses, seizing tax refunds, and throwing the judgment debtor in jail for willfully failing to pay child support when there is an actual ability to pay the child support debt. But, no debtor can be incarcerated merely for inability to pay, if this is established. Collect from guarantors or sureties of the debt including insurance companies in the case of insured claims, and bonding companies in the case of bonded debtors for debts covered by a bond. Similarly, private sector employers are typically liable for all judgments entered in the course of lawsuits naming them against their employees for tortious conduct (e.g. accidents) in the course of their employment and can be a source of collection for a debt. In certain circumstances, usually due to a voluntary mortgage-type agreement but also for certain kinds of debts related to property, a judgment debtor has a lien on real or personal property before the lawsuit is filed that can be enforced as a &quot;secured debt&quot; by seizing the collateral, often, even without finishing a lawsuit. But, ordinary lawsuit judgments usually don't have these rights. Duration Of A Judgment Typically judgments confer these debt collection rights for a fixed period of time, often six years in a court of limited jurisdiction (e.g. small claims court) and often twenty years in a court of general jurisdiction (which typically also has criminal jurisdiction over felonies). Often, these deadlines for collection can be extended and renewed if payment is not made in full during that time period if the judgment creditor takes affirmative legal action to do so in the right time period near the expiration of the judgment. Often a judgment debtor who is judgment proof when the judgment is entered may somehow gain assets (e.g. winning the lottery or receiving an inheritance) many years later at which point the judgment creditor can use the judgment to collect from the judgment debtor. Geographic Scope Of Collection Rights Initially, a judgment applies only in the state where it is entered, but it can easily be transferred to another state in most cases, with a basically administrative effort. The &quot;full faith and credit clause&quot; of the U.S. Constitution makes it easy to transfer a money judgment from one U.S. state to another U.S. state. But, the process is trickier in a foreign country. Many U.S. tort judgments (including judgments for defamation) are not automatically recognized in most foreign countries and may have to be reproven to collect on a claim in a foreign country (at least in part and often with fewer damages) from assets only subject to the foreign country's jurisdiction. If a U.S. person diverts or transfers assets to a country where a U.S. judgment cannot be enforced, however, with an intent to harm that creditor or creditors in general, that U.S. person can often be held in contempt of court and incarcerated until those assets are voluntarily repatriated. Voluntarily Repayment A judgment debtor can voluntarily pay amounts owed on a judgment and often does so in order to reduce the amount of post-judgment interest that accrues on the debt. The judgment debtor and judgment creditor can agree to payment plans or other resolutions in lieu of using the formal rights set forth above. &quot;Voluntary&quot; in this sense, however, is a somewhat loaded term. In practice, the terms and amounts of &quot;voluntary&quot; payments of judgment debts are negotiated &quot;in the shadow&quot; of the judgment creditor and judgment debtor's formal legal collection rights and defenses, with the parties sharing in some kind of windfall arising from the fact that collection costs are reduced when there is a voluntary repayment rather than formal legal action. Creditors Rights Related To Gifts And Third-Party Trusts Judgment creditors generally can't collect out of benefits provided in kind for the benefit of a judgment debtor gratuitously by a third-party with no wealth or income traceable to the judgment debtor who has no duty to pay a third-party judgment. For example, a judgment creditor can't collect from a house owned by a wife prior to marriage and titled in wife's name and not derived from husband's assets, in a non-community property state, where a husband lives rent-free and with food and health care provided free of cost, with his wife, if the judgment debt is not for household necessities). Similarly, assets in a discretionary spendthrift trust set up by the parents of a non-disabled adult judgment debtor to which the judgment debtor did not directly or indirectly contribution, which makes distributions to the judgment debtor only by making purchase for the benefit of the judgment debtor that don't give rise to non-exempt property of the judgment debtor can't be reached by a judgment creditor. Fighting Money Judgments Judgment debtors can appeal a money judgment, or seek to have it set aside, for narrow legal reasons, most of which have short deadlines. Once there are no appeals left and the most common post-judgment motions have been exhausted, the judgment is final and there are far fewer ways to set it aside (usually, discharge in bankruptcy, expiration of the judgment for being too old, and the argument that the court didn't have jurisdiction to enter the judgment in the first place are the main ways to set aside a final judgment where the main deadlines have already expired. The relevant deadlines usually run from the date that the money judgment is entered even if the debtor was unaware that the money judgment was entered). A judgment debtor, pending appeal, can post a bond for an amount greater than the amount of the judgment (125% plus anticipated appellate court costs in Colorado) to prevent the judgment creditor from collecting by these means pending appeal, from which the judgment is payable if the appeal is unsuccessful in whole or in part. A bankruptcy also temporarily suspends collection efforts without court approval in order to allow for an ordinary liquidation and distribution of assets and/or reorganization of a debtor's financial affairs. A &quot;debt collector&quot; as that is defined under state and federal law respectively, has various legal rules that the debt collector must follow when collecting debts that result in penalties (although rarely the loss of any ability to enforce a judgment debt) if not complied with, which can be enforced by debtors, in class action lawsuits, or by the relevant government officials (often the U.S. Justice Department and state attorneys-general). Bankruptcy For Individuals A judgment debtor can file for bankruptcy, if this option is available, in which case the collection of the judgment is handled in the bankruptcy process. A Chapter 7, once assets available at the time of filing are distributed to creditors, discharges some, but not all, kinds of debts. Some kinds of debts (e.g. most intentional tortious conduct judgments including most defamation judgments) can't be discharged in bankruptcy if a timely objection to discharge of that debt is filed by the debtor in a bankruptcy case. More complicated kinds of bankruptcies are available for individuals under Chapters 11, 12 and 13, which usually involve payment plans and/or customized treatment of certain assets. In most but not all bankruptcies (even under Chapter 7), an individual debtor must enter into a payment plan to creditors in addition to giving up all non-exempt assets. Disposition Of A Judgment Creditor's Claims At Death One a judgment debtor dies, if there is a judgment outstanding, the judgment creditor can file a claim in the estate of the judgment debtor and that is paid to the extent that there are funds available and not exempt from creditor's claims in order of priority under the law. But, next of kin are not responsible for a judgment debtor's debts. Probate estates cannot file for bankruptcy, but a probate proceeding often has an impact on creditors similar to a Chapter 7 bankruptcy (although by no means identical). Entity Debtors The analysis is similar, but bankruptcy works differently and there are far fewer exemptions from creditors, in the case of a judgment owed by an entity that is a judgment debtor to a judgment creditor. A full treatment of entity insolvency proceedings is beyond the scope of a reasonable answer to this question. Entities filing Chapter 7 bankruptcies and availing themselves of non-bankruptcy insolvency proceedings don't have their debts discharged, but become shells with debts, but not assets since all of their assets get distributed to creditors. Entities that reorganize under Chapter 11 can arrange to pay creditors less than the full amount that they are owed subject to some basic ground rules which usually entitled creditors to at least as much over the duration of a Chapter 11 plan as the creditor would receive in a Chapter 7 liquidation bankruptcy.
You can read about your rights as a California tenant at http://www.dca.ca.gov/publications/landlordbook/catenant.pdf This is rather ridiculous: 1) No judge will evict someone for paying rent by mail. (I assume you have the new landlord's address.) 2) If the landlord cashes the check you mail then he's not going to be able to claim you didn't pay the rent. If he actually refuses to cash your mailed check then that's all to the good for you. 3) You can ignore any requirements imposed by the new landlord that aren't in the lease, just as the landlord could ignore any new requirement imposed on him by you. Even some terms in a lease can be ignored, because not all terms in a contract are legal. (This is especially the case in tenant-landlord law.) If you think there will be trouble then use certified mail.
Under U.S. law, a U.S. court can assert jurisdiction sufficient to enter a binding judgment (called "long arm personal jurisdiction") if the events giving rise to the lawsuit took place in the state where the state or federal court in which the suit is brought is located. Generally speaking, modern U.S. law allows the service of the summons and complaint that gives the court jurisdiction over the defendant if the events giving rise to the suit took place in the state, to be served anywhere in the world (or even in outer space, for that matter). But, the practical reality is that serving someone with process from a U.S. court in another country would be difficult and expensive, and enforcing the judgment if you win could likewise be difficult. There are also a couple of other problems specific to small claims court: Many small claims courts do not have the full jurisdiction that the U.S. Constitution allows them to have by virtue of the statutes that authorize them and their contemplation that proceedings take place predominantly or entirely in person. It isn't uncommon for the statute authorizing a small claims court to limit its jurisdiction to defendants that live in the same county. Most small claims courts are only allowed to enter money judgments subject to some very narrow and idiosyncratic exceptions. Most small claims courts do not have jurisdiction to order specific performance of a contract to sell a car, even though they could award money damages for breaching the contract to sell the car if those money damage could be demonstrated convincingly. These barriers particular to small claims court could be solved by filing suit in another state court that has broader jurisdiction. (The federal courts would probably not have jurisdiction over this case even if there was "diversity of citizenship" between the parties because the amount in controversy would probably be less than $75,000 unless it was a very fancy car indeed to be worth that much used.) Different consideration would apply if these facts and circumstances arose outside the United States, depending upon the jurisdiction in question.