yes each party gets $500.00 plus whoever loses they pay the judgment I was on it in 2005
100k
$250,000 annually.
"From what I have found, no, Judge Judy is not Aunt Judy. Judge Judy is an American judge who takes public cases on television. Aunt Judy is someone else."
95 million dollars
From her deal with CBS, Judge Judy currently earns $47 million per season from her TV show.
An abstract of judgement in a criminal case is a written summary of the judgement in a case. The abstract of judgement will usually state how much money is owed to the winning party, as well as any other specifications of the ruling.
100k
$250,000 annually.
95 million dollars
"From what I have found, no, Judge Judy is not Aunt Judy. Judge Judy is an American judge who takes public cases on television. Aunt Judy is someone else."
From her deal with CBS, Judge Judy currently earns $47 million per season from her TV show.
The People's Court has a $500.00 fund for each case. For settlements less than $500, they pay the settlement, then split the remainder between the litigants. For cases greater than $500, they pay the settlement and give the loser $25.00. Either way, neither party can lose.
Officer Petry Hawkings Byrd.
The benefits of a lawsuit settlement work for both the plaintiff and defendant. The plaintiff may save on legal fees and the possibility of a losing case by just amicably agreeing to a mutual figure. The defendants could save on a judgment that would be much larger.
In a civil lawsuit, there are actual (compensatory) damages sought by the plaintiff, and these are decided by the judge or jury. The other type of damages that can be awarded are punitive damages, which can be much higher. Punitive damages are just what the term implies: punishment for the actions by the defendant. If the judgment finds that the activity by the defendant was knowingly wrong or negligent, the defendant is punished by a separate monetary award. In this way, companies and individuals do not benefit from illegal or unlawful actions by only having to pay what they rightfully should have in the first place. In some cases, the fact that a large number of plaintiffs experience the same loss or hardship is sufficient to establish a pattern of deliberate wrongful activity by the defendant.
Two things to know. First, if a person does not answer the summons and complaint in the time allotted, the court will let the plaintiff proceed with the case pretty much as if the defendant agrees with all the allegations and demands made in the complaint. The plaintiff will have to prove that service of the summons was made properly just so the court is sure that the failure to answer is not just because the defendant does not know about it. The court will schedule a proof hearing at which time the plaintiff will testify to the truthfulness of the allegations of the complaint. If the court is satisfied the allegations are true, it will enter a default judgment granting the plaintiff's demands as long as those demands are supported by the facts. Second, the court will not cut off a defendant from filing an answer just because the 20 day period has expired. All courts have rules that permit filing a late Answer provided there is some reasonable reason for the lateness. Plaintiffs's lawyers know that courts will allow late answers very liberally, so much so that they usually consent to a late answer without making the defendant ask the court to be allowed to file late.
Judge Judy expects a direct answer to a direct question & does not tolerate word-games. This would be fine if she was polite and not abusive herself. But she does not respect anyone herself so should not be in a position to expect it from others......much like a wayward cop who is caught abusing someone.....It's just that their position of authority DEMANDS that they exhibit fairness and objectivity.