85 N.E.3d 871
Ind. Ct. App.2017Background
- Harris leased a HUD‑subsidized apartment (rent $45/month) from Claystone/Lafayette; lease references HUD rules and a security deposit.
- Harris produced two handwritten receipts (money orders) she said prepaid rent; receipts lacked her name and were not admitted at trial.
- Lafayette filed a small‑claims action seeking about $38 in unpaid rent for February 2017 and possession; hearing occurred March 14 and was continued to March 16.
- At the hearings the court never swore witnesses, repeatedly questioned and criticized Harris (including disparaging comments about Section 8 tenants), and urged Harris to simply pay $38 to end the matter.
- Lafayette failed to prove unpaid rent by the March 14 hearing; it later conceded Harris owed no rent for Jan–Feb 2016 and that a $15 credit was applied toward Feb 2017, leaving $38 alleged due.
- The trial court entered judgment for Lafayette ($78.48 plus costs) and issued a writ of possession; the appellate court reversed, holding the court improperly shifted the burden of proof and violated Harris’s right to an impartial decision maker.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Lafayette) | Defendant's Argument (Harris) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether trial court improperly shifted the burden of proof | Lafayette argued the court’s comments referred only to 2016 months and confusion was corrected; Harris had effectively admitted liability for Feb 2017 | Harris argued Lafayette never carried its burden to prove she owed rent and the court required her to produce proof instead | Reversed: court improperly shifted burden to Harris; Lafayette failed to prove debt by preponderance |
| Whether judge violated due process by lacking impartiality | Lafayette minimized comments as non‑disparaging and not evidence of bias | Harris argued the judge’s questions and remarks belittled her and acted as advocate for plaintiff | Reversed: judge’s demeanor crossed impartiality line; due process violation requiring new hearing |
Key Cases Cited
- Trinity Homes, LLC v. Fang, 848 N.E.2d 1065 (Ind. 2006) (de novo review applies to questions of law even in small claims appeals)
- Morton v. Ivacic, 898 N.E.2d 1196 (Ind. 2008) (discusses review standards and small claims informality vs. burdens of proof)
- LTL Truck Serv., LLC v. Safeguard, Inc., 817 N.E.2d 664 (Ind. Ct. App. 2004) (burden of proof remains on party asserting claim in small claims court)
- Richardson v. Richardson, 34 N.E.3d 696 (Ind. Ct. App. 2015) (setting out when judicial conduct demonstrates disqualifying bias)
- Withrow v. Larkin, 421 U.S. 35 (U.S. 1975) (probability of unfairness standard for biased decisionmaker)