Judge discourse moves that enact and endanger procedural justice

<jats:p> In this article we identify discourse moves in small claims court that have the potential to affect procedural justice – the sense that a litigant has been treated fairly and respectfully. We focus on what judges do as they address three communicative challenges that are part of small claims court judging: (1) handling the potential for appeal, (2) keeping trials short while treating litigants fairly and (3) managing the paradox of informal justice. After providing background on procedural justice and how it links to facework, and describing small claims court procedures and research, we characterize the trial data and our discourse approach. Then we explicate the discourse moves judges employed to address each of the communication challenges. This article concludes by suggesting the likely consequences of judges’ moves for litigants’ perceptions of procedural justice. </jats:p>