When Ken and Linda Goldman got married in February 2002, they had all the details down pat, including hiring a wedding photographer. The Virginia couple spent months interviewing photographers before deciding on a reputable Chantilly firm, SOTA Dzine.

Cost for wedding-day photos and album: $ 1,875.

The 18-month dispute that ensued? Not priceless.

"They promised us delivery of the finished product within two months," says Ken Goldman, 32, a publicist currently between jobs. Linda Goldman works in marketing for a major credit card issuer.

But the Goldmans say they didn't see proofs until late April; then, after ordering the 36 pictures they wanted in the album, months went by when all they heard was excuses -- the order was lost, leather albums were out-of-stock nationwide. By late November, says Ken Goldman, they had no wedding album and the company wasn't returning his calls.

"I wanted my money back; my wife wanted her pictures," he says.

The Goldmans filed suit for $ 1,875 plus court costs, alleging "services paid in full, not delivered as promised." Because the amount would exceed the state's small-claims limit of $ 2,000, they had to file in Fairfax General District Court.

SOTA's lawyer, Brian Ebert, says the contract never provided for "a specific time frame within which any services after the wedding will be provided."

The Goldmans, who represented themselves, started off on the wrong foot. At the first hearing last January, the judge rescheduled because the defendant was never served a summons. It's the plaintiff's responsibility.

Attempts by both sides to settle out of court then failed. From there, it was a downward spiral of missed court dates and bungled communications. At the third court date, for instance, the Goldmans arrived late because of a major snowstorm. Case dismissed.

In March, more than a year after the wedding, SOTA delivered the photo album. The Goldmans weren't satisfied. Ken Goldman says neither the album nor the photos were what they ordered. Ebert says the album and photos were what they ordered.

The Goldmans refiled the suit. An April court date was dismissed because of another procedural screw-up. They then filed a new claim. Then more process-server problems and a family emergency conflicted with more court dates, says Goldman.

Finally, at an August hearing, the judge set a condition to go forward: The Goldmans must pay SOTA's lawyer fees for the court dates they missed -- $ 400. When the Goldmans hedged and requested to see the hours the lawyer billed, the judge dismissed the case "with prejudice," meaning case closed, no refiling.

The lesson Goldman says he learned: "No matter how small the amount is, unless you're a legal expert, you need an attorney."

Ebert says Goldman's account isn't accurate or the full story. For instance, he says, the Goldmans waited almost four months after proofs were delivered to place their wedding album order. Goldman denies this. SOTA experienced some backup in filling the actual order as the busy season for wedding photography services was then in full swing. Last November, the company gave the Goldmans five free 8-by-10 prints as compensation.

"SOTA worked to fulfill the order as quickly as possible, but one of the prints that had been ordered did not fit properly," says Ebert.

By the time the wedding album was ready, the Goldmans had filed suit, says Ebert. "The failure of the Goldmans' lawsuits stemmed not so much from the fact that they represented themselves in court, but from their inability to make it on time, or at all, to the court on the dates selected by them."

Ralph Warner, an attorney and author of "Everybody's Guide to Small Claims Court," agrees this is a cautionary tale about the risks of taking your case to court unprepared. The Goldmans "never even got to the starting line. It isn't rocket science, but there are going to be important steps that you are going to have to take -- basic ones, like making sure the other side is notified is a no-brainer. But a lot of people don't know."

Tom Gordon, senior counsel at HALT, a nonprofit legal-aid group based in the District, says reform of the nation's small claims courts is aimed at making sure people like the Goldmans get past legal obstacles and get their day in court -- without hiring a lawyer.

"It is very easy for everyday consumers to have issues come up with home repair or wedding receptions -- and if these things are not resolvable in small claims court, they are really out of luck," says Gordon, explaining that rarely will a lawyer take a case that's for less than $ 10,000.

Yet the national medium limit for small claims courts is $ 5,000. Virginia's limit of $ 2,000 is the fourth lowest in the country. On Oct. 1, Maryland doubled its small-claims cap from $ 2,500 to $ 5,000. The District's limit has been $ 5,000 for several years, and it built mandatory mediation into the process -- another progressive trend nationwide.

Statistics show that in small claims court, the judge usually rules somewhere between the defendant and plaintiff, says Warner. Mediated settlements aspire to that, and are faster and easier to collect because both sides agree to the judgment. "In most of these cases, mediation would've settled it," he says, "even perhaps the situation with the couple and the wedding photographer."

Got questions? A consumer complaint? An unusual e-mail scam in your inbox? E-mail details to oldenburgd@washpost.com or write Don Oldenburg, The Washington Post, 1150 15th St. NW, Washington, D.C. 20071.