[Shark Tank in the Media]

Nat Geo channel is running a weekend marathon of episodes.  So far 2016 Season 8, in order.    However, CNBC still lists the reruns (mostly 2018 to 2020 this week) every evening but Friday and Saturday. 

I forgot so many of the more bizarre, like the mail a potato through the U.S. mail with messages on them.  (It's Potato Parcel, and as far as I can tell they still operate).

[All Episodes Talk: Let’s Talk About Dr Phil the Show]

I'm watching the update on OWN from 2017 for Treva Martin.   On the first show she was sent to Origins for alcohol rehab, she was drunk the second she got off the plane home.   Then she had 2 DUIs in two weeks (so who bails her out?), kicked out of sober living, and a judge sentenced her to wear an alcohol-monitoring bracelet and GPS tracker.    She also has 'friends' bringing her booze (and you can order for home delivery, and mail order now).   

On the update show in 2017, she claims she only drinks a little, but she's totally blotto on the stage, and I want to know how is this woman financing her drinking, getting more cars, and who is bailing her out and paying attorney fees?  Yes, her enabling relatives.   

 By 2019 she wrote a book claiming to be alcohol free, and still claims to be sober.  

[S14.E01: LIVE!]

I ordered the Pizza Pack from Amazon.   You have to order carefully, there are others on "A' that are knockoffs.     Unpack the pizza device carefully, the little vent cover was hard to take out of the package, and it's what keeps the pizza from drying out in the fridge.   I ordered it right after the show, and it arrived by Thursday, so quick shipping.     I'm going to buy a frozen pizza to bake and try Monday, so I'll tell you how well it works.    Certainly better than having to scrape pizza off of a cardboard box. 

I think I'll mostly use it for storage, and then reheat in a skillet, or a microwave when I'm desperate.   You can put the entire container in the microwave also.   However, you cannot put the entire container, or the dividers that also can be used as plates in the toaster oven.

You can also microwave single slices on the triangle divider trays.   They claim it fits up to an 18" pizza.    The big advantage over a refrigerator zipper storage bag is that this can be reused, but a refrigerator baggie will probably be trashed.    

I tried two kinds of Screamin' Sicilian oven baked pizzas, pepperoni, and their cheese pizza, Bessie's Revenge.    I the slices cool off, put some of each in foil, and some in the pizza pack.   Reheating the foil stored crust was a little soggy, but the Pizza Pack slices (I reheated in the microwave, I'm feeling lazy today) were better.   The pack slices were just like they came out of the oven.    So, I like that one better than foil.   Plus I can reuse the Pizza Pack container many times, and the foil or ziplock will have to be replaced constantly. 

[S14.E02: Woobles; Banana Phone; Turbo Trusser; Stealth Bros. & Co.]

Sharks: Mark, Barbara, Kevin, Lori, Robert

1-The Woobles- kits that teach you how to crochet adorable stuffed animals.  You get yarn, crochet hook, QR code to take you to the instructions, $3 manufactured, and $30 to retail.   Most customers are adults.  They’ve sold $5.2 million in the first three years, and expect $7 million this year. 86% gross margins.   They want mentorship, licensing, going into new outlets, and working with companies that do characters (Disney, etc.).      They need to lower their costs of acquiring customers.    Kevin, Barbara, and Lori are interested.   Lori and Mark make the deal.

2-Banana Phone-banana shaped blue tooth phone, pairs with your smart phone, it is a speaker for music too, and some proceeds go to saving gorillas.  Both pitchers have been working this on the side for six years.   Last year $540k in sales.   $6 a unit to make, and sells for $40, pairs with your existing phone.  The Sharks say it’s too much of a gimmick or novelty item. Everyone drops out, no deal.

3-Turbo Trusser-Bird truss kit, sellers are wearing chicken and turkey outfits, cooks a perfect bird every time for chickens and turkeys.    It keeps the juices in the bird.  Can be used in air fryers, ovens, rotisseries, grills, etc. Chef Wonderful demonstrates.   Out of 11,000 units they had 1 return.    Cooks more evenly.  The two men have invented six other failed products.    Margins are 82%.   They looking for social media and marketing help.   Kevin makes a royalty deal.  

4-Stealth Bros. & Co.-safe and discreet way to carry medical kits for individuals, merges function with style.    Seller is transgender, and he needed to property store his injectable meds.   Works for hormones, or hormone therapy, diabetics, IVF, Braxton Fleming is very impressive.  They have sharps containers, different styles to hold meds, and sharps.  They offer kits and sharps kits in bundles of 4.  There are competitors, but this is more fashionable, and better organized, and there are different kits for adults and kids.   He sells only online, $110k this year, last year $140k, margins are fantastic.  His parents were entrepreneurs.     He’s the only employee of the company.   Lori, Kevin,  and Robert are out.   Barbara and Mark want to partner with him.  $100k investment, and $100k in loans, for 20%.   This is a great product, and I bet with the sales from being on the show, he'll have a hard time keeping up with demand. 

I loved the Woobles kits, and the Stealth Bros product, I know so many people that could use this.   Turbo Trusser seems good, but I don't ever make a roasted Chicken or Turkey.   I will not say how bizarre I find the banana phone device, and suspect they only came on the show for publicity, and hoping for a deal with some novelty company.   

Update on Beat Box, bottles of wine.    They now do individual single serve boxes, instead of big boxes.  

[All Episodes Talk: All Rise]

4 p.m. episodes-

First (2014)-

Furniture Feud! -Plaintiff/former tenant Aja Fendt suing defendants/former landlords Rebecca Emerson (Becca Seidl is her facebook name) and Tim Seidl  (now husband I guess)  for rent, furniture, harassment, security deposit, and false charges. Plaintiff only lived with the defendants for four weeks, and she claims she moved out after she saw defendants dealing drugs.   Defendants claim the tenant.   Plaintiff, husband and children lived in a rental house owned by her mother, house was put on the market, and plaintiff found the defendants’ place.

Plaintiff claims she moved in beds, crib, kitchen table and dishes.    However, defendant claims tenants only moved into their area room in the house with garbage bags of clothes.   There is no lease, defendant was going to have plaintiff sign a lease at the beginning of the next month.   

Defendants claim plaintiff didn’t move in beds, because they furnished the beds.   Defendants deny that plaintiffs ever gave them rent, security deposit, and they furnished the apartment.  

Plaintiff’s story is there was an argument with defendants, she alleged they were selling drugs out of the garage, so plaintiff called the police.   Defendant says he was afraid for their safety, and the kids, after plaintiff husband threatened to kill people. Defendants changed one lock, and police told them they couldn’t evict the plaintiffs.   Defendants and children moved to a relative’s house to get away from the plaintiffs.       Later the police came to the house, and there was a protective order banning the defendants from their own house.  

Defendant husband says when the plaintiffs left, they only left a couple of TVs, and mattresses that the defendants had furnished, and garbage.    However, there is a facebook message about the mattress being given to plaintiffs.  There is also a kitchen table loaned to plaintiff.  

Defendants lived in the basement level, and plaintiff and family lived on the main floor.  

JJ gives the plaintiff five days to pick up their property with a marshal’s help, everything else dismissed.

Deportation and Disability -Plaintiff Michelle Quiterio suing  defendants Sara Ulloa and her daughter,  Noehmi Galan, for a settlement owed to her husband, that they were holding for plaintiff.  Husband was deported before he could receive the settlement.   Plaintiff’s husband received the settlement of $9700 while he was in Mexico, wife cashed the check with husband’s POA, spend some, and only had $5,000 left.    The settlement was for a disabling back injury while in the U.S.

Because plaintiff and husband didn’t have a bank account, so plaintiff asked Ulloa to keep the money in her account for her, but Ulloa doesn’t have a bank account.   So, defendant Ulloa suggested that since her daughter had a bank account, that she would hold the $5,000 left from the settlement (what an amazing coincidence, it’s the same amount as the limit in JJ’s court).    Then, the husband returned to the U.S. after two years, and wanted the $5,000.   

Husband was a salesman in Mexico, and that didn’t injure his back. 

Wife hasn’t worked for three years.    She did receive public assistance, and didn’t want the money to get confiscated to repay her benefits.   Plaintiff claims defendant’s house was raided by police, and money was confiscated.   

Either defendants were hiding the money from the government for plaintiff to avoid benefits being ended, or defendants stole the money.  Defendants claim they never had the $5,000.

Plaintiff case dismissed.

Second (2014)-

Landlord Scammed? -Plaintiff/former tenants Whitney Turnbull and Samuel Robles are suing defendant/former landlord Fred Kaczmarek for the return of their security deposit.  $1645 was security, and defendant wants $864 to pay for damages.   

The pictures at move out aren’t bad damages, minor stuff.   Defendant denies their dog chewed anything.   Previous minor dog damages were fixed before signing the third lease, and defendant agreed they were done properly after a mutual walk through.   There are texts from defendant saying the damage repairs between lease year 2 and year 3, that damage repair was acceptable.

When JJ tells defendant not to use “basically”, he agrees, and then uses “basically” in every single sentence, multiple times.   I hate the defendant for that.

Defendant claims the walk through was not to resign the year 3 lease, but a move out walk-through, and then plaintiff woman changed her mind and they decided to stay and resign the lease.

Text messages say defendant let plaintiffs out of the lease, and defendant claims there was domestic violence.  Right after resigning the lease for year 3, defendant let plaintiffs leave early.

Security back to plaintiffs $1650, defendant case dismissed.  

Injured Pleasure Horse -Plaintiff/buyer Lori Harl and daughter Jessica Hickman suing defendant/seller Ladonna Hulsey over the health of a horse plaintiff bought for the mother.  

Horse was purchased in Tehachapi, CA. and defendant had three horses.   Plaintiff claims horse was lame and wants her money back.   Before purchase, plaintiff daughter rode horse in the round pen for a while, and testifies she never has a vet check on any horse she’s purchased. 

 Judith Harniman, plaintiff’s witness, was another boarder at the boarding stable defendant keeps her horses at.   Plaintiff witness rode horse before the sale, because she was planning to buy the same horse.   Plaintiff witness arranged for a vet check on the horse, and pre-purchase exam (PPE), and after vet said horse had a failed exam on one leg, plaintiff witness passed. Plaintiff witness says she talked to vet who explained the horse’s conditions.  

 As always, buyer says horse is unsuitable, and seller says horse was fine until after the sale to plaintiff.

Defendant had three other horses, but sold the horse the case is about the quickest.   (This isn’t uncommon, you may buy a horse to get it away from a bad owner, or because you think it might work out for a specific mode of riding, but for a variety of reasons, horse isn’t a match for you, and you don’t develop a working relationship, so you sell the horse to someone else).  

JJ thinks defendant knew horse was defective, and still sold it, but plaintiffs didn’t have a vet check the horse.  Plaintiffs claims horse trips, but have they had his hooves redone?  

Plaintiff case dismissed.

5 p.m. episodes-

First (2017)-

I Will Never Help Another Soul Again-Plaintiff Elizabeth Hartwig   suing former roommate, Cindy Leclerc, over a loan that was never repaid, missing property, and stalking.   Plaintiff, and defendant's family lived together in an apartment (with defendant's boyfriend, and her two children).   Plaintiff met defendant though defendant's mother.  Agreement was defendant would pay rent of $1550, and utilities were paid by plaintiff (they were in her name).   Then plaintiff loaned defendant $1500, and $288 for defendant's medical bills, and a loan for Christmas gifts for defendant's family, $1388.    No surprise, defendant remembers nothing about the loans.    Defendant claims she didn't give her children much for Christmas.

The iPhone plaintiff bought for the defendant was returned, but without accessories, so plaintiff had to pay for the accessories (another $256).  Plaintiff claimed she paid a hotel bill for defendant, because defendant had a fight with her boyfriend, and then defendant returned to boyfriend, and plaintiff moved out of the apartment.    

$2,788 owed to plaintiff so far for the iPhone accessories, and loans.    

Defendant claims plaintiff should have to pay the apartment lease, because she moved out early, claim dismissed. 

Load a Bowl of Cannabis Vendetta?!-Plaintiff DJ Anderson. suing former friend Timothy Milner for theft, property damage, and assault.    Litigants were in the pot business in Washington state (for medical at that time, now all are recreational.  Litigants say once the recreational shops opened, all of the medicinal pot shops closed).    Plaintiff couldn't grow pot himself, and needed to find a grower, defendant was growing pot for plaintiff, and they shared it.    This was to fill the litigants' need for medical pot.

Both sides claim the other assaulted them, and threw the pot plants in the snow to die.    Plaintiff (who just called Officer Byrd, "Byrd") has a police report, without a real assault.   Dispute was that plaintiff was having pot grown in Washington, but plaintiff is an Idaho resident.   Defendant says it's illegal to grow pot for out-of-state residents, too close to a school, and near a mobile home park.    (However, school, mobile home, and residency questions existed before the fight).   Defendant claims plaintiff had a grow op.  

The fight was over who was smoking the other's supply of pot.   

Everything dismissed, because it's all incredibly stupid.

Lost My Checkbook!-   Plaintiff Bonnie Lee suing niece Amy Hook and her boyfriend Anthony Moore for unpaid loans, and the return or value for a TV.   JJ dismisses the old TV case.   Niece says she did get a loan for rent from aunt, $1300.   Defendant wrote $100 checks, to equal $600, and they would be cashed on niece's paydays.  Niece says she also baby sat for aunt's children.   

Then defendants lost their checkbook, and account was closed by bank, and then defendant would pay aunt the other half in cash (no, it makes no sense to me either), when niece could manage it.  Aunt only cashed two of the $100 checks before checkbook was lost, and account closed (I really doubt they closed the bank account over a lost checkbook, the bank would just issue new checks, and change the account number, and transfer funds).  

Aunt was still owed $1100 on the original $1300 loan.   There were two other loans for apartment security deposit, and Christmas money for niece's kids for Christmas, but $1300

Plaintiff receives $1100 for the original loan, but not the two loans made after niece wasn't repaying the original loan. 

Second (2017)-

Teen Fighting, Lying and Pregnancy-Plaintiff Barbara David and Alexxis Sandoval 17-year-old granddaughter, are suing defendants/her cousin Irene Sandoval, 16 years old, and Anita Morgan her grandmother for breaking her phone.   The litigants are teenage cousins, fighting over the same loser.  Defendant dated loser, and then plaintiff started dating loser, apparently there was some overlap, then plaintiff heard defendant was dating the loser again.  (Loser is named Blake).

A fight started with defendant and some other girl named Julia (she’s the sister of Blake the Loser’s other girlfriend), at Nicholas Park, then the plaintiff got involved in the fight too.      Everyone went to defendant's place, but she was staying at her aunt's house.  Defendant claims loser knocked up plaintiff, and that she later miscarried.    Defendant says about midnight plaintiff, and her posse of 20 girls showed up at the defendant's house.   Included in the posse was the loser's new girlfriend.     

Defendant claims plaintiff and friends attacked the car that defendant, friend, and driven by friend's mother, were in.    Plaintiff claims defendant had 15 people at the fight too.    Nasty defendant has to bring up that plaintiff was pregnant, and miscarried.  

Plaintiff claims defendant broke her phone.    Police report says defendant admits tossing the phone in the trash, and it's in the police report.     The grandmother of defendant claims defendant didn't break the phone, but JJ points out she took the police to the exact trash can where broken phone was.    Of course, the phone was an iPhone.   

(I have to say the litigants have the worst micro bladed eyebrows I’ve ever seen).

Plaintiff gets $699 for the phone.  

Alabama Landlord Shakedown-Plaintiff Liya Gonzalez suing former landlord/defendant Jasmine Horton for return of security deposit.   Defendant/landlord says there was a lot of damage, and improper notice of move out was given (15 days written notice required by lease).    Plaintiff signed the lease, and she lived in the single-family home with husband, and five children.   

Plaintiff's move out text was 5-days-notice, not 15 and written, and she didn't pay for the days covered by the lease terms.   Written lease has tenant notice crossed out, and 30 days was on the lease for landlord notice to tenant to leave.  The litigants won’t admit who did the crossing out, and change to 30-days for notice.     

Plaintiff asked for a walk through on move out, but landlord didn't come to do the inspection, and landlady claims she found damages later.    JJ's theory is landlady spent the security deposit.     As JJ says, declining to do the walk through cancelled any right to damages, because she had no way to prove when the damages happened, and landlord waived her rights.   

 Landlord didn't even bring a copy of the lease to court.   Defendant wasn't the owner of home, and rented it with her ex-husband, and never owned the home.   I wonder if she had the right to legally lease the house?   Defendant claims she sent the letter to plaintiff, but there is no proof.   Plaintiff offered to have a walk through, but defendant didn’t want one. 

Under Alabama law, landlords have to document damages in 30 days, and this didn't happen, so former tenant gets double the security deposit. I bet the owner defendant was leasing from passed the damages along to defendant too, since she was leasing the house from the owner.

Plaintiff receives $2400.   (Double her security deposit).

(Starting Monday, the 5 p.m. episodes, that are the ones most people can view, will switch to 2012 episodes.  However, starting Monday the 10th will be back to 2017).

[All Episodes Discussion]

26 minutes ago, DonnaMae said:

Maybe not. You could probably leave your phone at home, fly to Brazil, throw your passport in the ocean, and flee into the Amazon jungle.

There are also a lot of countries that don't extradict to the U.S., even for murder.   Also, a missing adult is considered able to disappear if they want to.   If you're in the U.S., willing to get another identity, and never contact anyone from your past life, I bet you could still disappear.  

[Hot Bench - General Discussion]

New, 30 Sept "Turf Concrete Con Job" ( Nieblas  vs. Richey)

Plaintiff was a friend of defendant's wife, and she wanted him to do some handyman work, and hardscape exterior work.  Plaintiff also wanted artificial turf, and fence repairs.   Plaintiff suing for $5200, claims she had to pay $3000 to repair work done by defendant and his father-in-law.   

There is no written contract between the litigants, but there is one between plaintiff and the father-in-law.   

Plaintiff has over 118 pages of evidence she submitted to the court, and tons of pictures.  Dimango isn't happy with plaintiff's supreme court size evidence.   Since defendant's wife is her husband's witness, I guess plaintiff and the wife's long friendship is over. Plaintiff submits photos of the job done by the father-in-law for the case against defendant.  

Defendant is a mill wright, and not an electrician or plumber.    Plaintiff stopped the turf install, and pulled it out and hired someone to redo the underlayment and reinstall the turf.  Plaintiff also claims the texture on 2 walls in the one room doesn't match anything in her house, or the other two walls in the room, but didn't bring photos of any other wall to see the difference. 

Then plaintiff claims the credit card at Home Depot for defendant was misused. Plaintiff alleges that defendant charges thousands, and stole from her.   The defendant's wife says plaintiff was trying to ruin her relationship with her husband.    

Plaintiff pulled defendant off of the interior work, and later the exterior.    

Decision is $3500 to plaintiff for the grass, and other work she had to redo, and for equipment he kept that she purchased.  

Rerun "Escrow I Scream!" 2022 (Walter vs. Cabuang)

Plaintiff claims defendant breached a contract and says defendant owes $4500 for missed rent, because the mobile home in the community (plaintiff bought one other in the community already, to rent out) was in terrible shape.    Plaintiff wants $5,000 punative damages, and $4500 for missed rent, because she had to repair the mobile home.    Plaintiff purchased mobile home and lot for $88,000, def  List price was $202k, down to $90k, then offered $88k, and wanted to buy for $80k, and that's when the contract failed. 

Plaintiff wants the lost rent, transportation to the mobile home park, but she already owns another property there, so that's bogus. 

Plaintiff claims defendant said the home needed a new subfloor, and a new roof, new furnace and air conditioning, was filthy, had flooded, and was in terrible shape.   Water heater needed to be strapped, and plaintiff wanted furnace working before purchase. 

Plaintiff claims it would cost $10k to replace furnace (I find that ridiculous).   Defendant bought mobile home, and intended to sell it, and then move to the Philippines.   The deal failed because plaintiff signed contract, saying 'as is', and then backed out, and is suing defendant for breach of contract.    Plaintiff didn't own the mobile home, and so she had no damages.    There were liens, HOA fees, back taxes, etc. on the house, and the defendant's brother refused to sign the escrow documents.  

Plaintiff never closed on the house, it was 'as is', and so her claim for missed rent is ridiculous to me.  Defendant claims she paid the HOA and back taxes liens off, but didn't bring proof.   

Defendant did have the right to sell, once she settled the liens.  

Plaintiff could have walked away, but didn't because of the low price of the mobile home.

Plaintiff wants the $500 back she paid defendant for the furniture in the mobile home, but defendant paid that back to plaintiff.

All three judges say plaintiff should have walked away from the deal.

Plaintiff case dismissed.   

[Good Bones - General Discussion]

On 9/29/2022 at 6:53 PM, 65mickey said:

I am so confused by this whole set up. There are no weddings or events held in the B&B? So the weddings and parties all take place in the carriage house? Guests crowded into a tent with fake grass and the reception takes place in the small carriage house with a couple of tables set up. The area around this property does not look inviting to me. What am I missing here? 

In the commercials Mina said she finished the carriage house first, so they were using it.   The carriage house has three suites, and the main house only has five suites, maybe to have event rooms?   

There doesn't seem to be any parking either, so what are vendors supposed to do for events for parking, loading and unloading? 

I suspect that Mina bought the house with the reno figured in, to a certain amount of budget.    I wouldn't be surprised if part is sponsored either by certain companies to feature their products, or the production company.   

I remember when Flip or Flop did the summer series of at least 6 mega backyard renovations, and I think they said later that they were losers, but the production company wanted extra ratings.  So they paid extra for the backyard remodels with pools with dinosaur skeletons in the wall, outdoor TVs, kitchens, pools, covered patios with every amentity.   So, they did the regular remodels, and the extra extravagant back yards were financed for them.  

[All Episodes Talk: All Rise]

4 p.m. episodes-

First (2014)-

Pesticide Assault? -Plaintiffs Jim Diamond suing defendants Frank Nettles and Laura Roldan (married couple) over an assault on their street (they’re neighbors).   Defendant wife says neighbors were friendly for a while after they moved in, and .  Melanie and Steve the neighbors, greeted defendants, and claim plaintiff came over and threatened them over being friendly with neighbors and defendants. 

Plaintiff says a neighbor who was out of town for quite a while, asked plaintiff to watch for strange cars in her driveway, and defendant wife parked in the driveway, and plaintiff asked her to move. 

The dispute has been going since defendants moved in.   

Plaintiff was spraying weeds for a neighbor, and defendants crossed his yard, and confronted him on the neighbor’s property.   Plaintiff claims he had permission to be in the yard, and the neighbor asked him to take care of her property.   Plaintiff witness Marsh Brown saw defendants confront plaintiff on the neighbor’s yard.   Plaintiff witness says defendants and two other neighbors (Melanie and Steve) from across the street, arguing plaintiff, and so plaintiff witness got involved because it was 4 against 1, then defendant husband pushed him hard, and sucker punched plaintiff.   Plaintiff had finger marks from defendant grabbing his arm, and then defendant husband punched him in the head.

The pesticide/weed killer was sprayed on the plaintiff’s neighbor’s property, but it doesn’t touch defendant’s property.   Defendant man claims his dog got sick from plaintiff spraying his own yard (litigants properties are side-by-side) a month earlier.  

Defendant wife claims she saw plaintiff spraying her yard with weed killer right before he did the neighbor’s property.  I don’t believe it, and agree with JJ, if the defendants saw him spraying their yard from his yard, they would have confronted him then, and not waited.

I remember this case, and wonder what happened since?  I can’t believe the neighborhood is quieter now, unless the defendants and their friends Melanie and Steve moved.

Frank Nettles is disabled, with neuropathy, bad heart with 5 stents, and claims he charged over to talk to plaintiff.   As JJ says, “what did you tell the government to get disability money?”      Why didn’t this assault result in police charges?

Defendant case dismissed, plaintiff receives $1,000 for the assault.

German Shepherd Scare  -Plaintiff Joanne  Flournoy suing defendant Precious Greer, for damage to plaintiff’s car hood.    There was a loose German Shepherd, and when defendant saw the dog, she jumped on plaintiff’s car hood.  Defendant claims she asked permission to jump on the hood.   Defendant claims she sat on plaintiff's car hood, but plaintiff's fiance who was driving the car at the time, denies that.    Plaintiff fiance says he saw a little kid walking a German Shepherd dog.   Everyone standing around scattered, and defendant jumped on the car hood, and hood was badly dented.    

Defendant says she saw the car, and the group around it, asked to sit on the plaintiff's car hood.   JJ points out that defendant isn't tiny, and would damage the car hood.  

$1300 to plaintiff. 

Second (2014)-

Taxing Friendship- Plaintiff Natoria Parks suing defendant Amber Hicks over unpaid tax preparation fees, and bank fees for a bounced check.   Plaintiff says defendant wrote her a check that was returned for insufficient funds.    Plaintiff is a tax preparer, and defendant was her client.  Counter claim is by defendant, who claims plaintiff used the routing number on the bounced check to pay plaintiff's credit card bill, and that was reversed.   Defendant wrote the check to plaintiff, and wanted plaintiff to wait 7 to 10 business days to cash the check.  

Plaintiff received the check on the 8th, and deposited the check on the 13th, only four business days.  Since plaintiff deposited the check after four days, the check bounced.  Then plaintiff used the routing number on the returned check to pay her tax preparation charges.   However, the bank reversed the credit charges. 

Plaintiff receives $240 for defendant's tax payment.     

Exes Fight Over Child’s Bed – Plaintiff Eric Smith suing defendant/ex-wife Charlotte Smith over the cost of a child's bed that he purchased for their son.   They are divorced, have 50/50 custody.   Plaintiff has another girlfriend now, but defendant claims when the litigants were shopping for the son's bed, that plaintiff wanted to reconcile with her.   Plaintiff put the bed cost $1450 on his credit card, and the defendant agreed to repay him.  

When defendant says that the litigants were reconciling, plaintiff is shaking his head.  (Plaintiff has a girlfriend, and has never wanted to reconcile with the defendant).   Plaintiff has a signed promissory note for the bed.    Defendant paid $350.

$1200 to plaintiff.

5 p.m. episodes-

First (2017)-

Pekingese Chihuahua Mating Mess-Plaintiff Christine Dietrich-Morgan (owner of Pekingese male dog) suing neighbor/defendant Roy Johnson III(owner of Chihuahua female dog) over his dog boinking her dog, and the resulting puppies.   Plaintiff suing over unpaid stud fee, and breaching an agreement to breed their dogs.    Plaintiff didn't get her stud dog fixed because she wanted him to have his own sibling (that would be his own descendant, not sibling you dim wit).   Plaintiff claims the litigants agreed for the Pekingese, and Chihuahua to breed, and months later the Chi. had puppies.  Defendant claims Peke didn't knock up his Chi, and if they did, it would be vet bills for him, and that's ridiculous, so defendant claim dismissed.    

Defendant says his dog was already pregnant, but two puppies looked like the Peke, and he claims they all died.   As JJ says, daughter, Meshelle Johnson,  and defendant wanted to breed the dog, daughter is 12, so not legally responsible for this. (Daughter is as dim as defendant father).      Defendant says he came home, and the defendant daughter, and plaintiff were breeding their dogs (or not-stupid case).   Daughter testifies that plaintiff came on their property while she was there with her father, while the dogs mated.  

JJ doesn't believe defendant said he wasn't going to breed his dog, and only wanted vet bills after puppies died.   Sadly, the puppies seemed to have been horribly neglected also.    Both litigants are the worst kind of despicable backyard breeders.    My guess trying to get a crossbreed designer dog, they thought they could get big bucks for the puppies.   Defendant claims the three puppies died, and it would have cost $600 to save one, and he didn't have the money, so all three died.  

Defendant claims all three puppies died, and later says he gave a puppy to someone, but that puppy died too.  Defendant claims he doesn't like spay surgery, so his female has puppies frequently, and then gives them all away (Guess who I wish Officer Byrd would beat to a bloody pulp in court? I dislike the plaintiff, this was a planned mating of two dogs, to get sellable mutts, she's rotten too).  

Plaintiff case dismissed, and both litigants are dog abusing A-holes.   

Camper vs. Computer-Plaintiff Theresa Mugrace suing ex-boyfriend William Ansel IV for an unpaid loan to buy a laptop.   They also bought a camper together in 2014, and made joint payments for the camper.   Plaintiff wants money for a loan she made defendant for a laptop, about the time they bought the camper.   After $1690 in payments on camper, over 13 months, defendant stopped paying.  Defendant wants money back he paid on the camper.

Computer was $3260, and only plaintiff paid for it.   It wasn't until they broke up that plaintiff wanted loan payments for the laptop.   Plaintiff and boyfriend used the camper together, until the break up.   Plaintiff still has the camper, and still uses it.    Defendant had a garnishment against him, and plaintiff said as soon as the garnishment was over, then he would pay every payment on the camper, while she paid for the laptop.    However, defendant only paid 13 of the 22 payments for the camper, and then they broke up. 

$3260 to plaintiff for the laptop, plaintiff keeps the camper, and defendant keeps the laptop.

Second (2017)-

Sick Cat Travel Alert-Plaintiff Blair Buder wanted a specific kind of female cat (Devon Cat) from the defendant/cat breeder Rebecca Ansari, for vet bills, fraud, and a refund of the cat price.    Defendant says plaintiff wanted the male cat at first, then said she wanted the female cat, but it was sick so it couldn't be sold.   Plaintiff flew from California to Minnesota, there were two females, and one male in the litter.     Defendant says the cat had a cold, and she never offered the female cat for sale.   Defendant was not offering the other female for sale, because she kept her for breeding.    (this happened in Minnesota).

The plaintiff's witness is holding the cat.   Devon Rex is the breed.  Picture of cat is of the male, and text says it's the boy cat.   That she's buying the male is clearly stated by the defendant's text to the plaintiff, and plaintiff's response.   

When she arrived, the plaintiff demanded the sick female, and now wants to be paid for the medical care.   

Plaintiff is given choice of keeping cat, or giving the cat back, and getting a refund.    Plaintiff keeps the cat, and gets nothing else.  Plaintiff does get the registration papers for the cat.

96 Year-Old Wants What She Wants-Plaintiff Richard Perricone is suing his mother's granddaughter/defendant Nicole Bradshaw for not providing for his 96-year-old mother in assisted living, and for stealing his mother’s money.   For a time, the granddaughter was responsible for grandmother's care.    Plaintiff claims defendant stole money from grandmother, before she went in a care home. 

 Plaintiff took mother out of the NC assisted living.  Plaintiff didn't visit while his mother while she was in NC, including for her 95th birthday.   Plaintiff has a disabled daughter who lives with him, and his wife, but he still never visited the mother.  

Plaintiff says defendant wouldn't provide the grandmother's beloved Club Crackers (grandmother wants exactly 19 with each meal), and other items grandmother wanted.   Granddaughter says she bought what the grandmother wanted, and grandmother would then deny granddaughter bought the items that were right next to her.    Grandmother is now in a care home within driving distance from plaintiff/son.  Plaintiff claims he visits his mother three times a week. 

Plaintiff case dismissed.  (Audience applauds)

[Hot Bench - General Discussion]

New "Scratch That"

Lucy Wise vs. Robert Schiefer,  Plaintiff bought house without inspection, claims her realtor inspected it for her, and when she moved in the floors were scratched.   However, there is no proof that the scratches were done by defendant.  Plaintiff claims the scratches are too deep to repair, and the boards have to be replaced, and she wants $5,000 for the damages, for three rooms of flooring.   Plaintiff's sisters cleaned the house before plaintiff moved in, and she says there were scratches in dining room, and one other place.  However, plaintiff wants money to fix other damages on the floor. 

Defendant says there were two small scratches, and he thinks they were done by his movers.  I think they were from defendant not using the little felt pads on the bottom of the stools and other furniture.  Defendant says plaintiff didn't claim through the moving company, and is delaying.    Defendant says the two small areas he saw that were scratched would be easy to fix, and not cost $5,000.   (I had an acquaintance who severely scratched her brand new bamboo floors, she bought a little kit, and the liquid fixed it, and you couldn't even find where the scratches were.)    I call bull pucky on having to replace the entire floor. 

Plaintiff has two estimates, one from a company, and one from some internet source.   Defendant says the scratches are small, but plaintiff claims they extend through three rooms.   (My guess is she wants to replace three rooms of flooring, and have defendant and his moving company pay for it. )

 There are only two small sections of scratches, but multiple close up shots of the same area, and no longer distance shot of how big the scratched areas are.   I don't see the damages as caused by the movers, but by normal wear and tear, which could be avoided by putting the little felt floor pads on everything. 

Corriero wants to give her three rooms of floor replacement for two small damaged areas, and the $5,000 she wants.   Dimango is much more realistic, and objects to plaintiff wanting the subfloor leveled, sanded floors and releveled.    Corriero wants to give her $5000, and Acker and Dimango want to give her $1000. 

$2,000 to plaintiff from Acker and Dimango agreeing, and Corriero deciding in the plaintiff's favor, as usual.  

Rerun, 2022, "Rear Ending"

Cao vs. Memon. Plaintiff claims when defendant rear ended the car Mr. Cao was a passenger in, and went to a chiropractor for medical treatment, for $5,000 with pain and suffering.   Defendant says it's a scam,

Defendant says plaintiff was the driver, not the passenger as plaintiff alleges.    Apparently girlfriend didn't have a license at the time of the accident.   After the accident, plaintiff immediately consulted a slip-and-falls attorney, who sent him to the chiropractor for almost $5,000 in treatments. Also, plaintiff claims he didn't go to work after the accident, and is still unemployed.  However, plaintiff's text to defendant say he was at work after the accident.   

I agree with Judge Acker, the chiropractor bill is a gross exaggeration, and fraudulent, and no supported by the car damages on either car.   In fact there were a few bumper scratches, but on defendant's car.   

Plaintiff's car's minor damages were paid by the insurance company.  

Plaintiff photos show minor scratches on his bumper, and no other damage pictures. Dimango says plaintiff is a scammer, and exaggerating everything.  There are no visible scratches on defendant's car.   

There are no paid bills from chiropractor. 

Plaintiff case dismissed. 

[House Hunters - General Discussion]

I think the Washington state realtor said he has bad knees or something, so he didn't want to have to do stairs very much.   However, I'm getting cynical, so I figure when they're selling a perfectly adequate house for some McMansion, that they're really keeping the original house for themselves, and renting the other one out, or flipping it. 

[House Hunters - General Discussion]

Gretchen is a bartender and house hunting in Rochester NY, with her Mom, Fe.  Parents will pay 20% down payment.   She wants to live downtown, Mom wants suburbs.  She wants room for her pool table and gaming. 

House 1-$99,900, in the city. 948 sq ft, Mom is upset about stairs in front of the door.  3 bed 1 bath.  1 bedroom, and bath are on the first floor.   screened porch, and nice back yard.  basement wall need to be smoothed out with concrete, and floor looks rough.   Second floor has two decent size bedrooms.    I think it needs a shower bathroom on the second floor for roommates. 

House 2-$139,000, in suburbs, built in 1942, 4 bed 2 bath, nice kitchen, but no stove and fridge, lots of cupboard space, she wants a room for her pool table, Back yard is huge, and level, no deck.   Great upstairs shower bathroom. realtor thinks house will go for $180k.   Still almost half of rent she's paying now.   I like this one, no odd basement that needs a lot of work, and bathrooms on both floors. 

House 3-$129,900 in Rochester, Victorian.4 bed 2 bath built in 1890 1700 sq ft, move-in ready.   I love the sitting room fireplace, and living attached is big, kitchen is big, needs stove adn fridge, nice back yard, all fenced, ceiling has patched water damage, main bedroom upstairs is nice, and secondary bedroom is big, there's a full attic but it need insulation and drywall,   realtor thinks it will go for $140k.   Mortgage would be half her current rent.  

She picks #1 , I would have picked #2, or #3 if I could afford to finish the attic.   I wonder if heat goes to the attic?  If not that means a new furnace probably.  $126k was the selling price after a bidding war.  

I bet you mom has someone in mind for the daughter, and keeps talking about him.   And he'll be from their friends circle, or church.   

[My Lottery Dream Home - General Discussion]

I wonder how all of the home buyers David showed in Cape Coral and close by fared?  Also, this was supposed to be a Florida episode, but changed to Maine.     I hope all of the Florida home owners David featured are safe.   I know some were in Cape Coral. 

“Wonderland in Maine”.  Bath, Maine is where the Jeff and Gretchen are looking with an inheritance from the husband’s mom.  Jeff is able to retire, and she wants to write

wish list-They want to live on the coast.  2 baths , 2 bedrooms, 1 car garage, big kitchen, fireplace, heated driveway (if possible).    They currently live south of Boston.   

House 1-Garvey’s Gulch, not directly on the water, $719k, 4 bed,4 bath, 2 car garage, on 4 acres, almost 5500 sq ft.   What an amazing house!    I love how this one is decorated.   Kitchen is beautiful, fully remodeled and lots of granite, pool, main bedroom and ensuite on first floor, and second floor has 2 guest rooms, and second main suite with a huge ensuite.   Huge pool that’s fenced, huge deck.

House 2-Blueberry Cove is on the Kennebec River, Historic home.   1 car garage, 2 bed, 2 bath, 1650 sq ft, $799k, David warns it will have a bidding war, it has so much character. Marble living room fireplace.  Kitchen /dining is open, and beautiful, on the Kennebec River.   Another fireplace in the sitting room with

its own bathroom, so it could be a bedroom.   No space for visitors.   The deck over the water is spectacular.   

House 3-Maritime Mansion, it’s spectacular!   $890k, was the Maritime Museum (they built a new museum, and put this one on the market), 8 bedrooms 5 bedrooms 14 fireplaces, 8500 sq ft.   Parlor and other first floor rooms are amazing, original hardwoods, David says 5 staircases, 2 kitchens (1 prep kitchen, the millwork and the moldings are lovely, the main kitchen is spectacular.    The bedrooms are gorgeous, the giant deck is lovely, house is on a ½ acre, with a water view.  

They bought #2, I would have bought #3 but only with unlimited funds to maintain it.  However, I would have bought #1, because of fewer issues with the historic house. 

I loved all three houses this time.    I usually like only one, or sometimes two, but I loved all three this week. 

[Farmhouse Fixer - General Discussion]

I watched the end of Colorful Victorian, the kitchen cabinets, range hood, and stove were way darker than British Racing Green. 

New, "Salem Witch Trial House",They remodel the bedroom and bathroom of a home connect to the Salem witch trials, and Jon restores a 1950's farm stand.  This is the John Proctor House, his wife was accused of being a witch, he stood up for her and was hanged.  His wife eventually was released, remarried and that's the last anyone knows of her fate.  Their story was the basis of "The Crucible".   The house is a two story, very dark, house.    John and Elizabeth were cleared of the charges in 1711. 

https://salemwitchmuseum.com/locations/john-proctor-house/

The front stairs are narrow, original.     They're looking at a bad leak from the second floor bathroom, for the out of state homeowner.   Here's the website about it, it's been on a lot of TV shows.  The homeowner saw the house on a TV show, and felt compelled to buy it. 

The bathroom does have some plumbing issues, but the entire bathroom is ugly, 1970's awful remodel. Kristina must be kidding, she wants to paint the bathroom dark and moody to fit the era, they didn't have plumbing then. 

They look at the B&B that used to be the Stephen Daniels House built about the same era as the Proctor house.   

The bathroom is nice, but the shower tile is too dark, it will show every waterspot, and the same for the floor tile. 

I hate the dark paint on the fireplace surround, and mantle.    It looked more authentic before. 

The farmstand has  glass insert garage doors all around it, it will have seating, baked goods, kitchen area, retail.  They want to bring in chefs and do demonstrations. The couple want a big barn on their property.    Lee's Farm Market, they also have an assisted living building and memory care on the property and want to do equine therapy (miniature horses).  They want a two story barn, with the ponies on the first floor, and yoga and other activities on the second floor.    

I love the barn design place Jon goes to.  

The farmstand looks so inviting after remodeling.   It's sad to think some wanted to tear it down, and turn it into a strip mall.   The farmstand is gorgeous, and the barn is so beautiful.    However, I thought they wanted to put the first floor of the barn was supposed to be for miniature horses.    They're not going to get insurance to keep hay on the second floor of the 'barn'.   Also, I bet they'll need sprinkler and fire systems in the barn..  

[All Episodes Talk: All Rise]

4 p.m. episodes-

First (2014)-

Neighborly Plant Destruction -Plaintiff Christy Wilson suing defendants  Mark Fite and (wife) Cara Kelly over trimming vines that were growing on plaintiff’s property but grew onto defendants property, and  onto their carport, so defendants cut them.

Plaintiff claims defendants cut the vines on their property, but also damaged vines on plaintiff’s side.   The vines are all over the common wall, and down the length of the wall.  Vines went all over the wall, and into defendants’ carport, and onto defendants’ house roof.    The defendants’ moved in five months before this, and plaintiff about five years ago.   Plaintiff agreed to cut the vines, but wanted the privacy from having the vines on top of the fence. 

Plaintiff keeps arguing the vines on the defendants’ carport and roof have been there for years.   

Mice, bugs, etc. will love vines like the ones on the encroaching vines.  

Plaintiff case dismissed

Facebook Furniture -Plaintiff  April Lozano suing defendant Lily Jo Rodriguez (plaintiff’s husband’s cousin), for disposing of furniture.   Plaintiff, and her family, and defendants moved in with defendant’s house temporarily, and after plaintiff’s daughter said defendant pulled a knife on her, so plaintiff wanted defendant out.   Defendant babysat twice for the plaintiff, and after the second incident ended the babysitting by defendant.   

Plaintiff only had time to get her clothing out, but not the furniture.   This happened 2 years ago, and furniture was replaced by plaintiff. Defendant has sold the furniture on Facebook.   Plaintiff claims to have proof that defendant made a false CPS claim against plaintiff.   Since plaintiff has a daycare, she was also worried about more false reports.

Everything dismissed.

Follow the Money -Plaintiff Crystal Mounts suing defendant/ex-boyfriend James Pullen for half the cost of a camper and camping spot, and return of property, and money.    Plaintiff wants one year of the camping spot rent paid. 

Plaintiff has a total of eight kids, one with defendant, none of the eight kids live with plaintiff The other child is being raised by defendant, and his mother.    No property decision is made, because they weren’t married, and have no documentation about who owns what.

Plaintiff took out a car loan for $16500, when she was working, and put it in her bank account.   Plaintiff pays $100 a month child support, and is unemployed again.   Defendant says he’s never received a penny from plaintiff.    Defendant says plaintiff has been on social services benefits her whole life.   Defendant doesn’t have custody, but some guardianship through the state, and child has only medical benefits through the state.

Plaintiff says defendant emptied the car money out of her account, and defendant denies ever having a joint account.   Defendant claims he never took a penny from her, and he didn’t have access.

Plaintiff case dismissed.

Second (2014)-

Funeral & Family Fight – Plaintiff Kerry Magee suing defendant Patrick Bailey, for a loan to defendant for defendant's father's funeral costs, and an assault.     Litigants are half-brothers (share the same mother). Vernon, defendant's witness gives a lot of entertaining testimony.   Defendant says his father's funeral was paid for by union insurance, but plaintiff did give him $1300 for bills.   Plaintiff claims he invited the defendant to go to the Las Vegas NASCAR race.   Vernon the witness, was going along on the trip to Vegas, and claims plaintiff was going to pay everyone's way to the race in Vegas.  

Vernon the witness called hotel security, and claims it took two security guards to get plaintiff off of defendant.   The photos of defendant's injuries are bad.  

Defendant gets $2700, and that is $4000 minus the $1300 loan from plaintiff.  

Bulldog Stud was a Dud! – Plaintiff Dominique Urtecho suing defendant/family friend Miguel Aceves over an English Bulldog breeding.   As the title says "the Stud was a Dud!"  Plaintiff has stud, and they wanted to breed defendant's female, to get puppy.   Stud fee was $500.   Male was taken to female's location, a friend of defendant was to help with the breeding (not defendant's witness).   There was no litter resulting from the breeding, and therefore, no stud fee is owed.   

The breeding was by artificial insemination, by a co-worker of defendant.   Male is stimulated to produce semen, and then female is inseminated.  

Contract submitted by plaintiff, it says return service, but that didn't happen either. No puppies, so no pick of litter.  Plaintiff has bred her male twelve times, always at the vet's office, except this time. 

Plaintiff case dismissed. 

5 p.m. episodes-

First (2017)-

You Can't Take the Fireplace With You!-Plaintiff Samantha Torregrossa suing ex-boyfriend, ( the father of her son), Salvatore Geraci for an unpaid credit card bill, and for the return or value of a fireplace.   

Plaintiff left defendant for someone else, when that didn't work out she came back, and is suing defendant.   They lived together for seven years, in a home purchased by defendant.   They dated for ten years total.    Plaintiff never worked, SSMOO (Sainted Single Mother of One), says she was a SAHM.   

Defendant bought the house, paid for the house, and plaintiff paid for the appliances.    Defendant didn't pay for the credit card bills, but plaintiff never paid for anything or worked.      How does someone who hasn't worked in years have a credit card?   

Fireplace was put in house in 2014, it was a gift for the house from plaintiff's mother.   Plaintiff gets nothing for the fireplace.      For 3 1/2 years, plaintiff never worked, but only the appliances were put in by the plaintiff.   Appliances added up to $3500 (stove, microwave, washer/dryer fridge, and TV).    Two years after the appliance purchase plaintiff took off for some other guy, and then after the new guy didn't work out, plaintiff suddenly wanted to sue.

Defendant is a fire alarm inspector for the city of New York, and he pays child support.     Plaintiff looks really pissed she's not getting her $3500 back for appliances, and nothing for the fireplace.    Plaintiff moved into her grandmother's apartment, so no rent, and plaintiff and her mother are fake crying about this.  Plaintiff doesn't want anything back, just the money for the appliances.   

Plasma TV and microwave will go back to plaintiff, and that's all.   Everything else dismissed.  

Best Friend Split After Party Swipe-Plaintiffs Jorge Santos and girlfriend/fiancee Taylor Alens, are suing former friend, Quran Alhameed, for backing into plaintiff's car during a party.   (Plaintiffs have been dating for nine years, and she's 21).    Plaintiff says defendant backed into plaintiff's car leaving a party, and defendant says he didn't do it.   Defendant's insurance company information was given to plaintiff by defendant.  Ms. Arens paid for the repair, so that's why she's suing the defendant also.    

Litigants were at a party, defendant left, and plaintiff heard a crash, and defendant backed past plaintiff's car, but hit it.    Defendant claims he saw the damage to plaintiff's car, but didn't hit the car, and went in and told plaintiff about the car.   Then defendant gave the insurance information to plaintiff, and as usual, insurance had lapsed from non-payment.  Defendant claims plaintiff Santos' brother hit the car. 

Plaintiff submits the car repair bills.   Defendant never got insurance, and his car got towed, and is gone. 

$2,430 to plaintiff

Second (2017)-

$100 Basketball Bet Turns Violent-Plaintiff Richard Caldwell suing defendant Danny Copeland for an assault over a basketball game bet, and missing property.    Two years before there was $100 bet on the game, plaintiff lost, and never paid up.   The two men started arguing over the non-payment, and a fight resulted.  Plaintiff claims he was badly injured, and his gold cross was ripped off (cross was found by police and returned).   Police report is presented. 

Defendant was arrested, but is suing for a false police report.    Defendant claims plaintiff attacked him.  Defendant's case was resolved, and he plead out for a lesser charge, (he was originally charged with five charges) so his counter claim is dismissed.   Next time the plaintiff should pay his bets.   Since defendant plead guilty, his claim is gone.   

Plaintiff gets $2500.

Quick!  I Need a Pizza Oven-Plaintiff Wesley Miller contracted with defendant Jose Martinez to have an outdoor pizza oven, and other items installed, and it had to be finished in a week, and it wasn't finished.  Plaintiff hired someone else to finish the work.   

Defendant claims it rained 5 out of 7 days, and he was in the hospital too, for one day.   Defendant will have to return the money for the job. 

However, defendant claims plaintiff paid $1,000 deposit by check, and put a stop payment on the check, and he never received any money from plaintiff.    However, JJ has proof that the check was cashed already.         The check was cashed by defendant for $1,000, and there were supplies that plaintiff tried to return, and other supplies were dumped by defendant on plaintiff’s property.   Plaintiff had pay to get ruined materials hauled away.

(In the hall-terview the plaintiff says the defendant wasn't in the hospital, but was arrested, and in jail). 

$1,000 to plaintiff.   

[Hot Bench - General Discussion]

New 28 Sept, "Friends & Business Don't Mix"

"Seymour vs. Finley" Plaintiff loaned longtime friend $25,000, and fails to repay repay $34000 in two months, $9,000 interest.   Plaintiff had defendant sign a promissory note, but defendant says it was an investment, and he owes nothing.    Finley repaid the $25,000, but not the full $9000 interest, he claims he repaid $5,000 already and loan nothing.  (This was in L.A.)   Defendant inherited a mail box business from his late dad, and repaid two earlier loans to plaintiff.     

Corriero does exactly what I suspected he would, and claims the interest of $9k for two months is usury, and illegal (except in some states).   Much as I dislike Corriero's opinions, $9,000 interest for two months on 25,000 is ridiculous, defendant might have received a better interest rate from his neighborhood loan shark.   

There is proof of the loan, proof of repayment of the loan, but no proof defendant repaid any interest. 

Enforcing 36% interest is illegal.   So, plaintiff will get $2500 interest and that's all.

$2500 to plaintiff for 10% interest.  

Rerun, 2022 "Overpower of Attorney"

"Merrill vs. Maher"

Plaintiff was incarcerated, and gave his mother's power of attorny to his cell mate's fiancee, and she changed his passwords, and paid herself what she wanted.    

Plaintiff wants to be repaid for fraudulent charges, and phone charges.   Defendant only worked on the financial account for one month, paid herself $1,000 to handle plaintiff's fianances.   Agrement was plaintiff would pay defendant $300 phone bill, and $50 to  defendant's boyfriend's commissary account.      Plaintiff is still out of pocket $3500 after getting some charges cancelled.    

Plaintiff says he's still locked out of some of his accounts, due to defendant changing the passwords.  $1100 Zelle payment,  Defendant admits she changed his passwords and locked him out of his accounts.   Defendant stole a lot from plaintiff.  

I find it interesting that before defendant handling his accounts, he had an accountant doing the same thing.   I've never needed a business manager, so he must have a lot of finances to handle. 

Plaintiff receives every penny he asked for, $  .   After the verdict, and a lecture from Acker and Dimango, defendant stomps out of court. 

[No Demo Reno - General Discussion]

I've seen the two level counters fairly often.   My subdivision is 1/4 8 to 10 year old houses, and a majority of them have the two tiered peninsulas.   The other 3/4 of the houses are built since 2016.     A lady who bought right before I did has a two tiered counter, and her house is from 2017.  My house is 2018, and has a flat one level granite peninsula.   

A friend who is a contractor for new builds has a flat counter peninsula, with the sink in it.   His wife hates it, because when the kids use the breakfast bar, they slide their dishes right into the sink.   Fortunately they use melamine/plastic dishes for the kids in the morning, so they don't break. 

I think a lot is the builder's design choice.  

I like to watch reruns of this show, just to watch the quality of the contruction, and the designs the homeowners seem so happy with.   

[House Hunters - General Discussion]

The woman moving from Las Vegas to Houston was interesting.  She certainly had a compelling background, and was such a success.     I really liked her dad.   

I liked the first and second properties.    Her son was so much fun.    I like that they bought house #1that fits all of their needs, and at $425k (I think that was the one, I was switching back and forth from hurricane coverage), but she had to bid over, and settled at $500k, or some posters say $550k.    I hope she loves her house, and all of them are very happy living there.   (Thanks to stewed squash for the price update). 

I didn't like anything about the third property, 

(apparently watching Ian coverage interfered with paying attention to the actual episode, sorry about that). 

About 2011 an acquaintance was buying a house.   It was priced low, $115,000 as I recall.   It was an estate sale, and the adult siblings priced it about $10k under appraised value.   They thought they would get a bidding war.   The sellers were wrong, and my acquaintance was the only offer, and she wanted her closing costs paid, and they agreed to get rid of the property.     

The sellers apparently were ticked about not getting more money, because at the closing table, one sibling said at the end that 'you better hurry, the utilities are getting cut off today when the utility company closes'.    My acquaintance grabbed her competed paperwork, and the realtor led her to the utility company, and they got there about 30 minutes before the utilities would have been shut off, and she would have had to pay extra to get them turned on, and only during regular business hours.    So, some bidding wars just don't happen. 

Locally houses were going for way over appraised value, often for cash, but that seems to have stopped.  

[Halloween Baking Championship - General Discussion]

I really enjoyed seeing the mazes.   

I loved Zac's costume, and Carla and the clippers.

It was time for Justin and Margarita.      

[All Episodes Talk: All Rise]

4 p.m. episodes-

First (2014)-

Uninsured Motorcycle Crash! – Plaintiffs (motorcycle owner) Michell Beram is  suing defendant Charles “Chad” Pocher for crashing the motorcycle.    Plaintiff flips motorcycles, bought for fix up and resale, Defendant was going to buy the motorcycle, went on a test drive, and crashed it.  Motorcycle was not insured.   Witness Josh Ostrander works with defendant, and is friends with plaintiff.   (Huntington Beach, CA).

Josh invited defendant over to plaintiff’s house, and Chad wanted a faster motorcycle than his current one, asked plaintiff if he could ride the motorcycle and maybe buy it on payments.   Chad got on the bike, was told to stay in the neighborhood, and defendant crashed the bike.    Defendant has insurance on his current bike.    Plaintiff only had insurance on the bike he rode a lot, not the sale bike in the case.

Chad was riding on Pacific Coast Highway, way out of the neighborhood, took a turn on a new tire, and bike fell in turn.   Chad claims he was going at a reasonable speed, and claims he hit an oil slick. My guess is Pacific Coast Highway is well out of plaintiff’s neighborhood.   

Judging from the defendant witness, Margaret Pocher, waving and jumping around in her seat, Chad brought his mommy to court.    Estimate from plaintiff is $6985, demand to defendant is that amount.  Defendant says plaintiff wanted to do cosmetic repairs to the motorcycle, not mechanical repairs, and sell it at an inflated price to someone else.  

There are two ways to fix the bike, for $3,000 to do cosmetic only, and commit fraud.   The other way is to spend almost $7,000 on it and it would be safe.    Plaintiff claims frame was intact, but bike was safe.

Plaintiff only paid $3,000 deposit to fix the bike, and it’s at the shop now.   Motorcycle cost $6400 when plaintiff bought it.

Plaintiff says he could sell bike for $7000 to $7200, after it's repaired.

Plaintiff gets $1500 , half of what he wanted.

Crash After Bible Study  -Plaintiff Jennifer Romero suing defendant Aaron Ballou after he hit her parked car, while he was on his way home from Bible Study.    Defendant says it was plaintiff's fault, because of bad parking.     Defendant did not have a driver's license, or insurance, and he wanted plaintiff's insurance information.   Accident was around 11 p.m., on Saturday night, for a bible study.    What bible study goes to 11 p.m.   Defendant came around a curve, hit plaintiff’s parked car, and he claims it was parked out in the road. 

How could defendant have been watching the road, and still hit a stationary object?    

Plaintiff receives $4,000.

Second (2014)-

Teens in Tight Quarters! -Plaintiff/former roommate Jesse Waite suing defendants/former roommates Brianna Zumbrum and Daniel Ramirez, both side demanding property damages.  Plaintiff wants all remaining rent.       All three litigants are former high school friends, who moved in together, and are fighting over pets, girlfriends, and property damage.   Plaintiff moved his girlfriend and a Labrador in, and defendant Ramirez says both were irritating, and so he left.   There was one bathroom, attached to the bedroom, so everyone had to go through the bedroom to the bathroom. .   Defendants were sleeping in a bed in the living room.    Defendant woman moved out after plaintiff tried to fix defendant boyfriend up with some woman.  (This was in California).   

When defendant Brianna moved out, the two men decided to live there together, and up their rent payments by $200 each.   Plaintiff’s girlfriend moved in at least two full days a week.    Defendant Daniel says plaintiff’s girlfriend stayed over every week, for several days, and the dog moved in full time.   Then, plaintiff moved in a couch in the living room, and kept locking the bedroom door, so no bathroom access for defendant.   Case against defendant Brianna dismissed.   

Plaintiff wants the $1480 a month rent for the remaining months on the lease.  Defendant Ramirez has to pay half of rent for four months, the rest is on plaintiff.  Defendant paid pet deposit, one-third each $750 each.    

$2150 to plaintiff, for four months from defendant Ramirez.  

Tattooed Lip Infection! -Plaintiff/lip tattoo client Elina Khutinaeva is suing defendant/cosmetologist Kelli Ho, over a serious infection after a lip tattoo by defendant.   

A twist is that the plaintiff wanted her lip tattoo from a defendant who does eyelash extensions, not lip tattoos.      Plaintiff claims the defendant was injecting Novocaine, and that requires a nursing license, or other certification.   However, JJ says that’s hearsay.  

Plaintiff claims a few days after the procedure, she woke up with infected lips, but didn’t go to the doctor until 15 days after the procedure.    Doctor’s report says mild possible infection, and cold sores, and prescribed a mild ointment to help the problem. 

Plaintiff case dismissed.

5 p.m. episodes-

First (2017)-

Home Profits Snafu!-Plaintiff Julia Barrera , is suing her cousin, Joe Rea,  for the profit from the sale of a home.  Plaintiff bought a home, put house in defendant/cousin's name because he had better credit, and would get a better interest rate.  Plaintiff claims she put down $10,000, and defendant never put a penny down.   Plaintiff lived in home for 17 months, made the mortgage payments, and has receipts for that period.    Defendant claims he made 3 payments.   Plaintiff first claimed she made 21 payments, but she only made 17 payments.   House was sold in 2015, by defendant cousin, and he paid nothing to the plaintiff.   Defendant's profit was $20k, after commissions, and taxes. Defendant's $20k profit was reduced by the $3k plus the three payments defendant made.      

Defendant never paid the $10k down payment, but made $17k in profits after his payment.     Defendant says he's an investor, and made the investment to profit, but was on his credit.    Defendant swears plaintiff was supposed to refinance the mortgage into her name after two years, but plaintiff claims defendant kicked her out, and sold the house.    Defendant claims he paid her $4k right into plaintiff's bank account, but has no proof.   Plaintiff's down payment came from her divorce settlement of $39k, so that's where the $10k down came from.    I wonder if plaintiff ever tried to get a mortgage in her own name?   Plaintiff moved out in May, and house didn't sell until August.   So, if plaintiff was going to get a mortgage on the house, she would have had plenty of time to do that.  

Plaintiff will receive the $5k court maximum payment, but there was no contract to split the profits.    

Can You Find the Scam?-Plaintiff Mary Mendoza suing her former friend, Lisa Fleming, for a bad check she cashed for defendant, and an antique table.    Defendant was a friend of plaintiff's son, and defendant needed a place to stay for a while.   Defendant needed a social security payee, and two checks were issued to plaintiff each month, because plaintiff was landlady (the payee program pays half to payee for living expenses for the recipient, and then the rent is paid to the landlord).   

Plaintiff received both checks, and signed her check over to defendant, and therefore, government was paying rent, but scam was that defendant actually received all of the money from the monthly checks (very confusing).   (Scam is that defendant isn't supposed to get both checks, one check is to pay the plaintiff for rent, but no money was actually paid to the landlady, just to the defendant.   Defendant received over $1100 a month with the rent check, she is now married so the husband is the payee, and the check is $837 so the money went down from $870).    

Defendant has a payee because she has a gambling problem, and this has been going on for 17 years (filmed about 2017).   

One check plaintiff cashed was returned by the bank, because social security said defendant's husband had already been made payee, and a check had been deposited by defendant husband.    Plaintiff had to borrow the money from the bank to cover the bounced check, plus fees so $485 owed.

Antique table was damaged when litigants were discussing the money issue at plaintiff's house, and defendant went off, and flipped the table over, damaging the table.    Table was fixed, but plaintiff didn't have to pay, so that's dismissed.

$485 to plaintiff.

Second (2017)-

Outrageous Mother on a Rampage-Plaintiffs Katelyn Rose (current partner/wife of child’s father),  suing defendant /mother of plaintiff's fiance's child Paige Brasher for car and house vandalism by defendant at a custody exchange.  Custody exchange was for plaintiff witness’s child with defendant.  Plaintiff witness is her fiance, William Bader (who is ex of defendant), and father of child with defendant.

The plaintiff man and defendant lived together from 2010 to 2015, and had a custody agreement in 2016.   After plaintiff man and defendant separated, he went to court to get a custody arrangement.   Custody 50/50 has been rocky, she gets kid Monday-Tuesday, he gets kid Wednesday-Thursday, and they alternate Friday through Sunday.   

Defendant came to visit the child on Thursday evening at plaintiff house, for mother's weekend visit.   Child had tonsils out recently, and mother wanted kid during recovery, but defendant came to visit son at plaintiff's house.    Defendant called plaintiff man at work repeatedly, and defendant came to man's job to see where son was, and to see if plaintiff woman was watching the kid.   

Defendant also wanted to see if plaintiff father was working, or if plaintiff's fiance was home with the child alone.   Plaintiff man's supervisor called and told him the defendant was coming by the man's workplace.  

Plaintiff father takes off Wednesday and Thursday for his son's visitation.    Son had tonsils out on Monday, and then went to father's place on Wednesday and Thursday, and then defendant would get child for Friday as usual (it was her weekend).    But defendant demanded to have the son earlier, and was jealous that father's fiance would be alone with the child.    

Defendant dislikes plaintiff fiancee woman, and then came to the home, where the house and car vandalism happened.  Plaintiff woman says defendant came to house, beat the sides of house, and doors with a lawn chair, smashed two huge windows at the plaintiff house, and the car windows and windshields are gone.    I can tell defendant why child was crying inside the house, because she was beating on the house, yelling, and being a jerk.   

JJ says plaintiff man should take defendant back to family court, and get supervised visitation only.   JJ is not buying defendant's stupid tale that she didn't do the damage.   Pictures of house and car damage are horrible. 

There is an audio clip of the vandalism (sadly, they don't play it).     I feel sorry for the child, his mother will never let go of her jealousy that the plaintiff father has moved on to someone else, and will never come back to her.   

Plaintiff gets $1250.  (They should have asked for $5,000 in my opinion, for the damages, and to help fund the custody fight).  In the hall-terview plaintiff says he's going to sue for full custody, and supervised visitation for the mother, and I hope he gets it. 

Child Support Nightmare-Plaintiff Dr. Adnon Bader (Dr. is a Gastroenterologist) suing former employee/defendant John Fisher for misuse of credit cards.   Defendant was paying almost $1,000 a month for child support, via payroll deduction.    Then defendant fell behind in paying support, and the $1,025 was coming out of pay for seven months while employed by plaintiff.     After defendant left the plaintiff's employment, the child support still came out of the plaintiff’s money for three months.     

Plaintiff wants the three months paid back.   Defendant says it was in his employment agreement that for the term of his contract the child support will be paid by plaintiff's medical practice.   The contract clearly states that Texas is an at-will employment state, and that the employment of defendant will follow that law.  

Work contract says defendant is an at will employee, for $50k a year.  Employee was terminated 3 months early, but child support continued to be taken out of plaintiff’s accounts.

Plaintiff gets $3500, and never had to say a word.  

[Hot Bench - General Discussion]

New 27 Sept "Lexus a Mess, Accident After Accident"

Case 1-Lexus, plaintiff bought Lexus from defendant for $3800, defendant bought 4 or 5 months ago, $300, and a book value of $1600-$1700.   Plaintiff paid for the car, and two days later it croaked, but it was an 'as is' sale, and plaintiff didn't take it to a mechanic to check it out.    As usual, buyer says car had concealed issues.  This is the first used purchase plaintiff made.  

So, defendant had the car for 4 or 5 months, never did anything but routine items, but didn't get it smogged?    So, buyer didn't do due diligence, and defendant didn't smog the car before selling.   

I suspect the person who sold to defendant sold for $300 because of the huge amount of repairs the car needed. 

Ruling is $3465 back to plaintiff, and car and title back to defendant.   I hope plaintiff will go to a decent hair stylist.  

Case 2-Accident, Plaintiff had a collision with defendant, that was her fault.   As usual, defendant claims she didn't do it, but if she did it wasn't as bad as plaintiff claims.  There had been two previous accidents in front of them, the litigants were the third accident.   Defendant rear-ended the plaintiff,  Plaintiff agreed for defendant to pay him out of pocket, but she never paid him a penny.     Plaintiff's Prius had $530 worth of damage, and defendant claims her car wasn't damaged.   Plaintiff came home, claimed the damaged with defendant's insurance company, and defendant's insurance declined coverage.   Insurance company said car wasn't covered by their company. 

Defendant is pulling the Sainted Single Mother card. 

Plaintiff gets $530.     Dimango says it was pleasant dealing with both litigants, I disagree, defendant was deceptive, and a liar, and driving without insurance coverage. 

Rerun 2022 episode, "Too Short" 

Plaintiff wanted a shoulder-length trim, but instead two years growth of hair was cut off, and she's suing to get extensions to repair the damage.   Toth vs. Reinagel.   Plaintiff wants a refund for the haircut, and reimbursement for hair extensions.    Defendant claims she didn't butcher the hair, but did exactly what plaintiff wanted.   Plaintiff told defendant Amber, to cut 2" off the bottom.     PLaintiff wanted 2" off, no layering, but instead she claims defendant did a free hand cut, and a lot shorter than what plaintiff asked for.   Plaintiff said instead of hair being to her shoulder, it was right below her ears.   Plaintiff paid $35, and a $6 tip.  

Amber the hair dresser says after a consultation plaintiff wanted hair 'above her shoulders', and didn't tell her a specific length to cut off.   When plaintiff holds the back of her hair up, the hair is way too short to put in a pony tail.    Plaintiff went to hair salon, wanted a refund, but defendant claimed owner was on vacation, and couldn't do a refund.   

Defendant finally admits instead of 2", she cut off at least 5".    I think I'm with Dimango, I may have nightmares about this.  

The photos of plaintiff's haircut are horrific, I could do a better job, and I don't have any training or talent with hair cutting.   Dimango hasn't been to a professional hairdresser for many years, after a haircut just as bad as the plaintiff's.  Defendant salon owner says plaintiff went too long with her extensions.    (I wish I knew the name of the salon, to avoid it). 

Plaintiff gets $35 for the haircut, and initial extensions that were installed, so $1790.   Plaintiff will not get the amount for updating the extensions every six months. 

(I wondered about who pays the litigants on this show, they get airfare, meals, transportation locally, and $35 appearance fee, awards are paid by the show, but there is no extra money above the award to either side. )   

[Renovation Island - General Discussion]

They still have scheduled episode 8 Upwardly Mobile (that was last Sunday's episode), but 8 is a rerun on this Sunday, and (new) episode 9 on 9 October, and I think that's the season finale.     I don't know why they're showing reruns this Sunday.   

The episodes all sound so much alike it's hard to tell if they've shown it already, the storyline is so similar every week.  As tired as I am about hearing about the lack of permits for the second story, I bet the permitting office in that county is really sick of being trashed on TV.   

They could have done a huge house keeping the existing footprint of the house, not trying to do a second story, and simply doing a mother-in-law apartment, and five or six bedrooms.    

[S14.E01: LIVE!]

For Shark Tank products, I like looking at the Amazon reviews, the 1 and 2 star ones can be very entertaining.    They shipped my Pizza Pack, so it should be here soon. 

For the three pitches, the KENT underwear one sounded ridiculous, and I wonder what the quality is like?   Their t-shirt didn't look any different from many other on the market, and I hate when the arms are so short, and look like their cut small. 

The baby one doesn't interest me at all. 

[S14.E01: LIVE!]

6 hours ago, aemom said:

The idea is that the box takes up a lot of room in the fridge.

For us - when we have leftover pizza, we usually freeze it for a future date.  We do sort of wedge pieces into some square NotTupperware boxes, so maybe something more appropriately shaped would be better for us.  This product is certainly more versatile than the cheese grater (which like Kevin, I also hated)

The reviews on Amazon for the Cheese Chopper are interesting, but not in a good way.   Since the inventer has the chopper, now the pizza pack, then I bet he has a few more he's working on.   

I did order a Pizza Pack, we'll see if that was a mistake or not.   But it certainly will take a lot less room in the fridge than a pizza box. 

The other two items are items I will never buy.   

[All Episodes Talk: All Rise]

4 p.m. episodes-

First (2014)-

Three’s a Crowd -Plaintiff/ suing Jordan Bianco suing defendant /former roommate Mary Stanko for unpaid rent security deposit and utiliies.    Plaintiff and girlfriend Kirsten Paskett, were two roommates, and plaintiff is suing defendant for her portion of the rent (50% because plaintiff and girlfriend shared a room).      Plaintiff’s girlfriend and defendant didn’t get along, and so defendant moved out.   

Original agreement is claimed by plaintiff girlfriend was half paid by them, but defendant claims she was originally told she would pay 1/3 of rent and utilities.   When defendant moved out on 1 May she was going to pay the rent, but when she went to pay up, and pick up her stuff, plaintiff Kirsten would only give Mary her stuff when she paid her more money. 

Plaintiffs aren’t getting security back, because new roommate will pay Jordan back for the security deposit.   New roommate will pay half of the rent.  

Did all three litigants go shopping together?  

Plaintiff girlfriend claims she found out defendant was going to move out without notice, and that caused the argument.   Audrey the roommate helped plaintiff sort through and lock up Mary’s stuff. Audrey was the fourth roommate, and was the woman living there until Mary moved out.  

$335 to plaintiffs, for the one month’s unpaid rent, when Mary’s friend was still there, and some of the friend’s stuff is still in the apartment, so plaintiffs will get even more rent.   

$415 to plaintiffs.

Moving Out Madness -Plaintiff Cassandra Allen suing defendant Douglas Marks rent late fees and cleaning fees.   Roommates were plaintiff, and her husband Billy, and defendant, were all on the lease, and renting one or two rooms from someone else in a house.  All three lived together for three years before everything fell apart.  (This was in Mission Hills, CA)

Defendant didn’t give 30-day’s notice to move out to live with his girlfriend, but he claims plaintiff husband Billy told him to move out. 

However, $900 rent to plaintiff, because even though defendant claimed he would move after April, but he was still there in June, and his stuff was still in the house until almost the end of July.   Defendant says Cassandra wouldn’t let him take his stuff out of the house.

Plaintiff receives two month’s rent $1800.

Second (2014)-

Drinking and Driving House Sitter -Plaintiff Deon Dionne suing defendant/former house sitter Paulino Cervantes   for car damages, house and furniture damages, and claims defendant drank a lot of her wine.   Defendant claims he only drank two bottles of cheap wine, didn’t damage the house or furniture, and car wasn’t damaged by him.    Defendant claims since he was given keys to move car from one side of street to another, and he claims that was the same as permission to use the car.    Defendant claims he didn’t cause the car damages to bottom of door, right side of car, or bumper.   Plaintiff claims defendant told her the damages happened driving to and from Pomona.   

Estimate for car damages are $1401, but estimate was $2011, and that defendant paid her $700.  She wants money for a week’s car rental also.

Plaintiff says she had six to eight bottles of wine gone, and wine was spilled on the couch.  

Plaintiff gets $1401 for car damages.

Traffic Ticket Pile-Up! -Plaintiff Jaymi Algeo suing defendant Veronica Grimes for traffic tickets, and other damages from a car plaintiff was selling to a third party, who resold vehicle to defendant’s boyfriend, and then defendant was driving.   Plaintiff sold her car to another man, who didn’t reregister the car, and he sold it to defendant’s boyfriend, and then defendant was buying it.    Then, the notices from the traffic tickets started, and nine months later car still wasn’t registered in defendant’s name, and no insurance.   

Plaintiff couldn’t renew her own car registration because of the outstanding tickets.  Defendant is counter suing because plaintiff stole her car. 

Plaintiff was arrested for stealing her own car, when she took her car back from defendant.  Defendant had been driving car for 10 months, without insurance or registration.   Defendant says car was impounded as stolen and unregistered, and wants impound and damage fees, dismissed.   When defendant saw car was gone, she called police and reported it stolen, so plaintiff was arrested for stealing her own car. 

Tickets are up to $100 each.  Plaintiff wants money for arrest, and she couldn’t renew her license.

Plaintiff receives $2500.

Three’s a Crowd -Plaintiff Caroline Kindred is suing defendants /roommates Jessica Ruth and Kayla McCarter for return of her security deposit.   Plaintiff’s credit wasn’t approved, but her father was her co-signer.   Plaintiff moved in with the agreement that no one would use her bathroom, and found someone else’s stuff, so she moved out before she actually moved in, but some of her stuff was still there, so she owes rent.    Plaintiff wants her share of $1066 security deposit back, and rent $687

$363 for security to plaintiff and that’s it.

5 p.m. episodes-

First (2017)-

Teen Joyriders Busted by Police-Plaintiffs, Rhiannon Torgerson, mother and son Tajauan Tyler , suing defendant mother Kerri McCoy, and son Marcus McCoy for a share of restitution money to fix a truck.   Defendant son says plaintiff son picked him up in the middle of the night in defendant's mother's truck.   Plaintiff son says that defendant son came over to plaintiff's house in the middle of the night.       Plaintiff says defendant picked him up on his motorcycle, and then they took defendant's mother's truck for joyriding.  (I realize that the stories don't make sense, but they never do).    Plaintiff criminal stole, and drove the truck, and went joyriding.   Plaintiff criminal is blaming defendant criminal for the crash.   

Both sons were arrested, they claim both for the first time, and they plead guilty to truck theft, and each pay restitution for the truck $4330 ($2165 each).      Defendant mother refused to pay the restitution.    Payment of restitution by both would result in case being sealed and expunged.   Plaintiff paid all of the restitution so her criminal can play basketball or something at school.    Plaintiff demanded defendant sign a letter that she had repaid the restitution, and plaintiff criminal could play sports.

Another wrinkle, defendant criminal violated probation, charged with vandalism, and violation of house arrest, so he was again arrested.   Even if defendant pays restitution, defendant criminal will not get his record expunged, because he reoffended the next month.    Defendant mother still thinks her criminal son will get his record expunged, but as JJ explains, son reoffended, and won't get expunged or sealed records.    Plaintiff mother doesn't care about what her son did, just that he can bounce a ball around.   Defendant mother just lied to JJ, about son's second arrest. 

The plaintiff paid with a credit card, and waited six months to pay the restitution, but the court holds the payment for 90 days, because the credit card holder can dispute the charges.    However, plaintiff mother paid both sides, and gets $2165 from defendant.  

$2165 to plaintiff.     

Uninsured Boy Friend Destroys Car-Plaintiff Letrishia Tyson suing defendant/ her daughter Adrienne Tyson for tow bill. Defendant is counter suing for moving expenses.    Plaintiff bought new car, sold old car to daughter for $2700 (insurance continued in plaintiff's name).    Then two months later defendant's boyfriend was driving the car, and totaled it.    Because defendant's boyfriend, Devante Evans, wasn't licensed, and wasn't named on the insurance, insurance didn't pay for the damages.   

Plaintiff told daughter, it was her fault, and to pay the car off, and she did.   Plaintiff got a bill from the tow yard for storing the car for a year, for over $3,000+.    Defendant's witness is the same idiot boyfriend. 

As JJ says, daughter paid off the car, but since plaintiff was legal owner, she's the only one who could get the car out of the tow yard impound. 

Mother and daughter moved after the accident, and daughter wants moving costs.  She couldn't drive because of a C-section, how heartwarming. 

Plaintiff case dismissed.   Defendant's stupid case dismissed.   

Second (2017)-

Ex-Girlfriend Escape Caught on Tape!  -Plaintiff Orlando Hernandez  suing defendant/ex-girlfriend Montiel Reeves for intentionally damaging his property, and assault.  Plaintiff says defendant invaded his apartment, after they broke up (plaintiff was in jail for six months, and they broke up before his unfortunate incarceration).  Plaintiff claims his friend was at his apartment playing video games, while plaintiff was walking his dog.    This is the second time defendant invaded his apartment.   

Defendant ex-girlfriend scares me, and her girlfriend witness is off too.   Plaintiff hasn't been on a date with defendant for over three years (she was 17 then, and is now 20).     Plaintiff was walking his pit bull/Dingo mix (I suspect this is an American Dingo cross, not an Australian Dingo) when the ex-girlfriend broke into the apartment.     Defendant claims she didn't force her way into the apartment, but came over for money.

When plaintiff friend called and told him the defendant was in his apartment.    Plaintiff cares for his disabled (double amputee) father, and is paid as a caregiver.   While in prison, plaintiff completed his GED.   

Video is submitted of the assault, and loco actions of the defendant.  Video shows the apartment with defendant singing, screaming, and acting high.   Defendant was breaking the window out, and you can see that on video.   The assault by defendant is shown too, and recorded.  

Plaintiff wanted a restraining order, but was refused.   Defendant wanted $20, and claims plaintiff lured her to his apartment for sex, and would pay her $20, and wouldn't let her leave.   What a liar she is. 

Defendant was given a protective order by the court.    (I won't go into details, but defendant has quite the record since this case aired).   I know who I think the victim is here, and it's not the defendant.

Plaintiff claims defendant came through the bedroom window, not via the front door.  Plaintiff looks so confused with JJ reads defendant's lying statement to the court.  Defendant told police that she went out the window to escape, and called the police make a false report to cover herself. 

I really hope that plaintiff is doing well now.  

 Plaintiff receives $956. $500 was for the assault, and the $456 was for the window and headphones (Plaintiff broke the number one rule of dating, ‘never sleep with anyone crazier than you are’)

Show Me the Money Trail!-Plaintiff Tynikki Burkitt suing contractor/defendant Joseph Mannino for return of her deposit on work he never performed.     Defendant/contractor says plaintiff made an insurance claim, received $6500, and then found a cheaper company to do the work.    $2500 deposit was paid to contractor, and plaintiff wants it back.   JJ wants to see the paid bill or check paid to contractor that did the job.  Plaintiff says she hasn't completed the bathroom repair, so she brought her suit prematurely.     JJ will explain why suit is premature.  

Defendant says the insurance check was negotiated with the insurance company, so JJ needs to find out how much the other company is charging for the bathroom.   (JJ surmises that the defendant padded the bill to cover the deductible).   

 JJ says the $6500 was insurance payout, and giving the $2500 back is not warranted, because that would be enrichment.   Plaintiff case dismissed.

Plaintiff receives $956.

(This week the 5 pm episodes are all 2017, but next week the 5 pm episodes are all 2012.  That should be interesting).