All Episodes Talk: All Rise

[funky-rat]

34 minutes ago, Byrd is the Word said:

If we follow the principle that JJ applies so often, the $40,000 or so rent the defendant paid over 48 months would probably pay for that entire mobile slum three times.  Whether or not it's rentable to another party is probably no more her fault that that of the property owner.  Charge her to clean up the junk she left behind and close the book on this. 

Most likely 4x over (or more).  We paid $13,500 for ours, and it's in nice condition with some upgrades.  Ours is late 70's.

[CrazyInAlabama]

3 p.m. reruns-

Brother vs. Sister-Plaintiff sister is suing defendant brother for unpaid balance on a car, and unpaid tickets.    Sister sold non-running car to brother, who never paid for it, got it running, and it was left on the street and amassed a bunch of tickets.    However, defendant gave her the car, and plaintiff let the registration lapse months before, so tickets are hers.   Case dismissed.

A House Divided-Plaintiff father suing adult son defendant for sub-standard work on father's water damaged house.    Son had full time jobs, and father is suing son for property damage that he didn't have time to repair on the house.    Defendant was given $2250 total, but plaintiff wants $5k.   Case dismissed, JJ doesn't believe anything the father plaintiff says. 

The Pregnant Chihuahua Did it-Plaintiff / former landlord and ex girlfriend, is suing defendant / former tenant for apartment damages, which are blamed on his pregnant Chihuahua.   When defendant left apartment,  his Chihuahua and her puppies were locked in his room, and he left them.    Defendant is a perennial victim, who had leached off of friends and relatives for over 10 years.      Defendant was employed when the litigants moved into the apartment, it was a three bedroom, one was for defendant's seven year old daughter.   Defendant lost his job, they fought, and he left without contact, before the first month was over.   

Plaintiff doesn't look too good either, because she left the dog locked in the room, and only broke in when the dog started barking, and clawing at the door for over two weeks, after complaints from the management company.     She fed the dog under the door.   She then took the dog, and puppies to the pound.   $4800 to plaintiff.  

Deceased Parents, Feuding Children-Plaintiff sisters suing defendant brother, and wife for return of deceased parents property, and claim undue influence on the parents.   There are nine siblings, one deceased, and only three sisters are suing.   The three sisters rarely saw the parents.    The coven of sisters hired an attorney, the court appointed a guardian, but they're still whining about the parents, who both died in 2012.    Property they're suing about was sold by father before he died, and they're still blaming the brother.     

Parents filed an application for a restraining order against daughters.   Appeal was denied.   SIsters are still upset that defendant 'banned' them from the funeral.     Case dismissed, and will never be over.  

[AngelaHunter]

Haven't reached the epic "SIT DOWN" case yet, but did see the trailer (or cattle car) kerfuffle. omg. Muppet-voiced plaintiff is just lucky def. and her "girls" didn't all stand on the same side of this run-down trailer at the same time or it would have overturned. Felonious, violent "fiance" moves in because Momma (at first I couldn't tell who was the daughter and who was the mom) really needs a man or a facsimile. Cops are called and then he gets the boot, so Muppet-Man thinks it's time for a little butt-grabbin'. LOL. He parades around naked and Momma tells her "girls" to stay in the house! Since Mom is already a Grandma, I"m pretty sure her Darling Daughters have some idea of what a penis looks like and probably didn't swoon in shock and horror at seeing the plaintiff's shriveled, old unit. And where is the baby-daddy(ies)? No, the herd said and did nothing about the exhibitionism or the sexual harassment, which started coincidentally when Momma stopped paying rent.  It's kind of bad comedy, but I shudder to think of conditions inside that trailer.

[Florinaldo]

1 hour ago, AngelaHunter said:

He parades around naked and Momma tells her "girls" to stay in the house!

As he pointed out, the house is in town and if he did that in the front yard as she claimed he would have been visible to other neighbours, who would have reported it to the authorities. That was clearly another untruth from her mouth, which cannot help drooling lies with every breath.

[CrazyInAlabama]

5 p.m. reruns-

Repo Assault and Neglect-Plaintiff step daughter (SSMOO-Sainted Single Mother of One) suing step father for repo on her car, that she purchased from him,  and damages.     Plaintiff Epiphany has a history of repo's.     Stepdad made her a real deal, and didn't pay most of the time, and partial payments, and caught up in a few months later.   She wasn't stiffing the stepdad, but the bank.   Then she stopped paying again, and made a partial payment for the next month, and a month later the step dad repo'd the car.    Out of $2700 in payments, she paid $1900.      SInce car loan was in step father's name, the credit bureau hits were on his records.   SSMOO didn't put insurance on car.    $900 to defendant. 

Dog's Broken Nail Leads to Amputation-Plaintiff suing dog groomer (sorry, dog salon owner), claiming that defendant broke dog's nail, leading to an infection, and it led to amputation of  toe.   However, plaintiff didn't even take dog to vet for two weeks after 'injury', so it could have happened any time between grooming, and vet.   Vet report only says infected toe.    Case dismissed. 

Sub-Lease Deadbeat-Plaintiff landlord/tenant suing defendant /sub lease tenant for non-payment.     Defendant paid nothing for the first six days in May, other months he was late, so late fees applied.   Six months later he didn't pay the rent, and plaintiff's mother paid it, and defendant repaid her.   Then the next month he didn't pay, but he was still there.   The plaintiff evicted him.   

(This is the man who currently lives "In an undisclosed location", so his counter claim was dismissed)     

Neighbor Survey Changes Everything-Plaintiff suing defendant for damage to his property by defendant's dogs.   Defendant says he believed the area he put yard trash, and where dogs were was on his property.   After plaintiff's survey proved the opposite, man cleared up yard trash, put up a fence on his side, and dogs were only on his property.    (The defendant is misunderstanding how surveying works).    Plaintiff has no proof of survey payment, so that's gone.   Case dismissed without prejudice, so he can get proof and go back to court.  

(Warning, tomorrow's first evening episode is new, and it's a dog attack on a young boy). 

[AngelaHunter]

51 minutes ago, Florinaldo said:

As he pointed out, the house is in town and if he did that in the front yard as she claimed he would have been visible to other neighbours, who would have reported it to the authorities.

Even if he did do that it clearly didn't bother her, or her "girls", much at the time. Whatever she and her former betrothed did in front of them - whichever ones were home and not out getting knocked up with some loser -  was no doubt much worse than the sight of a dangling dingle. I'm picturing Sumo wrestling.

[zillabreeze]

13 hours ago, AngelaHunter said:

Even if he did do that it clearly didn't bother her, or her "girls", much at the time. Whatever she and her former betrothed did in front of them - whichever ones were home and not out getting knocked up with some loser -  was no doubt much worse than the sight of a dangling dingle. I'm picturing Sumo wrestling.

I can't believe I missed this jewel!  Soccer took up exactly 30 minutes.  So...instead of flipping the episodes, the PTB scrapped the new one and showed the rerun.   So dumb 

[AngelaHunter]

37 minutes ago, zillabreeze said:

  So...instead of flipping the episodes, the PTB scrapped the new one and showed the rerun.   So dumb 

They ALWAYS do that - butt in with hysterical weather reports, a news event or anything that can't possibly wait for the actual news hour - and time them so they cut out only JJ and only the new eps. 

15 hours ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

Sub-Lease Deadbeat-Plaintiff landlord/tenant suing defendant /sub lease tenant for non-payment. 

Under the fancy suit, scholarly glasses and suave demeanor, Mr. Byron is an amoral, shameless, lying scammer. He probably does this - moves in, doesn't pay rent and then moves out - all the time.

[CrazyInAlabama]

The rerun second episodes have been from the same season most of the time, so I'm betting that the trailer episode with the claimed naked landlord (no I don't believe it) will be rerun pretty soon.    Also, here the local channel sometimes runs the missed episode in the wee hours of the next morning, so there's always hope.   

Soccer seems to have ended during the sacred JJ hours (we have two here), so at least I'll be able to see them every day, until the builder chops my cable line again.   

For someone who seemed so reasonable, and respectable at the beginning, Mr. Byron certainly turned out to be a scammer.   I do like his 'living in an undisclosed location' routine, and hope his new landlord evicted him the second they saw it the first time. 

Edited July 4, 2019 by CrazyInAlabama

[AngelaHunter]

1 hour ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

 I do like his 'living in an undisclosed location' routine, and hope his new landlord evicted him the second they saw it the first time. 

You can just bet he's not paying rent in the undisclosed location and/or has a bunch of creditors on his tail. Either that or he's in the witness protection program. That is probably not his real name either. 

[CrazyInAlabama]

3 p.m. reruns-

Twice Divorced to the Same Man-Plaintiff who divorced, remarried, and divorced again is suing ex for not repaying loan.  Plaintiff was living with man as roommates, and stayed after the divorce,  and didn't pay rent.  (Plaintiff/woman is on disability, and Defendant/Man does occasional flea marketing for money-which the caption person called "street salesman").   

 Plaintiff received a settlement from a law suit, with a non-disclosure agreement, which is gone, and her disability was going to be discontinued if she kept living with ex-husband.    Case dismissed.  (I know someone that has married, divorced, and remarried the same woman at least four times, so it could be worse).

Roommates No More-Plaintiff / former room renting tenant suing defendant who rented out, and rented out rooms, for security deposit, and damages.   The plaintiff rented a room in the first house from defendant, but when defendant moved to second house plaintiff was told he's not moving into this house by defendant.  $500 to plaintiff. 

Social Insecurity-Plaintiff /former tenant suing former landlady/defendant for unlawful eviction, false charges, and throwing his property outside.    Defendant swears man stole her pain pills, but as usual, has no proof.     Plaintiff moved man's stuff across the street to a friend's house.   Defendant claims man stole her pills, and plaintiff claims defendant gave him four pills after he fractured ribs, but she called the sheriff's and claimed plaintiff stole the pills.  Then gate was locked, defendant told man his stuff was gone, and he's evicted.   

Plaintiff gets money for false police complaint, had to go to court, and citation dismissed. $500 to plaintiff. 

Parked Car Hit and Run-Plaintiff accuses her mother's neighbor of hitting her parked car, and fleeing the scene.   What a shock!  Hit and run driver had no insurance. (and has her bangs all over her eyes, maybe she could drive better if she could see the road?).     Plaintiff saw defendant leaving, and defendant claims she didn't do it, but police issued a ticket.   Plaintiff receives $1069.96. 

[CrazyInAlabama]

5 p.m. episodes-

New-

Child Suffers 50 Stitches-Plaintiff mother is suing defendant over the attack on her son by defendant's dog.   Child was bitten on leg, stomach, and a few other places, and it took over 50 stitches to close the wounds.   There was a previous attack by the 150 lb. dog, and the court ordered dog had to be muzzled at all times, and owner was ordered to have liability insurance (insurance was dropped for non-payment by defendant).     Defendant was walking the dog, with a muzzle that came off easily..   Child, and friends were walking home from the park and dog attacked him without warning.    Dog was put down.  $5,000 to plaintiff.  

Mother Daughter Savings Plan Fail-Plaintiff daughter is suing defendant mother for loss of property, and other stuff.    Daughter and boyfriend moved into mother's house.   When daughter moved out, the other daughter dumped the plaintiff's TV outside, and mother's witness claims plaintiff sold her the microwave for weed money.   

Mother's witness is shaking and nervous, but it must be from being in JJ's presence.   Plaintiff gets $125 for the TV, and defendant's rent claim is dismissed.  

Adult Male vs. Judge Judy's Grandchildren-Plaintiffs suing former roommate/defendant for unpaid rent, unpaid utilities for four months.    Defendant claims he moved out with girlfriend before the four months started.   The funny thing is, defendant doesn't know the street address he lives at.    Plaintiffs are told to take their proof back to Small Claims in their locality.        

Rerun-

Stalking Through the Ceiling-Defendant claims plaintiff was stalking her through the ceiling, waved a gun at her, and scares me to death.   There are repeated police, and housing authority complaints by defendant for noise, other unlisted tenants with criminal activities, and claims the stalking.      I hope the plaintiff moved after this.   Defendant's bizarre claims started after she moved into the same triplex as the plaintiff in 2017.     

Plaintiff is suing for harassment due to repeated police calls from defendant.   Defendant sent the police one time when she claimed the neighborhood drug dealer moved in with plaintiff and her adult daughter.    I bet adult daughter had a friend over, and he refused to identify himself to police (on private property I think he has that right).  I can see that defendant is on leave from her job, trying to get disability.   Defendant claims she's going to move, but hasn't yet.   Plaintiff was granted a restraining order against the defendant.   (Guess who got arrested for twice violation of the restraining order, and once for assault last fall).     

$5,000 to plaintiff, and I really hope the defendant moved, but I'm doubting that.  then in the Hall-terview the defendant goes off on the producers.  

BB Gun Shootout-Plaintiff claims defendant threw a hissy fit on her property, and damaged her car, front door, etc.   Defendant claims plaintiff did it herself.    Plaintiff claims defendant was jealous of another man mowing her lawn, and that caused the gasoline splashing incident.    Defendant also claims she shot at him with a BB gun.    There is a police report, but no one was arrested, and plaintiff didn't press charges.     

Plaintiff didn't follow up with the police about criminal charges, but is going to do it in the future, and it would incriminate him to talk in court, so case dismissed.  

(Warning, tomorrow's rerun case is the one where the pit bulls attacked a tiny dog, and the heroic neighbor tossed the pits back over the fence.  This is all on video).

Edited July 4, 2019 by CrazyInAlabama

[Brattinella]

8 hours ago, AngelaHunter said:

You can just bet he's not paying rent in the undisclosed location and/or has a bunch of creditors on his tail. Either that or he's in the witness protection program. That is probably not his real name either. 

I'm sure he could have gotten away with just saying what state he lives in.  He's paranoid as hell, probably with good reason.

[Brattinella]

5 hours ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

Child Suffers 50 Stitches-Plaintiff mother is suing defendant over the attack on her son by defendant's dog.   Child was bitten on leg, stomach, and a few other places, and it took over 50 stitches to close the wounds.   There was a previous attack by the 150 lb. dog, and the court ordered dog had to be muzzled at all times, and owner was ordered to have liability insurance (insurance was dropped for non-payment by defendant).     Defendant was walking the dog, with a muzzle that came off easily..   Child, and friends were walking home from the park and dog attacked him without warning.    Dog was put down.  $5,000 to plaintiff.

This guy was the most irresponsible, lackadaisical dog owner I've ever seen.  Cane Corso, he said 100 lbs (no way) had previously attacked AT LEAST another dog, doesn't understand the meaning of a Muzzle (its not a muzzle if it hangs halfway open)  AND no insurance.  I don't think he even understood WHY he should have insurance.  I think his bottom line is:  He doesn't want to spend any money AT ALL on ANYTHING.  Plus, he could barely open his eyes, IMO, druggie.  I'm glad plaintiff got the 5K. 

[khyber]

He says the dog was put down, but who knows. 

[Byrd is the Word]

16 hours ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

Plaintiff mother is suing defendant over the attack on her son by defendant's dog.   Child was bitten on leg, stomach, and a few other places, and it took over 50 stitches to close the wounds. 

This case was so well presented and free of embellishment by the mom and her boy that it was a delight to watch, albeit at the expense of fascinating train wreck television.

16 hours ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

Mother Daughter Savings Plan Fail-Plaintiff daughter is suing defendant mother for loss of property, and other stuff.    Daughter and boyfriend moved into mother's house.   When daughter moved out, the other daughter dumped the plaintiff's TV outside, and mother's witness claims plaintiff sold her the microwave for weed money.   

As a lifelong resident of the state of Illinois I'm both embarrassed and amused by the dregs that show up in JJ's courtroom to duke it out. Cheap microwave ovens and televisions and allegations of weed buys in Springfield.  The family the other day suing each other over the shady disbursement of the proceeds from the sale of the deceased father's $12,000 home were from nearby Decatur.

16 hours ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

Mother Daughter Savings Plan Fail

Is it just me of did the rest of you catch the epic 10,000 mile/deer in the headlights stare of the defendant mom?  Her claim in halterview to go about her "merry way" would seem like a 180 turn in the life path she's chosen.

Edited July 5, 2019 by Byrd is the Word

[CrazyInAlabama]

I'm also suspicious that the Cane Corso was put down, but instead probably re-homed to someone else, renamed, and is out there ripping up defenseless children.       Maybe next time the dog will off the owner instead of hurting some child.     

Edited July 5, 2019 by CrazyInAlabama

[AZChristian]

Just now, CrazyInAlabama said:

I'm also suspicious that the Cane Corso was put down, but probably re-homed to someone else, renamed, and out there ripping up defenseless children.       Maybe next time the dog will off the owner instead of hurting some child.     

I think the dog was euthanized.  Because it had a previous record of attack and was NOT properly wearing its muzzle, someone (probably at the ER) would have reported this attack.  Given the owner's non-compliance, the dog was probably removed from him and euthanized whether the owner wanted it to be or not.

[Byrd is the Word]

2 minutes ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

I'm also suspicious that the Cane Corso was put down, but probably re-homed to someone else, renamed, and out there ripping up defenseless children.       Maybe next time the dog will off the owner instead of hurting some child.

Just imagine being 12 years old, running in a park with your friends, then being attacked by a 150 lb dog resulting in wounds requiring dozens of stitches to close.  This defendant didn't have a pot to piss in but if he did I'd own that by the time I was done with him.  Then I'd club him with it.

[ItsHelloPattiagain]

16 hours ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

Child Suffers 50 Stitches-....  Defendant was walking the dog, with a muzzle that came off easily..   Child, and friends were walking home from the park and dog attacked him without warning.    Dog was put down.  $5,000 to plaintiff.  

I wanted to smack the defendant's excuse that the muzzle came off the corner of the dog's mouth. I went to dog court many years ago when some live-in boyfriend of a SSM in my neighborhood allowed the 10 year old to walk his mongrel mix who broke free and chased down my dog and bit him around the tail area. He had the audacity to say that my dog wasn't on a leash EITHER but it was because his dog had grabbed my dog by the neck and throttled him right out of his collar (this was while I was beating that dog around the head while he was trapped between my legs. Fortunately my dog was okay. 

16 hours ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

Mother Daughter Savings Plan Fail-Plaintiff daughter is suing defendant mother for loss of property, and other stuff.    Daughter and boyfriend moved into mother's house.   When daughter moved out, the other daughter dumped the plaintiff's TV outside, and mother's witness claims plaintiff sold her the microwave for weed money.   

Did that mother look like she was put together with spare parts? Kinda janky looking? Asking for a friend. 

[CrazyInAlabama]

3 p.m. reruns-

Little Dog vs. Little Brat-Plaintiff is suing dog owner for his son's injuries.  This is the precocious kid who was bitten by a Bishon Frise (spelling), where the defense witness testifies that he's seen the child running wild, and poking, and teasing dogs.    The defendant father is some kind of movie industry person, as I recall from previous airings of this.     I know the plaintiff gets the money, but I absolutely believe the witness for the plaintiff's statement.   I think the father just likes to let his kid run wild, and do whatever he wants, and it's always going to be someone else's fault.   Medical bills to plaintiff.  

DJ Disappearing Act-Plaintiff suing DJ for not showing up at wedding.   DJ costs $600, and was paid in advance.   DJ has a ton of excuses for not showing up at the wedding, but they're all pathetic.     Plaintiff gets $600. 

$14,000 Out the Window-Plaintiff realtor, and former tenant, suing defendant for money plaintiff spent improving the defendant's inherited home, to get it into condition to sell.    Plaintiff and mother moved in, and never paid rent for five out of seven months.   Plaintiff was evicted for non-payment of rent, after she finally signed a written lease, and still didn't pay rent.       There is no written contract for the house work.   Rent was $1800 a month.   I would never use the plaintiff as my realtor, since she doesn't like to do agreements in writing.  Plaintiff claims broker for defendant wouldn't let her talk to defendant, but the conversations were a three party contract (not happening).    One month defendant allowed a short payment for work on house, but no other work was authorized. 

 Plaintiff claims that she spent $14,000 on house repairs, and improvements, but had no agreement for anything but the one month rent that was reduced by defendant.  There is a text from defendant to plaintiff saying not to do any work without her permission.   Litigant's cases dismissed.  

Show Me the Bail Money-Plaintiff suing defendant for unpaid loan, and return of a bail refund.  Defendant claims she never received bail refund.     There's some side whining that defendant's sister was physically assaulted by plaintiff, and she didn't press charges.   Plaintiff has no proof that defendant received the money back for bail.   $1,000 dismissed without prejudice, pending proof of bail refund.   Defendant gets $500 back for loan repayment. 

[CrazyInAlabama]

(Warning: The second episode is a graphic video of a dog attack, it's a rerun, and I think anyone who saw it remembers the heroism of the neighbor who waded into the fight to save the little dog)

5 p. m. episodes-

New-

Daycare Drama-Plaintiff is unlicensed day care provider, with no background check.   Plaintiff is suing defendant because she pulled her kids without notice, after a dispute over children's father picking them up at the daycare.   The police were called on at least one occasion about father, and day care provider said children had to leave.   Plaintiff claims defendant owes for 2 days, and was required in the contract to pay for two full weeks notice of departure.   Case dismissed.  

Husky Attacks Tiny Dog-Plaintiff suing defendant over Min. Pinscher attack by Husky/German Shepherd mix at a dog park.    Min Pin was on a leash, plaintiff's other dog was at man's side, and defendant's dog attacked the Min Pin, and had the small dog in the defendant's dog mouth, and Husky was shaking the Min Pin.   Defendant's big dog has a history of her dog going after small dogs.  $514 to plaintiff.  Defendant is despicable, and claims the plaintiff injured his own dog, and used it like a toy to lure her dog to attack his.    

Mechanic Demands Payback-Plaintiff mechanic kept his tools, and stored cars on the defendant's tow yard.   Defendants rented tow yard, and locked out plaintiff after a dispute.  Plaintiff wants the cars, and his tools back.    Defendant claims plaintiff owes $500 for Jeep, tow dolly damages.   Plaintiff gets three cars from the lot, defendant keeps the other jeep, and that's the end.  

Rerun-This is the first time I ever saw a disclaimer for animal violence on this show.

Don't Let Children Watch This-Plaintiff is suing heartless shrew of a neighbor for her two Mastiff/Bull Dogs, that are obviously mostly Pit, maybe crossed with Mastiff or something,  coming into plaintiff's yard, and savaging her tiny poodle.    The heroic neighbor, Cody Lucas, waded into the fight, picked up the pits, tossed them back over the fence, and in one case twice with the most aggressive male.     This is all caught on video.

    If you watch carefully, the owner of the vicious dogs is watching from the far side of her back yard.   I think the dog owner actually gets off on watching her animals attack others.   Defendant claims she didn't know about attack, and was inside her house during the attack, and she's a liar.    Plaintiff claims the defendant's dogs jump the common fence into her yard. 

Cody Lucas, my hero. says the dogs look like Pits, not Mastiffs, and he's right.  Defendant says she only has two savage dogs, but plaintiff, and Cody Lucas say there are three Pits.   Animal control was called immediately, and defendant says she would cover the vet bills.     The poor poodle is limping away on three legs.  

Defendant admits she's mentally unbalanced-Truer words were never spoken on this show.  Defendant's son is just as unbalanced as his mother.   $5000 to plaintiff. 

Go Back to Where You Came From-Plaintiff (with neon pink hair) suing defendant/ex boyfriend for posting pictures of her online.   Case dismissed for lack of proof.

Was She High-Plaintiff suing defendant for assault, breaking her phone during a car ride.  Defendant claims plaintiff assaulted him.  You know your goose is cooked, when JJ asks the defendant if the plaintiff was high, and everyone says she was, and probably still is.  Case is dismissed. 

Edited July 6, 2019 by CrazyInAlabama

[lynny]

I think that the verdict was 100% wrong in the babysitter/daycare case. Every daycare I'm familiar with says that you pay whether your kid is there or not and you give notice to pull the kid out. If the child care provider isn't guaranteed an income from the kid, then they won't take the kid. 

This is like telling a landlord that I know I'm supposed to pay rent for all of May, but I'm going on vacation from the 8th - 12th so I'm shorting him 5 days rent. I'm not going to be there, so I don't have to pay for the apartment. Sure, he can't rent it someone else for those 5 days, but that's his problem.

[zillabreeze]

20 minutes ago, lynny said:

I think that the verdict was 100% wrong in the babysitter/daycare case.

I completely agree and thought that was a bitch move.   JJ wasn't going to help that babysitter at all once she found there was no license.

I didn't notice what state they were from.  The license law is different everywhere.  Babysitter must have been doing something right if the state program was willing to pay her.

[funky-rat]

12 hours ago, lynny said:

I think that the verdict was 100% wrong in the babysitter/daycare case. Every daycare I'm familiar with says that you pay whether your kid is there or not and you give notice to pull the kid out. If the child care provider isn't guaranteed an income from the kid, then they won't take the kid. 

This is like telling a landlord that I know I'm supposed to pay rent for all of May, but I'm going on vacation from the 8th - 12th so I'm shorting him 5 days rent. I'm not going to be there, so I don't have to pay for the apartment. Sure, he can't rent it someone else for those 5 days, but that's his problem.

11 hours ago, zillabreeze said:

I completely agree and thought that was a bitch move.   JJ wasn't going to help that babysitter at all once she found there was no license.

I didn't notice what state they were from.  The license law is different everywhere.  Babysitter must have been doing something right if the state program was willing to pay her.

I agree to a point, but it gets iffy because another agency was covering the cost.  I'm surprised a governmental agency covered the cost for an unlicensed provider.

[augmentedfourth]

16 hours ago, lynny said:

I think that the verdict was 100% wrong in the babysitter/daycare case. Every daycare I'm familiar with says that you pay whether your kid is there or not and you give notice to pull the kid out. If the child care provider isn't guaranteed an income from the kid, then they won't take the kid. 

This is like telling a landlord that I know I'm supposed to pay rent for all of May, but I'm going on vacation from the 8th - 12th so I'm shorting him 5 days rent. I'm not going to be there, so I don't have to pay for the apartment. Sure, he can't rent it someone else for those 5 days, but that's his problem.

I think the issue might have been it wasn't really clearly stated one way or the other whether the defendant wanted to leave or if the plaintiff told her she no longer wanted to watch her kids. Based on the other stuff about the plaintiff not wanting to get involved with the babydaddy picking up the kids for whatever reason, I'm inclined to think it was the latter. So yes, she likely did have a contract, but if she tells them to go, I don't think it's fair for her to expect to be paid for those days.

[augmentedfourth]

It was a crazy week over here, so I just caught up with all the new episodes on my DVR. My verdict: I hate everyone, except for the kid who got bitten by the dog (and his mother) and the guy whose dog was attacked in the dog part. Maaaaybe I don't hate the car accident plaintiff, though there was a little bit of "He hit me and forced me off the road! ...Okay, maybe his car didn't actually come into contact with mine." The chart definitely indicated a collision. 

Some of these episodes look like they were cobbled together from whatever was at the bottom of the bin and Monday's all reruns, I believe. Does anyone know, are we done with the season?

[zillabreeze]

12 minutes ago, augmentedfourth said:

Does anyone know, are we done with the season?

They're so unremarkable that the only way I know what's a new case is if we have Ponytail Judy.  

[DoctorK]

16 minutes ago, augmentedfourth said:

Some of these episodes look like they were cobbled together from whatever was at the bottom of the bin

I've noticed this also. In fact some of the litigants with distinctive features on "new" episodes look so familiar that I wonder if they are taking old cases and trimming them to fit in to three (or four) case half hour shows.

[AngelaHunter]

Sorry to be a pain - don't sue me for harassment - but which ep is the epic "SIT DOWN"? I can't seem to locate it. 

[Byrd is the Word]

27 minutes ago, AngelaHunter said:

Sorry to be a pain - don't sue me for harassment - but which ep is the epic "SIT DOWN"? I can't seem to locate it. 

It’s the Double Lane Change ep. 

Edited July 6, 2019 by Byrd is the Word

[Brattinella]

27 minutes ago, AngelaHunter said:

Sorry to be a pain - don't sue me for harassment - but which ep is the epic "SIT DOWN"? I can't seem to locate it. 

This is the one with vicious pit bulls thrown back over the fence by Hero Cody.  Defendant is a behemoth and her son who looks equally as nasty, leaps up to defend his mom.  SIT DOWN!  Awesome!

Horrible video with this one, though.  Two pitbulls are playing tug of war with a poodle which is screaming. :((

[Byrd is the Word]

On 7/6/2019 at 5:05 PM, Brattinella said:

This is the one with vicious pit bulls thrown back over the fence by Hero Cody.  Defendant is a behemoth and her son who looks equally as nasty, leaps up to defend his mom.  SIT DOWN!  Awesome!

Horrible video with this one, though.  Two pitbulls are playing tug of war with a poodle which is screaming. :((

I think the one @AngelaHunter is referring to is the traffic accident case where the stupid, lying defendant is getting the business from HRH when his witness slowly rises as if he’s going to join the fight. EPIC when she loudly and sharply barks for him to “sit down!”

Edited July 8, 2019 by Byrd is the Word

[Brattinella]

1 minute ago, Byrd is the Word said:

I think the one @AngelaHunter is referring to is the traffic accident case where the stupid, lying defendant is getting the business from HRH when his witness slowly rises as if he’s going to joint the fight. EPIC when she loudly and sharply barks for him to “sit down!”

Thanks.  I was overwrought by the pitbull one.

[CrazyInAlabama]

In the lane change to get to the donut store case, the defendant's witness was told to Sit Down! also.    

[AZChristian]

9 minutes ago, LucindaWalsh said:

The case that was dismissed, the two guys suing their roommate for rent after the lease went to month to month: Why did JJ Spidey sense think it was a scam case? 

I got the feeling from JJ's comments that they had filed the case right on the JJ website, rather than the usual process, which is having staff members from the show combing through small claims court dockets.  She asked, "Do you have small claims court where you come from?  Go back there and file the suit."

I suspect that there may have been a situation where the defendant moved out (legally), but agreed to be on the show to help out his buddies who were now splitting the rent in half instead of in thirds.  And a free vacation trip to LA is always an incentive.  Too bad they didn't get as much spending money as they expected.

[AngelaHunter]

4 hours ago, AZChristian said:

I suspect that there may have been a situation where the defendant moved out (legally), but agreed to be on the show to help out his buddies who were now splitting the rent in half instead of in thirds.  And a free vacation trip to LA is always an incentive.

Just saw this. I agree those three goofs were hoping to get the show to pay their rent. Good luck to them in small claims court. The only interesting part was def, Stafford Stiles Hoff, a man pushing 30, who doesn't know his own address. How would he know? It's a place. He goes there all the time. It's at the end of a street somewhere. I remember the addresses of every place I lived for the last 25 years. Oh, and his death glare at JJ when it was pointed how ridiculous he sounded was noteworthy. I see the camera operators felt the same way.

4 hours ago, LucindaWalsh said:

I did a Blossom's Joey Whoa! reaction to the defendant's witness in the daughter suing mother tv/microwave case. Whoa! 

Whoa, indeed. What a pack of mutant misfits, all of them. Stacy, the plaintiff, and her peculiar wee boyfriend want to play house, but can't live independently even after 5 years together and have to live with giant Mommy. They can't pay rent for their own place or take care of themselves but they needed a dog they can't take care of.  After all that time, they saved up "about" 200$ towards their dream home with a yard for the dog. Def's witness, who bought the 10$ microwave so Stacy could buy drugs, or so she says, and get in more fights or whatever nonsense she was involved in, better stop what she's doing because she looked like an extra for "The Walking Dead." BUT, I guess we should be thankful that Stacy and Bobby(??) have not yet produced a new generation. At least, I sincerely hope they haven't. Oh, and no way did Momma cart a 32" flat screen out to the curb and leave it there. Gimme a break. She pawned or sold it. This is how these people live their lives.

In the daycare kerfuffle, the only thing I got stuck on is that def chose to pop out two kids with some guy ("Was he your husband?" "No". What a surprise. I thought JJ would know better than to even ask) with whom she cannot communicate or exchange kids without creating such a scene the police had to be called. I'm sure the little children enjoyed seeing Mommy and Daddy acting like homicidal maniacs. And of course "the state" is paying most of the daycare for the kids def decided to have but can't afford. 

ETA: "Epiphany"? Needs to have one,  and stop expecting everyone to subsidize her because she's broke yet feels she needs to drive a Lexus. Get your own Lexus, Epiphany. Oh, right - she can't do that because she stiffs creditors. So take a bus, you mouthy, entitled freeloader. I hope StepPop never extends another dime to support her. I felt sorry for her poor mother. 

Edited July 7, 2019 by AngelaHunter

[zillabreeze]

44 minutes ago, AngelaHunter said:

BUT, I guess we should be thankful that Stacy and Bobby(??) have not yet produced a new generation. 

If they haven't started, she'll play catch up soon enough and I got the odds the total brat count will include a few that aren't Bobby's.  If poor dog is female, they'll be backyard breeding coming too. Cause that's how our litigants roll.

[AngelaHunter]

2 hours ago, zillabreeze said:

If they haven't started, she'll play catch up soon enough and I got the odds the total brat count will include a few that aren't Bobby's. 

I was going to say I can't imagine that anyone else would want her. Silly me. These low-level breeders can always find lots of fugly losers willing to boink them. They might not stick around or even "date" but they'll procreate, cuz dropping babies is no big deal.

[zillabreeze]

11 minutes ago, AngelaHunter said:

willing to boink them. They might not stick around or even "date" but they'll procreate, cuz dropping babies is no big deal.

I'm a child of the 70s, there was a lot of boinking going on.  I heartily participated!  There was 15 ways to Sunday to boink without babies!  We boinked between bong hits, we boinked after concerts, we boinked at the lake ... There was boinking with NO babies!

We had BC pills, IUDs and condoms.  The one thing we didn't know was that boink babies would be our lifetime source of income. 

A boink oops would be the road to poverty.  Now, a boink oops is a paycheck.

[AngelaHunter]

1 hour ago, zillabreeze said:

A boink oops would be the road to poverty.  Now, a boink oops is a paycheck.

Absolutely. When I was young and single I made damned sure there were no oopsies, because I had to work to support my frivolous habits, like eating and keeping a roof over my head. No Daddy or Byrd around to support me and a young healthy person collecting welfare because they were too stupid to avoid getting knocked up was shameful to us. 

Our litigants really seem to have never heard of birth control, or if they have, see no reason to use it even during some booty call with a virtual stranger they met an hour earlier at a gas station. I remember JJ asking one bone-headed young girl who "found out" she was pregnant, "Why don't you use birth control?" *crickets* and then "I just didn't." *shrug* that says "why would you ask such a dumb question? BIrth control??? pffftt"

[zillabreeze]

38 minutes ago, AngelaHunter said:

Why don't you use birth control?" *crickets* and then "I just didn't." *shrug* that says "why would you ask such a dumb question? might

I  call  bullshit.  They know damn well what causes babies.  Babies = money

[CrazyInAlabama]

3 p.m. reruns -

Repossessed or Stolen-(This is the case where the defendant only found out the plaintiff didn't have a driver's license when defendant started dating plaintiff's husband-not ex-husband but current husband)  Plaintiff suing defendant for repossessing the car that was in defendant's name, purchased in defendant's name because of bad credit, and plaintiff owed DMV fines.    Plaintiff never had a driver's license for the entire year she had the car.    I think this is the first litigant/plaintiff that was up to date on payments, at least according to plaintiff.   However, payment records show many late payments over the year.  JJ brings up a good point, that if there had been an accident, the insurance company would have disclaimed.   Plaintiff also owes for a toll violation $103.50.   Defendant gets $103.50, plaintiff gets nothing. 

Wedding Date Disaster-Plaintiff and wife suing husband's step daughter (daughter of his ex-wife) for wedding costs, a puppy purchase, and haggard looking defendant sort of son-in-law DUI fines (from 10 years ago) they paid so his salary wouldn't get his wages garnished.  I really can't stand any of the litigants.    The plaintiff's raise dogs for money, this puppy is from litter number 3, so I officially can't stand the plaintiff's either.  Puppy was $700, and defendant did a stop payment for the check.   Plaintiffs get $2798.  

Kung Fu Kickin' Landlord-Defendant/landlady admits she kicked tenant in the stomach, after she broke down his door.     Defendant certainly is amused by admitting she assaulted the man.   Plaintiff claims a violent physical assault, and wants rent back.     The confrontation with the defendant was because she was moving multiple other roommates into the apartment, and everything went downhill from there.    The two current tenants (including deadbeat plaintiff), are being evicted by the apartment complex.    That apartment sounds like an interesting place to live, full of drama and assaults, and packed with people.    Nothing for defendant, plaintiff gets $500 for the assault. 

[CrazyInAlabama]

5 p.m. reruns-

Blind Man's Outrageous Request-Uber driver says blind customer didn't pay for the ride to and from Sonic, and borrowed money from her for food, and never paid her, and called Uber and made horrible complaints about driver.        Plaintiff gets her $586 for lost wages, and what defendant took from her. 

Service Dog Attacked in Coffee Shop-Plaintiff claims coffee shop owner's unleashed pit/lab crosses (two dogs) bit her small service dog.   Defendant pit/lab owner has the most ludicrous excuses, and blames everything on defendant.    Plaintiff says both pit/lab crosses bit her dog.  Defendant claims plaintiff came to the coffee shop door, threw her little dog inside, and that's when the owner's dogs nipped the little dog.  The only reason the defendant is happy is because JJ and Byrd paid the bills for the dog from the show money, and the defendant is despicable.  $2100 for the plaintiff.      

Death Threat Caught on Tap-Two women who had a common boyfriend (now everyone's ex) plaintiff (most recent ex) suing defendant (previous ex) for vandalism to her car.   There were two incidents, second incident police report says defendant was on the plaintiff's property, when car was keyed.     Plaintiff had a temporary order of protection, and that was extended to two years.    Car was keyed for the third time, six months later, with a recorded voice mail threatening plaintiff.   Defendant is demented over some loser boyfriend.   After a two year protective order was issued, the defendant lost her job as a paralegal.  $5000 to plaintiff

Mother/Daughter Debt Duel-Plaintiff mother suing defendant daughter for the loss on a repossessed car that mother co-signed for.    After daughter had car for a year, she dropped it at mother's house, and said she didn't want it any more.   There were no missed payments by daughter.   There was a dispute over son-in-law driving, and being on the insurance.   Daughter/defendant wanted a restraining order against mother for harassment, coming to her office and bad mouthing son-in-law/husband.   Plaintiff consented to the first restraining order, instead of going through a trial.   Daughter/defendant was arrested (she claims it has nothing to do with the case today).     I missed the arrest information.  Shortfall on car is $5030, so plaintiff gets $5k.  Defendant's ridiculous countersuit is dismissed.

[Byrd is the Word]

14 hours ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

Blind Man's Outrageous Request

I’d almost forgotten how hostile this guy was. And the “your honor” at the end of every single answer was painful to hear. There’s blind and then there’s just plain anti social. 

14 hours ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

The only reason the defendant is happy is because JJ and Byrd paid the bills for the dog from the show money, and the defendant is despicable.

I found them both despicable and equally full of shit. I’m pretty sure the defendant is happy because the show capped the damages at $2,100. I believe that the plaintiff did indeed advance the $10,000 figure that the defendant mentioned in the hall. And I absolutely believe that the plaintiff tried to turn this happening into an income opportunity. Her haterview remark about negotiations tells me what I needed to know. There’s nothing to negotiate. Either pay the vet bills, no more no less, or I’ll see you in court. Plus, that little dog with the $40 Amazon “service dog” vest combined with her dramatic cleansing breath and namaste gesture made me almost wish the defendant’s dog bitten the plaintiff. 

Edited July 9, 2019 by Byrd is the Word

[ItsHelloPattiagain]

14 hours ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

Blind Man's Outrageous Request-Uber driver says blind customer didn't pay for the ride to and from Sonic, and borrowed money from her for food, and never paid her, and called Uber and made horrible complaints about driver.

Ahhhh, this lovely specimen of humanity again. I always thought this was a set-up and the dude had no money on his card (probably waiting for his SS that Byrd paid for) . We have Uber Eats and Door Dash and other food delivery services here that will pick up your Sonic and deliver it right to your house without you having to put on pants (except to answer the door).  And the Sonic where I live is the last chance fast food place (meaning it's where you go when every other place is closed). 

14 hours ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

Defendant is demented over some loser boyfriend.   After a two year protective order was issued, the defendant lost her job as a paralegal.  $5000 to plaintiff

Defendant was cray cray with her shoulder-peeking top. And I bet the BF was just eating it up that these two women were fighting over his sorry self. (and that the defendant felt obligated to be his mama and put up a fight for him). 

[zillabreeze]

1 hour ago, ItsHelloPattiagain said:

We have Uber Eats and Door Dash and other food delivery services here that will pick up your Sonic and deliver it right to your house

Just for grins, I played with those services one day.  A $7.  Burger only from Whataburger was going to cost just shy of $20. after fees, processing, tips, etc!!!! 

[funky-rat]

7 minutes ago, zillabreeze said:

Just for grins, I played with those services one day.  A $7.  Burger only from Whataburger was going to cost just shy of $20. after fees, processing, tips, etc!!!! 

Yeah, it's a rip.  The only time I see it being worth it is if you are having a gathering, or some sort of work luncheon, etc.   A local hoagie place here used to deliver, then they changed to GrubHub or DoorDash only.  They're now out of business.  No one was willing to pay the ludicrous fees.

[zillabreeze]

4 minutes ago, funky-rat said:

.  No one was willing to pay the ludicrous fees.

I could see the value if you had been enjoying some adult beverages and were weighing the crazy cost vs. driving buzzed.  

The local pizza & Chinese still do their own deliveries for a $1. + tip.

[Florinaldo]

17 hours ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

Blind Man's Outrageous Request

This guy was even more retch-inducing the second time around. I am sure he uses his disability to scam and bully people all the time, because they let him get away with such behaviour for fear of looking like the bad guys. In his case, his main disability is his loathsome dishonesty. Thankfully the driver had enough spine to stand up to him and take him to court.