All Episodes Talk: All Rise

[Florinaldo]

15 hours ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

(In the hall-terview plaintiff says she wants visitation, and defendant says never going to happen). 

Good decision. If he lets her have visitation she will be there all the time and he will probably have to take her to court to shake her off; she may try to "visit" anyway even without his consent. He may be a bit of a dick, but the dog is better with him than with that obsessed neurotic ("The dog is my child", "I made an Instagram page for him").

13 hours ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

Frightening Dental Scare-

Defendant tried the frequent "I did not ask, he offered" defense. Litigants who do that usually forget the converse argument "but you accepted it dearie". Which makes it a contract and a loan.

13 hours ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

$5,000 to plaintiff, leaving her $7,000 short. 

At least she got some money back since the show pays out the award. If she sued him in real-life small claims she would never be able to collect with this deadbeat and would still owe for the full amount. Perhaps she can negotiate a settlement with the finance company for the remainder of the debt. He kept saying tht he was let down by people he thought were his family, as if they have a duty to support him and pay for his every whim.

[CrazyInAlabama]

3 p.m. episodes, both reruns, probably 2016-2017-

First-

You Sound Like a Fool-Plaintiff suing defendant for medical treatment, rabies shots, and damages after defendant's poodle bit her.   Dog bit plaintiff in the apartment parking lot, dog was off leash, collarless, was wandering in the street without an owner.   Poodle bit her on the hand.       Plaintiff called animal control, and defendant's young daughter came out of the apartment complex, and dog owner got defensive.    Animal Control report says no proof of rabies shots, so plaintiff had to get four shots in her arm over three weeks.    Defendant's witness is  an adult friend of defendant, and they keep calling the plaintiff a liar.      (Defendant tries to charge the sacred desk, and Officer Byrd rather sharply tells her to get back).  (There is no proof dog was vaccinated for rabies before the bite.   Dog had to get rabies vaccines updated after the bite, to get dog out of impound.    Receipt of rabies shot from 2014, was only obtained the week before court).   

Defendant and her witness's excuses are ridiculous.     Defendant hasn't paid the impound fee either.   Defendant's witness claims dog was outside briefly, wasn't off the property, and never bit the plaintiff.   Defendant's witness is such a liar, and keep mouthing off at JJ, and calls the plaintiff a liar.    Animal control report says neighbor says poodle is frequently running loose.  Defendant claims plaintiff hates Latinos.   

Plaintiff gets $1500.   (I think the plaintiff should have received all $5,000 for having to take rabies shots, and put up with defendant's stank attitude). 

Gambling Getaway Gone Wrong-Plaintiff suing ex boyfriend for unpaid gambling loan, and property damage.   They went from Stockton to Reno, defendant claims woman gave him $800 so he wouldn't bounce a check, and plaintiff gets $800 for the loan back. 

All property damage claims are dismissed from both litigants.   

Second-

This is Not Show and Tell-Plaintiff suing former roommate for an illegal lockout.  Plaintiff was already in the condo, and defendant needed a roommate, and landlord matched them up.  This all occurred in Denver.    Defendant says she's only another renter, and not the landlord.  However, defendant is the one that changed the locks, after putting plaintiff's property outside.      After the lockout, defendant moved another friend/ tenant into the condo.    Defendant's counter claim is that plaintiff damaged her motorcycle.   

Plaintiff couldn't move his California King bed, a sofa, love seat, entertainment stand, dresser.  Defendant claims couch, ottoman, and love seat are in the garage at defendant's place.   Defendant says the bed is gone, but defendant tossed the dresser, entertainment center, and other large items outside, and they disappeared.   Plaintiff was going to move, rented a U-haul, but defendant had already locked him out, tossed his stuff, or put it into the garage.    Defendant claims to have hearing loss in the one ear, and defendant was napping, and couldn't hear the knocking.   (My guess is defendant hears what she wants to, and ignored the plaintiff coming to pick up his stuff).   

Defendant has some ridiculous counter claim about her motorcycle.  Defendant starts to charge the desk of Justice. 

Plaintiff is suing for replacing the furniture.   $2509 to plaintiff.  Defendant's stupid counter claim dismissed. 

Smoked Out-Plaintiff suing former landlord for return of security deposit, and rent.      Plaintiff paid $1200 for rent, and security deposit.    Defendant, and live-in both smoke, and they agreed to smoke outside.    Plaintiff moved his stuff into the room, found out the landlord and girlfriend were smoking indoors.     Plaintiff moved out the next day, after defendants were smoking up a storm in the house, and the defendant's in-laws were staying for quite a while, and were smoking indoors also.

Plaintiff receives $1200 back.  

[CrazyInAlabama]

5 p.m. episodes, both recent reruns-

First-

Man Shaken Up By Nephew's Murder-Plaintiff was renting a room from defendant (he had a two bedroom apartment), and she left.  Plaintiff is suing defendant/former roommate, former property manager (son of property owner) , and the boyfriend's mother (she owns the five unit apartment house).   Defendant kept plaintiff's security deposit and never returned it, and never turned it over to landlady.    JJ dismisses the case against the property manager, and the owner.    Defendant is counter claiming because plaintiff video taped apartment condition when she left.   

Defendant/former roommates all seem to leave rather quickly, and he never returns security deposits.   Only former roommate is still the defendant, because he never turned over security deposit from plaintiff to property owner or manager.   (Defendant says he's upset because his nephew was killed in a mass shooting recently).     

Defendant swears she caused a flea infestation from her cat, and other damages.   However, defendant's girlfriend and dog stay over often, so fleas could come from the dog too.   

Security was $1100, and plaintiff gets back $980.    Defendant case dismissed.  

Worst Case Car Scenario-Plaintiff suing former friend/defendant for damages to a third party's vehicle,  after friend gets into an accident while driving her uninsured car.   Defendant says plaintiff asked him to look at her car, and tell her what was wrong with it.   Plaintiff had no insurance.   The car in question wasn't driveable, plaintiff had another car.   Defendant had the car towed to a friend's house to work on it, and got it running.  He took the car for a test drive,   

Plaintiff says she was selling the car to the defendant, but it wasn't registered to him, or insured, and defendant didn't have the title.     Sale of car wasn't complete, car was registered to plaintiff, and she says Allstate covered the car.   However, she did not have insurance on the car, just the one she was driving (bet it doesn't either).   My sympathies are with the third party who had their car wrecked by the plaintiff's uninsured car.   Plaintiff wants to be paid for having an uninsured car, an idiot driving it, and for the idiot having an accident.    

The third party that defendant hit sued plaintiff for almost $5,000.  Case dismissed. 

Second-

Paving the Way to Unemployment-Plaintiff suing cement mason for jack hammering a driveway, and destroying her driveway.     Defendants claims someone on the internet hired them to put in a new driveway, plaintiff wasn't home, and neither was the person that hired them.    Defendants gave a $6,000 quote, but person hiring them wanted $300 first from the defendant to prove it was a legitimate bank account.   They sent the $300, and defendants jack hammered a lot of the driveway, and plaintiff was shocked to come home and see her driveway destroyed, since she never hired them.   

 Not surprising that they could never get in touch with the 'owner' who wasn't an owner, and was a scammer.   

Plaintiff receives $2268, plus $895, totaling, $3163 to replace her driveway.    (The two defendants never accepted that they were scammed, and had ruined a driveway that they had no right to touch).

The Magically Disappearing Dilapidated Car-Plaintiff suing former friend for the disappearance of her car.  Defendant towed plaintiff's car into his mechanics shop, after plaintiff inherited car from late uncle, fall of 2016.   Four months later car didn't pass emissions, but it was registered, pending passing the test,( it flunked).   Car is a 1994 Buick LeSabre (spelling?).   

From Fall 2016 to October 2018 car went back and forth to defendant's mechanics shop, and it was never registered.   In October 2018 car was brought back to mechanic, it was parked in front of his house, and towed for expired registration.   

Plaintiff claims she can't find her car, and defendant says car was towed to city impound, and defendant claims he told the plaintiff.    The mechanic must have been really cheap for that woman to waste over two years sending her car back and forth to him.   

 $1.002 to plaintiff.   (I wouldn't have given them a penny.    They drove an unregistered car for over two years, so they did not come to court with clean hands).    

[Ilovecomputers]

On 4/6/2020 at 6:59 PM, CrazyInAlabama said:

Plaintiff was snooping in mother's iPad, and found dog was rehomed, during the mother's critical illness. 

Despicable!  I get asked a lot to help friends and acquaintances with computer problems and people share their passwords with me on all kinds of applications, but I would never dream of snooping on anyone. I’m surprised JJ didn’t seem to pick up on that. 

16 hours ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

Plaintiff claims she can't find her car, and defendant says car was towed to city impound, and defendant claims he told the plaintiff. 

My gosh, Judy had serious anger management problems in this episode!  I think there should be ratings for her shows, such as:

E- Educational (JJ illustrates the doctrine of “clean hands” or the four corners of a contract or other legal principles);

C- Cray, cray (plaintiff or defendant demonstrate crazy eyes or crazy behaviour)

X- Expertise (JJ demonstrates her expert knowledge in accident reconstruction, jewelry appraisals; normal wear and tear on leased premises, etc.); 

T- Talk Over Me Quotient (The decibel level reached in any episode while JJ, plaintiff and/or  defendant try to talk over one another. Additional points are added if JJ uses her ballpoint pen as a gavel; and

A- Admonishments.  Includes sharp criticisms by JJ to either party for drinking the water, crossing one’s arms, not standing up straight, for thinking they were coming to a tea dance or audition. 

What am I forgetting?

[SRTouch]

20 minutes ago, Ilovecomputers said:

Despicable!  I get asked a lot to help friends and acquaintances with computer problems and people share their passwords with me on all kinds of applications, but I would never dream of snooping on anyone. I’m surprised JJ didn’t seem to pick up on that. 

My gosh, Judy had serious anger management problems in this episode!  I think there should be ratings for her shows, such as:

E- Educational (JJ illustrates the doctrine of “clean hands” or the four corners of a contract or other legal principles);

C- Cray, cray (plaintiff or defendant demonstrate crazy eyes or crazy behaviour)

X- Expertise (JJ demonstrates her expert knowledge in accident reconstruction, jewelry appraisals; normal wear and tear on leased premises, etc.); 

T- Talk Over Me Quotient (The decibel level reached in any episode while JJ, plaintiff and/or  defendant try to talk over one another. Additional points are added if JJ uses her ballpoint pen as a gavel; and

A- Admonishments.  Includes sharp criticisms by JJ to either party for drinking the water, crossing one’s arms, not standing up straight, for thinking they were coming to a tea dance or audition. 

What am I forgetting?

MA - We must always keep in mind how things work in "MY America"

[bad things are bad]

Quote

(Defendant says he's upset because his nephew was killed in a mass shooting recently).  

You heard it hear first. In a few months "I/my partner/parent/neighbor/favorite entertainer had teh Covid and I was traumatized" is going to be an excuse for some bad behavior. 

 

[CrazyInAlabama]

3 p.m. episodes, both reruns, probably from 2016-2017-

First-

Stealing From the Disabled-Plaintiff /former tenant suing former landlord (owner of duplex, who lives in one side, and rents the other side out) for stealing from her bank account.  Plaintiff claims her landlady had the account number, and pin number, and used it to steal from her.  However, rent was $750, but the withdrawal was for $713 instead.   Plaintiff had a history of late payments, one month non-payment until well after the due date, so she was served with an eviction notice from landlady.   This all happened in Sparks, NV, near Reno.   Plaintiff paid 1 week of August, paid September, paid October on 13 October, and Housing court judge said to pay part of November, and use security deposit for the rest of November, and to move out of the apartment.   I wish JJ would stomp over to the plaintiff, and punch her right in that faded tattoo on plaintiff's neck.   

How dare the plaintiff call JJ, "Miss Judge Judy" .      

JJ says no proof of theft, no reason to get security back, since no payment for one month was ever paid.   Utilities weren't in her name, but that wasn't put in counter claim.    Damages are cleaning, holes in wall, etc. 

Both cases dismissed.  

Stalking and Harassment-Plaintiff suing ex-girlfriend for unpaid loans, and the return of belongings (a spare laptop, and a BBQ grill).   Defendant claims stalking and harassment, but no police report.   What a shock, they met online.   Plaintiff loaned her money for her to buy items to resell at the flea market.     As JJ says, if plaintiff is so scared of defendant, then why doesn't she return his property.  

Plaintiff loans, and credit charges are dismissed.   Counterclaim dismissed.    Plaintiff has order to retrieve his grill and laptop in the next five days with a police escort. 

Second-

Repoed for a Crazy Amount-Plaintiff bought car from defendant, (2004 Saturn Ion) plaintiff still owed $60, so defendant repoed the car.  Defendant doesn't have title or registration, and claims she repoed car, and gave car away.   Defendant says car had bad memories about previous boyfriend, so she just wanted the car gone.    $1,000 of the down payment was for defendant to pay her car note off.  

 Plaintiff paid $1,000 to defendant, and defendant claimed she would pay car off (def. only had car for six months) at dealership.    $1560 was paid to defendant, she still owed nasty heifer $60, and it was repoed.     When plaintiff came to defendant's house to pay the last $60, the boyfriend took the car. 

Who the hell is the defendant's boyfriend?    I thought Charles Manson was in jail when this was filmed, not in JJ's court.  Defendant claims she gave car to friend of boyfriend.   JJ calls the man that defendant claims she gave the car to, but he doesn't answer his phone. 

Plaintiff gets $1000 (she drove the car for five months).   

Then, in the hall-terview defendant yells at someone to stop laughing, I'm assuming the boyfriend?  Or maybe one of the camera guys. 

Dog Grooming Business Fail-Plaintiff suing former roommate for value of dog grooming equipment, and lost wages for $4700.    Plaintiff moved in to the house in April, and moved out in July, and left her dog grooming stuff behind in the shed she used for her dog grooming business.      When blonde moved out defendant wasn't home, and the dog grooming shed was locked.  Defendant claims woman never picked her equipment up, so he eventually trashed it.   There is only one receipt, for a table.      

Defendant claims plaintiff never used the dog grooming equipment, never had customers, and JJ wants case to go back to Missouri.   

Plaintiff gets $100, and if defendant wants last week's rent $90, he needs to sue her locally.  This is to pay her for the equipment.     I would have given the plaintiff $10 to make up for the rent. 

Hallterview is hysterical. plaintiff claims man used her phone to dial all of her boyfriends. Defendant says a 21 year old always has their phone glued to their face, so he couldn't have used her phone if he tried.   Good point from defendant.  

[CrazyInAlabama]

5 p.m. episodes, both recent reruns-

First-

Your Personal Pain Means Nothing-Defendants are alleged to have done a ton of damages to a rental house owned by plaintiff.    Plaintiff says her medical issues prevented her from suing sooner.    Tenants had a one year lease, left a month early, and plaintiff's attorney tried to arrange a walk through, but it never happened.    There are dated move in photos, but move out photos are from a cell phone, and not dated.   $700 for ruined rug, and cleaning.  Sleazy former tenant pulls out regs citing 21 days to tell him of damages, but they left no forwarding address.   

Landlady has proof tenant refused walk through, in an email.   Tenant claims to have video and pictures day of move out, but he says he got rid of them.    Tenants claim they left a forwarding address, but they didn't even with the post office.    Landlady/plaintiff hired a skip tracer through her attorney, and there is email from tenant saying not to contact him in any way.    Defendant claims to be a contractor, there is no way in hell I would hire him after seeing the despicable way treated the landlady.    Also, I love how JJ told the defendants that they were either trying to cheat the landlady, or were stupid liars (I'm going with stupid liars, and I bet they get away with this garbage on every rental they have ever lived in.  ) 

Tenants used security deposit as last months rent, so that's gone.  Tenant won't shut up, and says house was falling apart, so why did he rent it?  Landlady says it took many months to fix the house for the next renter.   

Too late for landlady to get any money, case dismissed.   Plaintiff needs to get a new attorney, if they don't know about how to send certified letters to the house address, and they will either be forwarded or returned.  Case and counter claim dismissed. 

Second-

Watch his Case if You Have Children-Plaintiffs suing parent of child for throwing a rock and damaging their car.  Plaintiff witness is a neighbor's child.   Plaintiff noticed two days later her car was dented, and she asked a neighbor's son if he knew who damaged her car.   As usual, defendant claims her son didn't do this.    Witness's grandmother waited until plaintiff came to her door to have witness tell what he saw.  Defendant son gets the witness chair, and claims he doesn't know who threw the rock.      JJ says there isn't enough proof, and JJ suspects the plaintiff's witness actually did it.   

Case dismissed.  (My guess is in the rock throwing case the defendant said he didn't know who threw the rock, because if he admitted the plaintiff's witness did it, the child would beat the snot out of him when they got home.   I bet the bigger kid, the plaintiff's witness, is the neighborhood bully, and his grandmother doesn't care about that. )

Liar, Thief and a Cheat-Plaintiff suing former employer for unpaid wages for house painting. Defendant's witness is not available, and has no proof that plaintiff didn't finish the paint job.     

$300 lost wages to plaintiff.  defendant has zero proof of anything.   Defendant should have paid the man. 

[CrazyInAlabama]

3 p.m. episodes, both reruns, probably 2016-2017-

First-

Sister Brother Breakdown-Plaintiff suing brother for rent, bills, unpaid utilities, and taking furniture with him that belonged to her.      Plaintiff owned a house, and moved to another city, and rented to brother.  Brother was supposed to lease/purchase the house.    Plaintiff moved in with another brother and sister, in another part of Texas.   Brother claims sister forced him to move into house, and purchase her house.   Brother never qualified for a mortgage for the house.    So brother was still paying rent, pending purchasing another house.     Then the sister/plaintiff moved back to the house, and brother still paid same rent to sister.     Sister says brother let propane tank run out, hurting the propane system.     

Plaintiff says brother took her bedroom set when he moved out.    Sister will have five days to pickup the bedroom set within five days.    Rent is thrown out, and so are the utilities.

Defendant/brother counter claim for two unregistered cars is dismissed.   Plaintiff gets her bedroom set if she picks it up within five days.

Neighborhood Hit and Run-Plaintiff claims neighbor across street backed across a two lane wide road, and hit her van parked on the street, then fled the scene.    Plaintiff didn't make a police report, because he thought neighbors would pay for the damage.      Plaintiff woman claims she, and her son saw the neighbor's car back up, and her van rocking, and other car driving off.    Plaintiff's don't know who was driving the car.  

Defendant wife says either brother or son drove van, and no one can prove that their van hit the plaintiff's van, but claims the van is only at her home occasionally.     Plaintiff says van is at the neighbor's house all of the time.     Plaintiff throws her husband under the bus, as the car driver.   

Plaintiffs receive $1100.

Second-

Mom the Mechanic-Plaintiff suing defendant over the value of plaintiff's car, and impound fees.   Car was deemed abandoned by the city, and towed to impound.   Defendant says she's an amateur mechanic, fixed the car, and then moved it to the street, and car was impounded.    Plaintiff paid $2200 for car parts, for a 20 year old car, and defendant was going to charge only parts and labor for repair.         Defendant was told by the city that car not registered to her could not remain on her property for more than 48 hours.   Defendant was going to be fined $200 a day for having the car on her property. 

As usual, defendant's phone croaked, and messages telling plaintiff to move the car are lost.    Plaintiff has the text messages.    Defendant claims car was repaired, and running, and she moved it to the street.    Plaintiff claims the car was not running, and had been gutted of all parts.   

Plaintiff paid $2200 for the car, and car dealer would only give her $500 on the car as a trade in.    Plaintiff receives $500 for the car.   

Dog Etiquette 101-Plaintiff suing defendant for injuries to her dog, after a dog fight.   However, plaintiff let her dog approach the other one, when the attack happened.    Plaintiff husband was holding dog leash, and walking the dogs.   Defendant was standing with her two dogs, and all were on a fire road.    Defendant stopped, and held her dogs while the plaintiffs passed the woman and her dogs.    Plaintiff let his dog approach the defendant's dog, and defendant dog lunged and bit the plaintiff's dog.  

As JJ says, defendant is not responsible for the vet bills, since plaintiffs didn't ask if the dogs were friendly, or anything else before allowing their dog to approach the defendant's dogs.   Just because a dog is friendly at a dog park, or other situations, then some are leash reactive.     Defendant claims plaintiff dog lunged?    

Case dismissed.  

 

[CrazyInAlabama]

5 p.m. episodes, both recent reruns-

First-

Three Words No Man Can Say (they are "I don't know")-Plaintiff suing ex-boyfriend for assault, a headstone for miscarried child, and other stuff.   Defendant was buying home under VA, and plaintiff gave him $1,000 for his closing costs, and they were going to live there together.   Defendant simply won't stop acting a fool, and won't shut up.   Defendant is a disabled vet, gets a VA pension, and does odd jobs.   He claims he paid plaintiff $100 monthly rent for the nine months they lived in her apartment, and she only paid $240 a month (In subsidized housing are you allowed to have roommates?).    Plaintiff doesn't get $1000 back, because there was no contract saying the money was a loan.     

Plaintiff miscarried at four months, and she wants half of the cost of the headstone ($400 is his half).   Plaintiff paid $400 for the burial, and the headstone was $800 more.  Defendant didn't pay for half of the funeral, so why would he agree to pay for half of the headstone?  There was no agreement for defendant to pay $400 for half of the headstone.   

Case dismissed. 

Adorable Little Girl Confesses-Plaintiff alleges defendant's little girl knocked over a sign, (a pole with a cement block on the bottom), and it damaged the plaintiff's car.  Plaintiff couldn't hear the loud boom over her own sound system.  Defendant mother says plaintiff was parking illegally, and so she shouldn't have to pay.     Little girl is in the witness chair, and admits she pushed the pole.   

JJ says it was defendant's mother role to control her daughter, and didn't.   (Kid might have been cute on the stand, but she sure looked angry when mommy lost).  (I hate those sound systems where the entire trunk is a giant speaker.   Fortunately, those systems are a great way to get a ticket here)   If that woman's music is so loud she can't hear a giant boom of the sign hitting, how does she hear ambulance sirens?   

$452 to plaintiff.  

Second-

Oil Doesn't Go There-Plaintiff let defendant move in with her for six months, and in month five defendant wrecked, and totaled out her own car.   Then she stole plaintiff's car, put oil in the hydraulic fluid port.    Defendant moved back with a relative after the car incident.   Plaintiff's witness is an employee of the mechanic's shop, but has no mechanical training.   Car is at Aamco transmission.   There is no proof that the defendant caused the damages. 

 Case dismissed without prejudice, to go back to Omaha so witnesses can come to court.

Lesbian Love Gone Wrong-Plaintiff is suing ex-girlfriend for damages, and stolen property.  They lived together for about two months, then broke up.   Defendant had a court order, and brought a locksmith to get her property from the house.    Plaintiff claims when defendant received her property, she took defendant's property also.    As JJ points out, the court paperwork says that defendant lives in the home, but it was always the plaintiff's home.  Plaintiff gets her passport, and charm back.     One more necklace will be returned to the plaintiff, but the rest of the jewelry are gifts so defendant keeps those items. 

Plaintiff gets some stuff back.   Cases dismissed.  

Incarcerated Son's Loan Loss-Plaintiff is suing other grand mother of her son's kids, for the value of a car, or the return of the car.  Plaintiff's son is in jail, and pre-incarceration a title loan was placed on the car to raise bail for loser son.    Plaintiff was taking care of defendant's two grand kids for CPS, family foster (baby was born addicted).     Defendant claims the kids went back to CPS because plaintiff refused to keep watching kids, and defendant's and her relatives' homes were unsuitable.    

Plaintiff says defendant daughter wanted the kids, but defendant grandmother doesn't pass DOJ rules to keep the kids in her house (Daughter lives with her mother, the defendant).   (Yes, I'm rotten, I really wanted to know why grandmother and others were unfit to keep the kids). 

Car is titled in plaintiff's name, order will give possession of car back to plaintiff, and she can sell it to pay off the title loan.   End of case. 

[Florinaldo]

3 hours ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

Three Words No Man Can Say

I wonder how often JJ herself utters those three little words. Just about never since she fancies herself a grand polymath and supreme expert in all fields.

Would that make her an honorary male?

[CrazyInAlabama]

3 p.m. episodes, both reruns from probably 2016-2017-

First-

Eyelash and Tanning Business Bust-Plaintiff suing former friend for unpaid loans, and unauthorized use of his debit card.    Plaintiff sold his home, and needed to start a business as an investment, and invested in plaintiff's eyelash, and tanning business.  Tanning bed was $1400, and plaintiff claims another $500 in check.  Defendant accepted a check for granddaughter's preschool from plaintiff  Defendant claims she remodeled his mobile home to repay him for the money, and helped him pack his home.    Defendant claims she bailed on the friendship when plaintiff sent her indecent photos on her cell phone.   Defendant erased the photos.

As JJ says, defendant should have paid the money back, if she thought plaintiff only gave her money because he had feelings for her.      $465 to plaintiff for the child's school.

Surprise Evidence-Plaintiff was living with defendant, before that they both lived in the plaintiff's grandparents home.     When plaintiff turned 18, she says defendant wanted the gas and electric bills in plaintiff's name, because of a bad history of non-payments to utilities, and bad credit.   Defendant claims the utilities were in the brother's name.  However, the utility bills are addressed to plaintiff.    Plaintiff says a previous residence of defendant were in the brother's name.

$763 to plaintiff.      

Second-

Lame Horse Trespassing-Plaintiff purchased a horse from the defendant, and wants purchase price of horse, and vet bills back.   Plaintiff claims horse was dead lame for the three weeks she had the horse, and she never rode the horse, but there are pictures on Facebook posted with plaintiff on the horse.    Plaintiff returned the horse to defendant's barn while trespassing, and defendants are suing for the vet bills of horse since she was returned.    

Plaintiff claims defendants knew she was dumping horse on them, but defendants say she was lying.   Plaintiff claims she called the vet, three weeks after she purchased the horse, and finally had the vet out, and dumped the horse on the defendants.   

Plaintiff will not get a refund of purchase price.    Picture of trail ride is plaintiff's boyfriend riding the horse.     

Plaintiff case dismissed, and defendant will resell the horse.  

I'm Tired of Paying for Weed-Plaintiff is suing former tenant for rent, late fees, and damages to property.     Defendant was growing pot, because he was sick of paying for his own weed supply.    Defendant claims he paid his every two weeks rent, then admits he didn't pay for two months.  Defendant claims he owes plaintiff nothing.    Defendant claims plaintiff knew he was growing weed at the house, and plaintiff denies that.      

 Amended lease, signed by both parties, say that defendant will keep place in good condition, because plaintiff was trying to sell the property.     Defendant claims plaintiff was trying to sell house, so he decided not to pay the rent.    Damages to house include 

Plaintiff receives $675 for rent.   

[CrazyInAlabama]

5 p.m. episodes, both recent reruns-

First-

(These are 2 parts of the same case, they just both suing each other.  The ex-boyfriend has an adult daughter as a witness, he must look younger than he is.  As JJ says about the boyfriend, what's the attraction?)

You Can Have Him...Keyed on Car-Plaintiff claims defendant (ex girl friend of plaintiff's ex boyfriend)wrote "you can have him" on her car paint,   Defendant sent a photo of the car damage, saying "Look what I did".   Defendant was doing this with her older children sitting in her car watching.   JJ has everyone's favorite baby daddy in the witness chair.   

$4500 to plaintiff.

Baby Daddy Tire Flattener-Plaintiff (defendant from first case) suing everyone's favorite guy, Dwayne.  She spent the night at his house, he got jealous, she left, and about 4 a.m. the tires were flattened, and she claims Dwayne did it.  She also claims her garage, and car was spray painted, and I won't mention what he said.   Dwayne was arrested for probation violation, and police never followed up on tire flattening.  The writing on the windshield must be very nasty, because they blurred it.   

Second police report changes the story plaintiff told, where plaintiff claims it wasn't the defendant.     There is a statement by plaintiff that says Dwayne didn't do it.    Case dismissed.

Second-

I Wouldn't Let You Take Care of a Goldfish-Plaintiffs suing former caretaker for father for  unpaid loans, and attorney fees.  Defendant can't even remember when she worked for the plaintiffs, and took care of the father.    Defendant claims she worked from either only three months or a year, she's not sure of anything.   

Defendant's claim is she worked enough hours to be owed, $8,500 for her last month.  Plaintiff actually worked for about 9 months, they loaned her $3500 for a car, and a month later she quit, and never repaid anything.     

$3700 to plaintiffs for car loan, plus attorney fees.

How could anyone let the defendant take care of a helpless person?  

The Gift of a Hair Cut and Bed Bugs-Plaintiff let defendant rent her rental house (3 bed/ 1.5 bath, 2 doors down from plaintiff's residence).      Both litigants have a history of substance abuse, but plaintiff claims she's sober, and she claims defendant fell off wagon.  Plaintiff is suing for $5000 for a haircut, rent, and property damage.  

Plaintiff filed for damages, the same day she filed for eviction.     Did defendant get notice since she moved out on Sunday, law suit was filed on Tuesday, case was filmed on Wednesday?  Counter claim didn't serve notice either, so JJ just will look at two months unpaid rent only. 

 Bed bug claim by plaintiff is out also.   I wonder if defendant's current landlord, or host knows about the bed bugs?   JJ dismisses the damages, and other allegations, except rent, to go back to local court. 

$700 to plaintiff for the rent, everything else goes back to local court in Missouri.  (I have no idea about the haircut or why it's included in the title).   Defendant didn't counter claim for the security deposit,, so that's gone.    Apparently the plaintiff cut the defendant's hair, personally, I wouldn't admit I ever touched that woman's hair).     

  

Edited April 13, 2020 by CrazyInAlabama

[parrotfeathers]

On 4/10/2020 at 6:02 PM, CrazyInAlabama said:

How could anyone let the defendant take care of a helpless person?  

I don't know but the plaintiffs said she did a really good job.  She was kind of nutty to me.

 

[CrazyInAlabama]

I bet in the care taker case, that the price was right for the level of care.    She didn't even know how long she worked there, and so was so vague on everything else, it scared me.     I think the plaintiffs saying what good job the care taker did, was just a CYA move on their part.  

I checked my cable guide, and all of the episodes this week are reruns, and I'm betting that they ran out of new ones.     I don't know if they saved some for ratings sweeps month in May, but I guess we'll find out then.  

Edited April 13, 2020 by CrazyInAlabama

[CrazyInAlabama]

3 p.m. episodes, both reruns, probably 2016-2017-

First-

3 p.m. episodes, both reruns, probably from 2015 or 2016-

First-

Nervy Squatter Lawsuit-Plaintiff was renting condo from owner, overstayed lease, and was served a three day notice to quit in June, and left the end of August.    Plaintiff was shorting or not paying rent.   Defendant was a roommate of squatter plaintiff.   Plaintiff wants rent from roommate, lock change fees, and attorneys fee.    (Note to plaintiff, if you're eyes don't even open, then your fake eyelashes are way too big, and heavy).  JJ calls landlord to see if plaintiff ever caught up on the rent,   

 Defendant was locked out in June, back in condo in August, and moved out the end of August.   Plaintiff wants July rent from defendant, but plaintiff had locked her out.    Defendant had possessions in the condo in August, but didn't live there (after police were called by plaintiff twice, claiming defendant was a burglar).   Defendant had to get a restraining order to move  back in August (JJ says no rent owed from defendant). 

Nothing for plaintiff, or defendant. 

Well-Behaved Courtroom Dog-Plaintiff suing defendant for her dog attacking plaintiff's dog.   Plaintiff says defendant was outside the non-leash area, with her dogs off leash, outside the fenced/gated dog park. .   Defendant has a Husky, and Chihuahua, and Husky attacked plaintiff's dog.  The plaintiff's adorable dog is maybe 10 pounds or so, and is totally quiet in court.    Defendant's stupid story is that plaintiff was going to kick her Husky, and that made her dog defensive, and she claims there was no attack.      Tiny plaintiff's dog wakes up when JJ yells at defendant, and is still totally quiet.   

Defendant lies about her dogs being in the dog park, then went outside (supposedly gate to dog park was broken), and then came in dog park, and attack was all plaintiff's fault.    Injury photos are very bad, I'm surprised the little dog lived.   

$865 for plaintiff.

Second-

Thanksgiving Day Breakdown-Long term partners split up romantically, and become roommates.  Plaintiff suing ex-girlfriend for unpaid rent.   They broke up in November 2015, and became roommates, and defendant never paid the rent or utilities, until she moved out in June 2016.      Defendant gives JJ some carbon copies of checks, but doesn't have actual proof of any payments.

$2250 to plaintiff.

Sun Roof Strife-Plaintiff is suing defendant for sun roof damage.   Plaintiff needed a place to stay, and her two children, and paid no rent, but they were all living with a friend who was paying the rent for everyone.       Defendant says plaintiff was delivering pizza, and defendant was baby sitting plaintiff's baby in the car.    Defendant also borrowed plaintiff's car to drop of plaintiff's kid at school, and then said she dropped an ink pen in the sun roof track, and the sun roof broke.   

After the broken sun roof they all lived together for almost a year, then the court case was filed.   Defendant says they were all doing a police report, and that's when she dropped the pen.  Plaintiff says there was no accident, and no police report. 

 Plaintiff receives $580.58. 

[CrazyInAlabama]

5 p.m. episodes, both recent reruns-

First-

You are a Lousy Nanny-Plaintiff (former nanny) suing defendants for back pay, and then she called CPS on the couple.    However, nanny didn't call CPS when she saw the injury, and child said "Daddy was mad at me".  Nanny claims it wasn't a bruise on top of child's head, but a goose egg that was clearly visible.   However, nanny waited quite a while to call CPS, (long after she was fired), but only after she repeatedly asked for her salary.      

   Defendants have a counter claim that nanny put their very expensive chef knives in the dishwasher, (claim is for over a $1,000 for the knives), and left the house a mess.    Nanny only worked five days for the couple (Nanny worked 3 days a week, 21 hours in total, $15 an hour, equal $322), and paid her for zero days.    Defendant wife also never did a back ground check on nanny before leaving her children with her for five days.   I find it absurd for anyone to see a huge goose egg on a little girl's head, kid says daddy hit her, and doesn't call CPS about this fictitious injury until after she didn't get paid.   

Nanny was owed $322 wages, and Defendants get the same amount for their day spent at CPS, so no one gets anything.  (Who will hire a nanny before they do a background check?)

Fence Frenzy-Plaintiff and defendant have a common fence, and the two agreed that defendant would put up new fence, and plaintiff agreed to pay $1200 for her half.   Plaintiff paid defendant $750, never paid the last $500.    When the fence was finished, plaintiff nasty old lady (to me), plaintiff didn't like fence, so had it taken down, and replaced.   Nasty old lady plaintiff wants $1500, to pay for half of the replacement fence, plus $500 back for what she paid for the first fence.   

Nasty plaintiff wanted a middle horizontal rail on the privacy fence, just like the old fence. so she had it torn down, and rebuilt.   (My personal opinion is, the privacy fence the defendant put up was up to standard, and even had the nicer side facing the old bats side).     Nasty plaintiff actually called the police over the fence.   The wood the defendant used looks like a better quality than what the defendant used.     Plaintiff gets nothing.      Defendant also dismissed, because the money covered the materials.  

Second-(First case is a graphic attack on a defenseless dog)

Canine Sucker Punch-Plaintiff (Goldendoodle owner) suing defendant (Akita) for vet bills ($411) for a horrific attack on his dog.    Defendant, and boyfriend had Akita at car show, defendant claims her dog, 17 month old Akita, has never bitten.   

However, there was another complaint (two months later) by a neighbor, that the Akita got out, ran across the street to neighbor's property, and Akita attacked the neighbor's two dogs, and one dog was injured.   Akita was quarantined, and defendant paid $500 vet bills.   (So why is defendant woman carrying a stupid trophy to court?)

Goldendoodle was on leash, and plaintiff asked "Is your dog friendly", and defendant boyfriend said "Not really", so plaintiff tried to avoid dog.    At the outside award ceremony, Akita was passing by plaintiff, with the boyfriend, and attacked without warning, grabbing Doodle's nose, throat, and then paw.     Doodle's pictures are awful.     No surprise, Akita wasn't injured.     

Defendant girlfriend claims Goldendoodle barking shows it's aggressive too, total garbage (there is a video of Goldendoodle barking a little, that's not vicious). 

Two attacks in two months?  Akita needs to go to the farm with grandma (Yes, we all know that means a dirt nap).   

Akitas are guard dogs, don't back down, and this particular animal will keep on attacking any time it gets a chance.  Akita owner and boyfriend just don't get it.   I feel sorry for the animals, and people who will suffer for the defendants' ignorance, because this animal will attack again.    My guess is there are probably other attacks by now, and I only hope potential landlords, and insurance agents saw this episode. 

 Plaintiff gets $411. Byrd has to tell defendants to leave, and waves bye-bye to them.      

Homeless Five-Child Family Payback-Plaintiff suing former co-worker (September Johnson) over a car she bought from plaintiff.   Defendant paid $400, and stopped paying (total was $1500).   Defendant's story is that she is the Sainted Single Mother of Five (SSMOF).   She and companion, and children ended up in a homeless shelter, but didn't return car, or pay for car either.   Car deal was over a year ago, and defendant drove car, and eventually junked it.   

Hallterview is interesting.   Plaintiff found out title hadn't been changed, after she was contacted about unpaid tickets.   Defendant is still claiming she did nothing wrong.

$1100 for plaintiff.  

Edited April 14, 2020 by CrazyInAlabama

[parrotfeathers]

1 hour ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

Akita owner and boyfriend just don't get it.

No they don't.  Akitas are a very protective breed.  That girl doesn't have any business with one.  A lab would be a better choice.  I was at a dog show a few years ago and in the conformation ring an akita decided he didn't want the judge to touch him.  Judge went to hospital.  Akita banned from show ring forever.

[NYGirl]

Mother of the year rerun made me angrier the second time around.  Trying to sue the child she gave away at 9 days for adoption for tons of things after having her come live with her. Also blaming her for her puppy dying while her and her husband were out of town for the night.

What a giant POS.  I felt so bad for that girl.

[CrazyInAlabama]

3 p.m. episodes, both reruns, probably 2015-2016-

First-

Retirement Payday Fail-Plaintiff suing ex-boyfriend for an unpaid loan to pay his mortgage.   Plaintiff gave defendant three cashier's checks adding up to $5k, instead of a checking account check (she thought it would be a better record than a regular check, wrong idea).   The litigants were living in defendant's house, paid no rent,    Defendant was unemployed for a while, but still supported plaintiff, and supported her during and after her trip to rehab.   Plaintiff claims she sent keys and rings back to defendant, but defendant claims he didn't receive rings back.   (Hall-terview is interesting, defendant claims they were engaged, but she was married to someone else at the time, and still is). 

$5k to plaintiff.   

Teen Drives Into Wall-Plaintiff suing cousin and her brother, for damage to her bedroom wall.   Defendant borrowed his sister's car, and drove it through the plaintiff's bedroom wall.      Plaintiff's son was implicated by the defendant driver, but he denies ever driving a car, and says plaintiff doesn't even own a car.    Plaintiff son was going to sneak out to meet defendant driver, to go to a party, and that's when the defendant driver hit the house wall. 

Defendant driver still only has a learner's permit, and his cousin is surprised that her insurance didn't pay for the damages from an uninsured, unlicensed driver.   Defendant car owner gives cousin permission to drive her car all of the time.    Defendant car owner still doesn't think that the cousin's learner's permit should require a licensed driver with him at all times behind the wheel.    JJ thinks plaintiff son was driving, but either way unlicensed person hit the house. 

$1600 to fix the wall, and plaintiff gets that.  

Second-

When Inebriated Lovers Fight-Plaintiff suing ex-boyfriend over a drunken fight they had.  Both claim the other started it, and threw the first piece of junk.    Plaintiff wants an unpaid loan for defendant's motorcycle loan refinance (original loan was 27% interest) repaid, an assault, and insurance costs.  Plaintiff took out loan, and paid off motorcycle for defendant, to refi to 4.9%, and to get $2,000 extra for plaintiff's custody battle.    Defendant was sent title by loan company, and so he sold motorcycle back to the dealership, for $4,000.   Motorcycle loan is up to $6300, for loan, insurance, and fees.    Plaintiff will get $3,000. 

There was an initial fight, and police removed him, but did not arrest him.    After the altercation, man came back to her apartment, and she let him in, and they started throwing items at each other.    The two litigants apparently get drunk frequently, and then fight. 

 Plaintiff gets $3,000, everything else dismissed.       

Bad Grandmother-Plaintiffs grandson, and his mother are suing grandmother (maternal grandmother) over an unpaid loan to purchase a car for the grandmother's son.   Grandmother was supposed to sell her house, and repay the loan ($2100).     Grandmother never paid him, claims she doesn't owe grandson, and never asked for a loan for her other son.   Grandson gave the money to his uncle, not to grandmother.   

$2100 for grandson for loan (I don't trust grandma at all).    Grandson claims grandmother took property from her home, that should have belonged to grandson, and daughter in law (rake, garbage cans, AC unit, BBQ grill-smoker.     Adult son (grandmother's witness) says smoker/grill was his, so that's dismissed.  

Grandmother lived with plaintiffs for a while, they had a kerfuffle, and grandmother wants moving expenses, first month's rent, etc. all dismissed.    Grandmother claims plaintiffs kept her Virgin Mother statue, and tools, dismissed too.   

$2100 to grandson for the car loan.  

[Helibel]

Wow, the bio mom is  a disgusting piece of garbage. She had no insight at all. the crazy party lines and the weird posture/body language.
That poor 20 year old is just a kid. I can not imagine a worse reaction to a sad episode. Poor kid, an inconvenient child. I would have loved to have seen the husband I bet he is a piece of work too.

Dr Phil should  to deal with this, that kid needs help.

[BigMoeMiami]

It is obvious the mother is a sociopath and incapable of love or feelings toward her daughter.  She did well to give her up to an adoptive family, unfortunately, the adoptive family was abusive.  The only reason she may have taken her back is she needed somebody to baby sit her dogs while she was away, not because she felt sorry or anything for the plight her daughter had gone through.  So, as she sees it, the girl "had one job" and she blew it.  After the death of the puppy, the girl is worthless to her and the focus of her hate.  You can tell how she seethed while the girl told the story of how the puppy died.  This woman is the most vile, filthy, degraded, inhuman, disgusting and revolting person.  How can you treat your flesh and blood this way?  The young girl is such sweet, pretty innocent person.  I pray she finds love and caring from somebody and doesn't go into drugs or other abusive relationships.  Sweety, I am sorry your life turned out this way, but you must persevere and not be bitter.  you are beautiful and nice and you will succeed. 

[iwasish]

16 minutes ago, NYGirl said:

Mother of the year rerun made me angrier the second time around.  Trying to sue the child she gave away at 9 days for adoption for tons of things after having her come live with her. Also blaming her for her puppy dying while her and her husband were out of town for the night.

What a giant POS.  I felt so bad for that girl.

I said it first time this show aired... either step daddy had the hots for daughter or mommy was scared having  a twenty year old daughter might make people question her claim of being 29. 
What a cold hearted bitch! A real see you next Tuesday! 
A well placed strong nip or bite by a 60lb golden could easily puncture the skull of a pug puppy. The head of a puppy is much like that of a real baby, the bones aren’t fully formed so they can be compressed to get thru the birth canal. 
I’m in the process of introducing a dachshund puppy into life with my 2 yr old dachshund and so far so good. A few instances early on, a snap,  a snarl  by the older one and tons of yelping and whimpering from the younger. Never any blood drawn or sign of injury so far.  I’ll still keep them apart if I’m  not home for long periods, but now that they’re closer in weight and size, less chance of injury. I can easily see the scenario happen as the girl described. 
Elizabeth Meadows. Certainly has no maternal instincts. 

 

 

[CrazyInAlabama]

5 p.m. episodes, both recent reruns-

First-

Fatal Car Accident Fallout-Plaintiff received a $30,000 settlement for being in an auto accident where her father and another relative died.      Plaintiff bought a condo with some of her settlement.    Plaintiff loaned $5300 to buy truck, ($7500 total price), and he sold truck, to upgrade.   Defendant never paid a penny back, and claims they both signed a contract that the truck was defendant's, and only in his name.     Defendant's mother is obviously a crook as well as defendant, since she thinks it's just fine that defendant son is a crook.   

$5,000 to plaintiff.

Spoiler

Mother of defendant referred to JJ twice as the b-word, on facebook, talking about the case. 

Struggling Single Moms Wage War-Plaintiff (SSMOO-Sainted Single Mother of One) suing former friend, (SSMOT-Sainted Single Mother of Two) for a false restraining order, false arrest, and stolen property.  Plaintiff moved in with defendant, paying rent ($200 a month), and found that defendant was only paying $87 a month in rent for the subsidized housing.   

Plaintiff told defendant that she had found her own apartment.   Plaintiff and defendant both claim nasty text messages (As usual, plaintiff switched phones, and lost the text messages).   Plaintiff was arrested on an outstanding warrant, and spent three days in jail.  Arrest had zero to do with defendant, and plaintiff took a plea to get out of jail.   Only thing left is the missing property junk, with the usual excuses on both sides.   

Case dismissed.    

Second-

Adopted Daughter Kills Mom's Dog-Plaintiff (biological mom of defendant) reconnect.  and it was a terrible idea. 

 Daughter is dog sitting Mom's 8 week old puppy at Mom's house, after bio. Mom's older Golden Retriever bites puppy, and it dies.  (Strangely, both women have the same hairdo).  Daughter moves to Utah, and then moves in with Mom.   Plaintiff wants moving costs of moving daughter to Utah to live with her.  Moving costs thrown out.   Unpaid loans to daughter by Mom, and cost of used $1,000 car, were both before daughter had job. 

Bio. Mom claims daughter was in abusive family, but her adoptive mother sought out Bio. Mom for daughter at 18, and since I believe nothing the plaintiff says, I don't believe that either.   Unpaid loans, and car loan are crossed out, no expectation of repayment, and it was for everyday items.   I believe nothing the bio. Mom says about the relationship, the adoptive parents, or the lovely young lady that the defendant has grown up to be.    

Hotel costs requested by Bio. Mom, for when Bio Mom and her husband came home after being called about puppy.   She wanted daughter to dog sit 8 week old puppy at Bio. Mom's home, in an attack by plaintiff's older dog.   When daughter called that puppy had been attacked, and was dying, Bio. Mom and step dad came home, and want to be repaid for hotel room (JJ throws that out).   When JJ tosses the loans, and other items out, the plaintiff glares at JJ.  

Bio Mom plaintiff wants punitive damages for death of puppy.   However, they had out of town trip scheduled when they got the puppy.     (Actually, I wouldn't have left my older Lab with an 8 week old puppy, she was rather possessive, and didn't tolerate up start puppy attitude.   Plus, a pug puppy at 8 weeks would be super tiny compared to the Golden.   I doubt it took much force to cause the seizure, and bleeding in a tiny puppy like that..     

Plaintiff says older Golden Retriever was playing with the 8 week old Pug puppy, (after 10 days of peace with the Golden, and Pug), and then bit puppy.    Daughter calls Bio. Mom, says there is nothing she could do to save the Pug.  Puppy was bleeding, and seizing, and it died very quickly.   (Byrd to the rescue with Kleenex).   Apparently the blanket on the floor was the same one the older dog used quite a few times. 

 Plaintiff keeps saying what defendant told to the plaintiff's husband, husband didn't come to court.   (What was up with the horrible panty, elastic lines on the plaintiff?   Either control tops that couldn't control, or a Spanx knock off that wasn't properly fitted.  

I agree with JJ, this was plaintiff's dog, that bit a puppy she also owned, and didn't say to keep them separated.     Accidents happen, and dogs will be dogs.   Plaintiff dog case thrown out too.     

Case dismissed.  (In hall-terview both litigants are not having further contact, and I agree with defendant that plaintiff was looking for a reason to dump her).   

My view is that the best thing that ever happened to the defendant is that the plaintiff gave her up for adoption.   I hope that the defendant has found a better life, and never associates with the biological relative who sued her.     I wonder if the Plaintiff's husband realized before this what a jerk he is married to?    Since the husband didn't show in court, I'm guessing he has a clue now.  

Edited April 15, 2020 by CrazyInAlabama

[meshelle71]

SO sad for this young girl the real mother is a freaking bitch!I cried for the girl !Her real mom is a selfish piece of shit!

[parrotfeathers]

2 hours ago, NYGirl said:

Mother of the year rerun made me angrier the second time around.  Trying to sue the child she gave away at 9 days for adoption for tons of things after having her come live with her. Also blaming her for her puppy dying while her and her husband were out of town for the night.

What a giant POS.  I felt so bad for that girl.

I just pulled this forum up after watching this (remembered it from last year) to ask if we could curse.  What a b**** that woman is.   And could her dress be any tighter?   She's still mad at her bio daughter for the stretch marks I imagine.  

[iwasish]

14 minutes ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

 

 Plaintiff keeps saying what defendant told to the plaintiff's husband, husband didn't come to court.   (What was up with the horrible panty, elastic lines on the plaintiff?   Either control tops that couldn't control, or a Spanx knock off that wasn't properly fitted.  

 

Maybe he didn’t show up in court because he’s shown too much interest in younger, prettier, nicer stepdaughter (who doesn’t need to wear Spanx).

Bio mother couldn’t even look at her child. Poor girl was obviously devastated over what happened. Bathed the dead puppy so the owners wouldn’t see it “like that”.  
I’m a fairly cold hearted person but I love to give that poor girl  a hug and then punch that so called mother in the face. 

I do wonder what circumstances surround the “ relationship” between bio parents. The  mother seemed to have a real deep seated anger or resentment towards daughter, that perhaps might be misdirected.

 

[Florinaldo]

13 hours ago, iwasish said:

The  mother seemed to have a real deep seated anger or resentment towards daughter, that perhaps might be misdirected.

I think the mother may have resented that her now adult daughter was interfering with her social life and party schedule, while highlighting that she is not as young as she likes to pass herself to be. Which only demonstrates that giving her up for adoption was the correct decision. If things got so bad in the adoptive family, she would then have been better with friends or even strangers.

[Ashforth]

14 hours ago, iwasish said:

Poor girl was obviously devastated over what happened. Bathed the dead puppy so the owners wouldn’t see it “like that”.  
I’m a fairly cold hearted person but I love to give that poor girl  a hug and then punch that so called mother in the face. 

I do wonder what circumstances surround the “ relationship” between bio parents. The  mother seemed to have a real deep seated anger or resentment towards daughter, that perhaps might be misdirected.

I often think that I can't be surprised anymore at how horrible some humans are, but this "mother" took the cake. It's shocking to me that not only was she suing the young woman she gave up for adoption and then claimed to have rescued from an abusive home, but was fine with going on television to expose herself as an abhorrent person. I suppose that people who may encounter her in the future can be thankful for this opportunity to see her for what she is in advance.

[CrazyInAlabama]

3 p.m. episodes, both reruns, probably from 2016-

First-

Elder Abuse Arrest-Plaintiff/tenant suing former landlord for the return of security deposit, a laptop, and a false arrest.    Plaintiff says defendant gave him food, defendant says plaintiff stole the food.   Plaintiff says he grabbed a baseball bat to defend himself when the defendant attacked him.   $1450 was the security deposit.    Defendant claims he withheld security for damages that occurred when plaintiff moved out.  Plaintiff says he didn't do the wall damages, but the door hole was already there when he moved in.   

Plaintiff was arrested and released, for assault, but no charges were filed against the plaintiff.    Litigants were fighting over $20 for gas, plaintiff claims he locked the door to his bedroom to keep defendant out, and defendant pushed door in, and plaintiff called the police.   Then, plaintiff claims defendant came after him with a bamboo bat, and police were called again.    Defendant submits the police report for the second call, but everything is redacted.   

Plaintiff receives $1450 for the security deposit.     Plaintiff gets his laptop back with the assistance of the police. 

Deceased Husband...and Boyfriend-Plaintiff girlfriend suing for her watch and tablet, that was left at her deceased boyfriend's home.     Defendant is the 'wife' of deceased boyfriend (they didn't live together after 2005).     The defendant and deceased husband never divorced.   Plaintiff wants the watch and tablet that were on the dresser at the late boyfriend/husband's house.   

Plaintiff saw the watch on the defendant's wrist, when defendant came by the Senior Center that plaintiff, and late boyfriend went to.   Plaintiff's witness saw defendant wearing the wrist watch, when she gave a bag of pictures to the defendant.    Defendant didn't say anything about the watch, and drove off still wearing the watch.   

Plaintiff has no proof about defendant stealing the tablet, so that's dismissed.   Plaintiff claims she paid $75 for the watch.   $75 for plaintiff for the watch. 

Second-

New Boat Owner Fail-Boat repairman suing client for interest, late fees, and unpaid bills for a boat repair, on a 1997 SeaDoo.   Defendant bought boat for $8,000 (As is) with accessories, buyer didn't have it checked by a mechanic, or ever put it in the water.   Defendant says boat  had a leaky crankcase, and it needed an engine rebuild, and defendant called seller for help.   Boat has two engines, one worked, and one didn't.   

Plaintiff worked on boat, and defendant claims someone else fixed the boat so he could use it, but defendant has no receipt of repair from another mechanic.     Defendant took boat to plaintiff, but refused to pay the bill.   When defendant went to pick up repaired boat, there was a kerfuffle over the bill, and police were called.     Defendant told police he only brought boat in for oil change, and is absolutely lying in court, and to the police.   

Plaintiff gets $879 for fixing the boat

Sister Fighting DUI-Plaintiff sister is suing her sister for an unpaid loan to pay her DUI legal fees ($2105).    Defendant sister works part time registering patients at the ER.     Defendant doesn't even comprehend anything in court, and seems to have her own script she's following. 

 Before the time of the DUI the mother, and defendant were living with the plaintiff, and defendant hit something at the gas station with plaintiff's car.    $2105 legal fees, and other fees for a title loan to pay defendant's title loan on her own car off.   Lawyer cleared DUI record.    

Defendant no longer drives, after her insurance was cancelled, but plaintiff says sister was caught driving under suspension, car was impounded, and plaintiff refused to bail car out, so it's gone.   

$2105 to plaintiff (smart woman, she doesn't live with mother and sister any longer, and cut them both off). 

Edited April 15, 2020 by CrazyInAlabama

[CrazyInAlabama]

5 p.m. episodes, both recent reruns-

First-

Correction Officer Falls in Love With Convict-Plaintiff is former corrections officer, and defendant is a former convict (2008-2015), and they met at 'work'.    Plaintiff suing for unpaid loans, unpaid rent, and an assault.  Defendant says no loan agreements, she started all of the arguments, and nothing is his fault.   

Plaintiff quit her job, so they wouldn't have a conflict.    They moved in together in January 2019, and he was moved out by police in May 2019, and wasn't paying rent.   Plaintiff has an 8 year old, and 16 year old living with them also.   Who moves in a long term convict in with her two kids?     

Plaintiff loaned defendant money to pay for a long-term unpaid ticket, $700+ (before they were living together), so he could get his license back.   Defendant claims woman paid ticket, but it was a gift.   

Defendant is getting sassy, and rotten to JJ.    Bet Byrd isn't doing cross word puzzles in this case, and I bet the security people are very close.     

Plaintiff told to forget back rent.    In April the two had a fight, and it turned physical, after she threw his stuff into the hallway.  She claims he pushed her, and knocked her into the wall.    Defendant claims she pushed him first, and he pushed her back.   Restraining order is one year, but he was in jail for something else when the hearing happened.      Plaintiff had no medical bills.    

$500 to plaintiff.    

Plaintiff is lucky she didn't end up the subject of an ID channel docudrama, about the disappearance and death of herself, and her sons.       

Drug Paraphernalia Eviction-Plaintiff suing ex-boyfriend for rent and utilities, and a loan.  They lived together, after (according to defendant) his former roommate left drug paraphernalia around, and it was noticed, and he had a 24 hours notice to quit. 

He moved in with plaintiff (he claims it was never romantic with them).    Defendant didn't pay rent for his 14 day tenancy.   There is a text message from defendant saying he will pay rent.  

Plaintiff gets her $280 rent. 

Second-

Teen Fakes Full-Term Pregnancy- (and while wearing a wig that is so cheap, just like the defendant)-Plaintiffs (mother, father, and idiot son), suing son's (Tayia Byes-Oswalt)ex over fraud, DNA costs, etc. over her allegedly fake pregnancy.    Defendant proudly announces when they had sexual relations(once before the pregnancy announcement, and once after the pregnancy was announced).    Plaintiff parents paid for attorney fees, DNA tests, etc.    Defendant took a pregnancy test, and claims it was positive, in March.    Plaintiff claims they boinked around St. Patrick's Day, but defendant fool says mid February, and letter stating pregnancy diagnosis was in Mid-March too.     In April is when defendant claims she's confirmed as pregnant again.    If looks could kill, the defendant would be a smoking pile of ash from the look JJ is giving her.       

Defendant claims she had a miscarriage in October (at 8 months?).   Defendant mother claims daughter was really pregnant.    I want to see the medical records on this, because I believe nothing defendant daughter says.   Also, at 8 to 9 months the baby is still birth, not a miscarriage.

Plaintiff father says he and his wife offered to go to doctor's office, and go with defendant's parents, but defendant claims her parents are both deceased (so who is the mother of defendant standing next to defendant?).    Plaintiff parents have texts backing up what they said, claim she sent ultrasounds, and other information regularly.    

Defendant daughter claimed she was going to permanently move to the Dominican Republic, where they have no extradition (they do as of 2015, and updated since), and she would sue for every penny she could get.  She also said she would never come back to the U.S.    Defendant mother denies her daughter is a liar.    (DR, the last time I heard, signed an extradition treaty with the U.S., but I doubt a minor grifter like the defendant would qualify). 

Plaintiff claims defendant told them she had the baby, and sent a picture of a baby to plaintiff parents, and other birth information.     Defendant admits the baby picture is someone else's baby, but this is supposed to be after her own 'miscarriage' (is an 8 month still called a miscarriage?).     

JJ tells the plaintiff's to sue in civil court, and then the defendant's medical records can be admitted into the legal record. 

(In hallterview plaintiff's wig seems to be rather unstable, and horribly cheap, just like she is). 

Plaintiffs get $5,000.       (Since the leftover money from the $5,000 is split between litigants, then that means the defendant gets zero).  

I wonder how many other times the defendant has pulled this scam?  

I think the not-so-pregnant girl was having fun torturing the supposed father.    I think she found out how much money the parents have, and wanted as much as she could get.   I suspect she already knew how well the parents of teen were doing, since she kept dating the plaintiff son from time to time.     I bet about the time DNA tests came up, and she realized the plaintiff parents weren't fools, is when everything fell apart for her.   

 I think the end game was to keep up the story about a baby, until she realized the parents weren't going to just send her money endlessly, especially if she actually did go to the Dominican Republic to live.    If she had moved there, I bet she would borrow a friend's kid to baby sit, for more photos, and if plaintiffs ever came to visit.    I think her mother was the foolish person who doesn't want to be a parent, but just be a pal to the daughter, and daughter ruled the roost.  

My opinion is the little troll (she does resemble a troll doll) would never give a child up for adoption, she would sell to the highest bidder.    That young woman reminds me so much of a few of the ones who pulled adoption scams on multiple adoptive parents, and then claimed they adopted the kid to another couple, or else were never pregnant.    I hope the plaintiff's parents do take this case to civil court, as JJ suggested, and then get to subpoena her medical records.  

[Ashforth]

That wig with 4 foot long "hair" was so gross. It did match the Defendant perfectly. She claimed to be a waitress now, I have to say if she came to my table in a restaurant wearing that mess, I would get up and leave. She was obviously a scam artist (just not a good one).

It's been a while since I watched JJ on the regular, but now that I'm working from home, it is appointment TV for me every afternoon. It's always been amusing to see the oddball parties, but the awfulness of some of these people is astonishing. Why in the world would they go on a television show?

[Florinaldo]

5 hours ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

Defendant doesn't even comprehend anything in court, and seems to have her own script she's following.

The way she kept mechanically adding "as a gift" each time she acknowledged receiving money from her sister  is an indication that she had either been coached or had found out through research that this was her only possible line of defence, even it it was neither credible nor supported by the evidence.

[howiveaddict]

Enjoyed the lying, never pregnant, atrocious wig wearer just as much the second time around.  Hope word gets out before she scams anyone else.  Her mother didn't seem like a "lovely woman" like JJ said either.  I bet she was somehow involved in the mess also.  

Wasn't there someone on Dr Phil before who faked pregnancy/miscarried?

Oh, and 8 months is not a miscarriage. It's a still birth. 

[EtheltoTillie]

Well, I had given up on JJ for a few years, but like some others I'm sitting at home and watching some of my old standbys.  Yesterday was a bonanza--correction officer dating an ex con and pregnancy faking troll were jaw dropping.  The way troll's mother answered the questions indicated that she was willfully blind to what was going on.  JJ did not ask whether troll looked pregnant at 8 months.  I really wanted to hear that. 

[CrazyInAlabama]

3 p.m. episodes, both reruns, probably 2016 or about that time-

First-

Wedding Carriage Ride Failure-Angry mother of the bride (Momzilla) arranged for defendant to ride bride and groom around for an hour, with a stop for pictures.   Carriage arrived at 4:30 p.m., arrived at the reception at 5:05 p.m.    The ride was only 35 minutes, but there were supposed to be some stops for photos, but the photographers were no where in sight.   The best man took cell phone pictures, instead of the photographers that were missing. 

 I believe the mix up in communication was between the photographers, and Momzilla, and the daughter was being surprised, so she got out of the carriage and went into the reception hall early.   

(In my personal opinion, another Momzilla who planned he wedding she always wanted, and not what the daughter wanted, and it ruined the mother's day).  

Case dismissed.        

Terrible Landlord or Miserable Tenant- Plaintiff suing former landlady for moving costs (not happening), and a false restraining order..    Landlady says tenant paid her rent, but was often late. 

 Former landlady/defendant filed for a restraining order, and gave her a Section 8 connected 60 day notice to quit (Is there a difference between a regular notice to quit?, and Section 8 notice to quit?).    Plaintiff moved into a new place, also in Palmdale, the same day she moved out of plaintiff's place(the house was a lot bigger, and the cost to tenant was a whole lot less).    The eviction was because of continued complaints to housing authorities, threats, etc.   There was a mediation on the restraining order, so that's dismissed.   

Everything is dismissed. 

Second-

Lesbian Mud Slinging-Plaintiff suing defendant/ex-girlfriend for a burned couch, and unpaid rent for one month.   Defendant states that plaintiff is a fire-dancer, we need the video. Defendant claims the locks were changed, and her property was destroyed.    Defendant denies that she broke into the house, and burned the couch.     Defendant says plaintiff is always drunk, so plaintiff says defendant is twice as drunk, and half as attractive she is.   (Sorry, my opinion is they are both jerks, and the way they act and treat others, shows both are losers).   JJ tossed both out to compose themselves.    

Plaintiff can't figure out what the rent is.   Rent is $1570, and half was $785 for defendant.  Plaintiff admits she dumped defendant's TV, and other items out on the porch.   

JJ says there was no legal right to lock defendant out, and dump her property outside, without legally evicting her.     $2600 to defendant for her destroyed property, and rent was deducted from the total $3385, so plaintiff gets nothing.    

Deceased Dad's Equipment Recovery-Plaintiff suing defendant over their late father's equipment.    Defendant sold equipment to plaintiff's late father, purchased through the defendant's ex-wife (she's witness for the plaintiffs).    Plaintiff's late father bought cattle trailer, and a round bale buggy.    Down payment was $200, by late father.     Trailer and buggy was sold before the property division order was issued by the divorce judge.    Plaintiff keeps the trailer.

Hay buggy is on defendant's property, and plaintiff paid the defendant's ex-wife (plaintiff's witness) for the buggy,  and if plaintiff wants the money back, he's told to sue his witness.  

Cases dismissed. 

[CrazyInAlabama]

5 p.m. episodes, both recent reruns-

First-

Used Car Salesman Vows to Be Nastier-Plaintiffs bought used car from defendant (2009 Volkswagen Passat), and after two weeks car had big issues.    They took car back fairly soon.   The dealer was charging an extra $100 a month for repairs, and dealer gave them a loaner while original car was being fixed, for over 5 months.    $5,995 was purchase price of car.    Defendant says plaintiffs put wrong kind of gas in car (I've never had a salesman or service person tell me what kind of gas to use in a car, unless it was diesel).   

Plaintiffs traded for the second loaner, a Jetta, and have made a payment on the original car note after car went into shop in May.   Defendant gave a statement to plaintiff saying a certain amount of money, and he claims plaintiff needed statement to get another car loan.   (JJ really dislikes car dealers, doesn't she?).   

Title will be transferred for loaner car to plaintiffs.    I believe the defendant, and I don't believe the plaintiffs. 

Cat Custody Crybaby-Plaintiff suing for custody of her cat, that has been in defendant's care and custody for two years.   Plaintiff either wants cat back, or money for cat and vet bills.  Plaintiff was given cat, had cat for a month, and transferred cat to defendant where it's been for two years.  This is a sad case, plaintiff is obviously not prepared to be in court, seems to have emotional problems, and seems to be fragile.   

Case dismissed, defendant keeps the cat. 

Second-

Teen Bullied Because She Smells Like Pot-Plaintiff grandmother suing mother (Sainted Single Mother of Four, SSMOF) of her 11 year old granddaughter over a false police report that grandmother was kidnapping granddaughter,  School called grandmother, and said child smelled strongly of marijuana on three occasions, and child was being bullied.   Grandmother also gave granddaughter a phone to keep in touch, but mother took phone.   Defendant has several other children also.  Sadly, plaintiff's son is incarcerated.   

Defendant claims school never called the grandmother (plaintiff), and has zero emotions about the child, the pot smell, bullying, and anything else.    Plaintiff claims the father of two other children of defendant (9 and 7), was calling granddaughter from prison to find out what defendant was up to.    (The defendant's choice of Bozo orange hair, and a green top is truly unfortunate). 

Defendant has four kids, the 11 year old with one prisoner, the 7 and 9 year old with another prisoner, and one more child who has a father that isn't in jail, at least the day of the case filming, but who knows before or since that time.  14 year old's father lives in Victorville, isn't that another prison town?  

Defendant's boyfriend claims he doesn't live with defendant, so JJ calls boyfriend's mother to find out if he actually lives with mother or defendant.    Boyfriend is with SSMOF at least 60% of the time.  (JJ is not amused by boyfriend's lies, about him paying mother rent, and that he's not living with defendant).    I wonder if defendant is allowed to have boyfriend living with her?   

JJ tells grandmother to sue for guardianship of granddaughter, and see if she can get full custody.   When grandmother went to pick up child at school, defendant called police and said grandmother was kidnapping the child.    CPS was already at the defendant's house when grandmother went to drop child off.     Grandmother claims she has a photo of table full of marijuana, right next to kids, and JJ says show it to the family court judge.  SSMOF claims child took pot picture, with cell phone given to child by grandmother.   Boyfriend of SSMOF keeps laughing,   There is a video from SSMOF showing harassment by grandmother.   Video was entertaining, and Grandma certainly told everything that was on her mind.  

Cases dismissed.    (I hope the grandmother goes to family court, and gets the child permanently).    SSMOF says she only has one marijuana plant.   

Edited April 16, 2020 by CrazyInAlabama

[jilliannatalia]

On 4/13/2020 at 3:58 PM, CrazyInAlabama said:

If the nanny were licensed in some way and were a mandated reporter, she could not report so long after the fact without risking  serious trouble.

 

You are a Lousy Nanny-Plaintiff (former nanny) suing defendants for back pay, and then she called CPS on the couple.    However, nanny didn't call CPS when she saw the injury, and child said "Daddy was mad at me".  Nanny claims it wasn't a bruise on top of child's head, but a goose egg that was clearly visible.   However, nanny waited quite a while to call CPS, (long after she was fired), but only after she repeatedly asked for her salary.      

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited April 17, 2020 by jilliannatalia

[Florinaldo]

On 4/16/2020 at 6:55 PM, CrazyInAlabama said:

I believe the defendant, and I don't believe the plaintiffs. 

I totally agree with you. JJ was wrong.

On 4/16/2020 at 6:55 PM, CrazyInAlabama said:

This is a sad case, plaintiff is obviously not prepared to be in court, seems to have emotional problems, and seems to be fragile.   

She dresses either like a child or like a doll, with that pink bow in her hair matching her pink jumper. She also speaks like a child. All indications of the problems you suggest. The cat is better off without her.

Edited April 18, 2020 by Florinaldo

[ItsHelloPattiagain]

19 hours ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

Wedding Carriage Ride Failure-Angry mother of the bride (Momzilla) arranged for defendant to ride bride and groom around for an hour, with a stop for pictures.   Carriage arrived at 4:30 p.m., arrived at the reception at 5:05 p.m.    The ride was only 35 minutes, but there were supposed to be some stops for photos, but the photographers were no where in sight.   The best man took cell phone pictures, instead of the photographers that were missing. 

 I believe the mix up in communication was between the photographers, and Momzilla, and the daughter was being surprised, so she got out of the carriage and went into the reception hall early.   

Wedding cases are always the worse cases because the expectations are so high. My DD had a carriage ride planned after her church ceremony where they planned to go to the reception site nearby. They finished at the church about ten min early and the carriage was about five min late so there was an awkward delay. So to make up for it, the carriage driver took them around the main square of the tiny town they were married in and luckily the photographer got amazing pics because there was some kind of Xmas celebration downtown and people were waving at them like they were royalty. 

That weird most-likely-not-pregnant chick with the horrible blond fright-wig was just as strange the second time around. My other son-in-law had a family member who was posting pics on Facebook of her "pregnancy" recently (including a fake ultrasound without her name clearly on it) and apparently she "lost the baby" as well. It's a pretty frequently used scam these days. 

[CrazyInAlabama]

3 p.m. episodes, both reruns, probably from 2016-

First-

Jealous Baby Mama Cat Fight-Defendant has two kids with man (defendant's witness).   and then defendant and witness broke up.   Since he's the defendant's witness, I guess the witness and defendant are back together.  When plaintiff was parked at man's house, she alleges defendant ripped pieces off of her car.    Defendant claims plaintiff was the aggressor.   Police report says defendant witness said defendant did do the car damages.   

$2,000 to plaintiff.

Free Wheeling and Dealing-Plaintiff suing defendant for rims plaintiff never received, purchased for $1,000 (used rims from defendant's own car).   Defendant claims he needed to re-chrome the rims, and over a year later they were resold by shifty defendant.   

$1,000 to plaintiff .    

Second-

Tree Huggers v. Tree Choppers-Plaintiff suing trailer park neighbor with mutual property line for the survey costs.    Plaintiff did survey she said defendant's fence was on her property.    Fence was encroaching, and it was taken down, and another fence defendant built was encroaching on plaintiff's property again, and it impacted the plaintiff's fence posts.    They also cut the plaintiff's cable (someone should be shot for that.  I've had repeated cable cut issues from new builds, and it's freaking infuriating).     No one is getting survey costs.   

Sorry JJ, you don't put your fence on my property, not even an inch, or on the joint property line.   

Defendant got HOA permission to trim her trees, but buttinsky plaintiff told neighbors to leave the trees alone, and actually stood in the way of the tree cutters.   So defendant's company could only cut half of the trees, and they were all on defendant's property.     

Cases dismissed.   

Mistaken Trailer Identity-Plaintiff  is suing defendant for stealing his utility trailer (a flat open trailer).     Trailer was stolen in August, plaintiff has police report.   

In October, defendant's employee was at a stop light, and plaintiff signaled him to pull over, and they stopped at a gas station.    Plaintiff accused defendant employee of having his stolen his trailer.      Police were called, and trailer was confiscated, pending clarification of ownership.    Defendant claims trailer was bought in 2012.   Plaintiff claims his trailer was homemade, not the manufactured trailer the defendant owns.   

Police confirmed the VIN number and license plate were correct with defendant's paperwork, and police released the trailer to defendant.   

My guess is plaintiff will never give up calling defendant a thief, and the hallterview interview with plaintiff reinforces that idea, he will never quit.  

Case dismissed. 

[CrazyInAlabama]

5 p.m. episodes, both recent reruns-

First-

Disrespected Date Sucker Punch-Plaintiff (older slight, gentleman) suing defendant (younger, taller, much bigger, and apparently violent).    Defendant went on first date with woman, (she's the plaintiff's witness), and became angry when she was talking to other people.   Defendant claims plaintiff witness/date was acting bizarrely, making approaches to others, was talking with the plaintiff, and defendant claims date was pressed against plaintiff.     I wonder how many drinks the defendant, and his former date had that night?  At least they took Uber, instead of driving.  

Defendant approached plaintiff from behind, when plaintiff and witness were pressed against each other (only according to defendant himself).    Defendant then walked up to plaintiff, and defendant sucker punched plaintiff in the face, and knocked out plaintiff's front teeth.  Defendant's case was dropped after he went through anger management, and kept his nose clean.      

Plaintiff's other witness is an EMT, and put pressure on the wounds, and plaintiff says he saved his life.   Loser defendant claims it wasn't his fault.   In hallterview, despicable bully defendant claims he was falsely arrested.   No he was arrested for what he did.   

$5000 to plaintiff

Fight the Power of Attorney-Plaintiff suing son's ex-girlfriend that he lived with before his incarceration, for a car.    Son was making car payment ($210 monthly, with about $5,000 left), and defendant claims man prepaid car payments.    Girlfriend/defendant didn't pay anything for the loan for the car she was driving.   

Plaintiff had power of attorney, and plaintiff paid car loan up, and wanted the car.   Defendant claims the car was a gift, as usual.   Plaintiff wants money for the car payments, and the car was repossessed, and plaintiff wants payment for a car battery.    Plaintiff has the car now.   

Cases dismissed. 

Second-

Bleaching Baby Daddy Clothes Goes Live-Plaintiff suing for ex-girlfriend (and baby mama) for bleaching all of his clothes after their nasty breakup.   Defendant was brilliant, and thought live streaming her vandalism was a good thing, after she found out he had another girlfriend.   Plaintiff was off work for three years after a work accident. 

Defendant's first live streaming video is her bleaching every item of his wardrobe.   Current plaintiff girlfriend in giggling through this.  Princess Paynes is the defendant, and she still doesn't have a clue that it's called vandalism.    Plaintiff gets $4,000 for his clothes.   

Defendant wants money because plaintiff is alleged to have broken her door down the day after Bleachgate Live happened.  She also claims she put his bleached stuff outside.   (How can Princess open her eye lids with the huge fake eyelashes she's wearing?). 

Plaintiff claims he broke down the door, slammed her head into the wall, and hit her roommate.   Princess has zero police reports, photos, medical reports, so no proof.   Defendant claims someone (alleges plaintiff or his girlfriend) slashed her tires, with no witnesses or proof of that either. 

$4,000 to plaintiff, nothing to defendant.

Lien on Me, Shame on You-Plaintiff suing defendant for selling her a car with a lien on it.  Defendant bought car, had a title for car it, and took out title loans on his current vehicle, and on the car he sold plaintiff.   Defendant sold car to plaintiff for $580, but still owed more than that to title company, but didn't tell plaintiff about the title loan lien.  A while later plaintiff looks outside, and car is gone (repossessed).   Defendant bought car for $1300, had a lien for $1300, and plaintiff was going to pay him $2300 (minus the $580 she already paid him). 

Plaintiff gets $580.

[Florinaldo]

4 hours ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

Defendant's case was dropped after he went through anger management,

Whoever gave those anger management classes, their method sucks because he was still seething and acting very aggressive.

6 hours ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

Sorry JJ, you don't put your fence on my property, not even an inch, or on the joint property line.   

She called the encroachment "minimal" because she does not grasp basic geometry; area is a function of length squared, so what appears to her as small can amount to an appreciable chunk of land if the fence runs more than just a feet or two. And if you don't do anything about it, the principle of adverse possession will eventually kick in and the other person can claim that "minimal" fraction of your land as theirs.

Edited April 18, 2020 by Florinaldo

[CrazyInAlabama]

3 p.m. episodes, both reruns, probably around 2016-

First-

Bad Babysitter Barter-Plaintiff claims she doesn't need to repay $400 loan to defendant, because she was supposed to get  defendant's Jeep in return for babysitting his child, and taking child to and from school, and before and after school care.   She claims she worked many hours, paid off the Jeep, but defendant didn't pay her for more babysitting, and she got behind in her bills.   JJ figures out she didn't work for $1800 worth, but much less.   Plaintiff claims in two months she worked 120 hours, at minimum wage, but paid off the jeep.    Plaintiff didn't get the title for the Jeep at any time.     

The plaintiff claims defendant didn't pay her much, and repossessed. the Jeep.    Plaintiff also claims man lusted after her, but she obviously had another boyfriend (she's quite pregnant), and defendant says she watched the child was every other week (custody issues).   How did this woman work full time bar tending, but take the defendant's kid, and her own kid to and from school, when she works over an hour away?      Plaintiff only lives a block away from school, so why was she driving the kids to and from school? 

(funny note-defendant buries money in his back yard, and announced this to 10 million viewers.   JJ advises him to move the money).   (I used to live in Colorado Springs, and why would plaintiff drive an hour each way from Pueblo to bar tend in snow country?   They have lots of bars in Pueblo ).   Defendant claims a friend of plaintiff, and plaintiff's mom threatened him.  

Plaintiff wrote loan, for the $400.   $400 to defendant, and nothing to plaintiff.  

Matching Tattoo Fail-Plaintiff suing ex-boyfriend for cost of matching tattoos, and a bedroom set.  Defendant's nasty emails are so bad that it can't be shown on TV. Defendant's new girlfriend is his witness (looks almost identical to plaintiff's witness), and gets the Byrd boot.   Defendant did not pay for bedroom set, $2350 (King size bed, frame, and TV), because he claims it's was a gift. 

$2235 to plaintiff (loser defendant actually made one payment already).

Second-

Squatter Denial-Plaintiff/landlord  suing former tenants/defendants for non payment of rent, and a false arrest. There is a receipt for $600 to rent a bedroom at plaintiff's location.    Defendant man said they had no choice about squatting in the plaintiff's place.    Plaintiff wanted tenants out in September, and they were legally notified to leave the property (a 30 day notice to leave).    Defendants claim they paid rent until September 2015, when they were told to leave by 15 October 2015.   Defendants paid rent in October, and November, (both very late in the month), and didn't pay for December, but still lived in the bedroom.   

In December, defendants didn't pay rent or utilities, or January either, and didn't move out until February.    Defendants claim the eviction notice was because they complained to the Housing Authority.     Again, we get to hear the "ate the steak" lecture.    Defendants claim the Housing Authority told them not to pay the 3 months rent.     Defendant's mother (witness) keeps telling woman defendant what to say.      Defendants refused to try to find a job, and move out of plaintiff's property.   

Defendant claims the plaintiff's property was a single family dwelling, and was illegally split into three residences.     Defendant man claims he's working now, and woman is going to school.     Protective order application from defendants is ludicrous, and shouldn't have been granted.    Plaintiff was arrested for trespassing on her own property.   This is how the defendants treat a family friend?

$5,000 to plaintiff. 

Good Samaritan Bitten in the Face-Plaintiff suing defendant for her dog (Marshmallow) biting him in the face, when he found the dog wandering loose.   Defendant says her dog never left her garage, and never bit anyone.   (Descriptions say it's a poodle, but it looks like a Mini. Schnauzer).    Plaintiff saw dog wandering in the street, he pulled over, tried to look at the dog's collar, and the dog bite plaintiff's cheek.    Dog ran into garage, and when defendant opened the front door, and that's when she said the dog's name.      

Defendant claims the dog isn't hers, and then says it never left the garage.    Defendant told plaintiff she would pay his medical bills, but didn't.      Defendant says a contractor let the dog out, and defendant went to look for the dog, and couldn't find the dog.    Defendant says where she used to live the gardener would let the dog out, but dog would come back home.    

Plaintiff receives $1000 for medical bills.  Defendant is angry that plaintiff contacted Animal Control, and she tried to say her dog was never outside.   

[Ashforth]

I got an episode with a total POS guy and his wife who claimed that their English Bulldog (which I don't think they ever called by a name) accidentally got away from them while they were having a picnic party at a park. Did they look for her? Nah. A Good Samaritan found the dog in a road and took it to a rescue organization, and those nice people took it to a vet where it was diagnosed with heat stroke and pneumonia. Her prognosis was poor. Oh and lo and behold, the dog had recently had puppies and had an injury which suggested it was tossed out of a vehicle. No collar, tag, or microchip.

The rescue guy opted to let the vet euthanize the dog and paid the vet bill.

The POS animal abuser - who I suspect runs a puppy mill - had the gall to sue the rescue organization and may have been trying to sue the vet as well. My white hot rage may have kept me from hearing everything. 

[CrazyInAlabama]

5 p.m. episodes, both recent reruns-

First-

Homeless Helping the Homeless-Plaintiff landlord was homeless at one time, with her three kids ten years ago.    She bought a house, and rented to other homeless people, is suing for damages, unpaid rent, unpaid bills, etc.    Defendant and her three kids (10, 7 & 1) rented a separate neighboring house she owned, next to her own home, to the plaintiff.   Plaintiff purchased both properties in May.     

Plaintiff is a mental health therapist working with the school district.    Defendant was living in a car with her three kids,   Defendant paid only $600 of $1500 security, moved in 1 July, lived there until September 13.   Defendant paid $600 rent in July, nothing in  August or September.    Defendant wanted the house to be Section 8, for $248 rent by her, and the rest of the $600 by Section 8 ($352).  

Defendant went to Section 8 to complain, and Housing Authority to complain about a broken door.  Defendant says she stopped working in July, and only started working recently (at Amazon) because she "had to go through the illegal eviction actions".    Plaintiff claims defendant's daughter broke the door, that defendant complained to the Housing Authority about.    Defendant was evicted as of 1 September, but stayed until 13 September. 

Application plaintiff has says defendant hasn't been employed for over 10 years.     Defendant was evicted, and left her furniture from house on the front lawn, and never picked it up.   

Plaintiff gets $1500 rent, $900 security deposit, and damages equaling $3300.  (I really wished Byrd would beat the snot out of defendant with fly swatter of death).  (My opinion is that if the defendant should put half the effort into working, and paying her own bills, as she does into screwing over a woman who rented the house to her, she would be better off.    The plaintiff's mistake was letting the defendant move in at all.  Bet the next tenant will have a rental and work history). 

Stanley the Pomeranian Has His Day in Court-(dog custody case) Plaintiff suing defendant for possession of adorable Stanley.    Litigants lived together in apartment for a year, moved into house owned by his mother for six months, and split up.   Defendant still lives in the house, and with the adorable Stanley.     Defendant claims Stanley was always with him full time.     (The only one who looks at the plaintiff less than the defendant, is the adorable Stanley.   Stanley doesn't care about the plaintiff, and never did.   Plaintiff only wanted the dog to hurt the defendant). 

Stanley goes with defendant. 

Second-

Unlawful Bulldog Euthanization-Plaintiff suing animal rescue owner over theft and euthanasia of his dog.  Plaintiff had English Bulldogs, took them to the park in 91 degree weather for a birthday party.  Dogs were in the back of the truck.    A short nosed animal, like a Bulldog in that heat is deadly.   

Plaintiff was unloading birthday party stuff, noticed his one dog was missing.    After finding the dog missing, they still had the party.  Man claims he went looking for his dog (they arrived at 9 a.m., and party went until 4 p.m.), after taking other dog back to the house.   Plaintiff claims someone stole his dog, but dog was found wandering, and defendant took dog to nearest vet.     Vet put down dog a few hours later.     

Defendant statement says someone, found dog at side of road, in distress, had had puppies recently, and was dehydrated, and had other heat damage, and gave dog to defendant for help.   Plaintiff says dog had puppies recently.   Vet report says dog had a gash, was depressed, dehydrated, having breathing issues, crackles in lungs, vet suspected heat stress/stroke, brachycephalic airway syndrome.  Dog was put down.     ( I wonder how many litters the plaintiff had from that dog?   JJ gets the information that the dog had three puppies in this litter, and they were sold for over $3k each.  I bet the other dog is a male English.)   

As JJ says, man didn't go to find his dog, but went to an all day birthday party.   Apparently birthday party was a huge deal, with almost 100 attendees.    As JJ says, plaintiff is a horrible excuse for a pet owner, and is absolutely a puppy mill breeder for the Bulldogs. 

Dog was euthanized before plaintiff even went to look for it.        Defendant says dog has no collar, tag or microchip, so the owner couldn't be notified about dog being found.  Vet report says dog was severely dehydrated, and badly injured, and had injuries consistent with being tossed out of a moving vehicle.  

Of course, plaintiff lives on a farm, most puppy mill operators do.  Fewer neighbors, and fewer complaints to the authorities. 

Case dismissed.

 

Edited April 21, 2020 by CrazyInAlabama

[Florinaldo]

13 hours ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

The only one who looks at the plaintiff less than the defendant, is the adorable Stanley.   Stanley doesn't care about the plaintiff, and never did.   Plaintiff only wanted the dog to hurt the defendant

That dog was the calmest creature we have seen in a long time at a litigant table, almost as if he had been given a soothing pill of some sort. He barely took notice of JJ and as you say, did not care a whiff about plaintiff. I do not know how long the taping lasted with the inevitable interruptions, but the dog being held like that did not look like the most comfortable position for dog or human.

13 hours ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

Unlawful Bulldog Euthanization

Plaintiff was either the most obtuse person on Earth or the least mentally agile; usually litigants are more adept at coming up with alternative silly arguments to bolster their stories. He kept coming back to "they did not give me an opportunity to find her", whereas the defendants did not even know of his existence since the dog did not bear any ID. The thing he was most uspet about was evidently the loss of breeding revenue, not the fate of the dog itself.

13 hours ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

Homeless Helping the Homeless

Another renter who knows every rule in the Section 8 book and how to take advantage of them, on top of thinking she is owed service and various compensation while not paying for anything.

[Ashforth]

56 minutes ago, Florinaldo said:

Plaintiff was either the most obtuse person on Earth or the least mentally agile; usually litigants are more adept at coming up with alternative silly arguments to bolster their stories. He kept coming back to "they did not give me an opportunity to find her", whereas the defendants did not even know of his existence since the dog did not bear any ID. The thing he was most uspet about was evidently the loss of breeding revenue, not the fate of the dog itself.

I didn't hear how he even found out what had happened to the dog. He was a smug asshole.

And yes, he was only pissed that his abused little cash cow was gone.

Edited April 21, 2020 by Ashforth

[CrazyInAlabama]

3 p.m. episodes, both reruns, probably 2016-

First-

Most Wanted Shoplifter-Plaintiff suing for defamation of character after defendant put up a photo of him, labelled 'shoplifter', after a dispute over cheap cigars.    Defendant, and his brother both claim plaintiff is a shoplifter.    There is a police report about the March incident.    Plaintiff claims defendant wanted to fight him.    Plaintiff brought a witness who wasn't in the store during the incident, must have wanted the trip to L.A.   

Case dismissed, and plaintiff is banned from the store.   

The Reluctant Landlord-Plaintiff suing former landlord-to-be for storage fees, and security deposit for a room he wanted to rent.   Defendant claims man signed the lease (no she doesn't have a copy), and backed out at the last minute, and she wants the month's rent.  $200 security was paid to defendant, and when he couldn't get a key early, he bailed.   

Defendant said she couldn't give him a key until the lease is signed, and rent paid.    I think defendant dodged a bullet by him not moving in.    Plaintiff does not seem tied to reality.   

Plaintiff gets his $200 back, if she would have had a signed lease it would have been different. 

Second-

Single Mom Settlement-Plaintiff (used car salesman) suing defendant over non-payment for car, she gave him a bad check.   Defendant is Sainted Single Mother of ? (SSMO? ). $7,000 for a 2000 Jeep Grand Cherokee, put $2500 down, and $600 a month for 9 months (costs $900 for interest, and taxes, etc).    Check was for $2,000, from Farmer's insurance for injuries.   (Defendant's chest tattoo of giant red lips, and Take Note is tacky).    Plaintiff put check into his account, because SSMO? didn't have a bank account.       

However, defendant refused the settlement from Farmer's insurance, so check was cancelled by company, but defendant kept the Jeep.    JJ will contact Farmer's insurance about the check status.     Farmer's Insurance says defendant didn't cash check knowing that accepting check would be accepting the settlement. 

JJ's decision is:

1. Order that plaintiff can get car with Marshal. 

2.  Charges for grand larceny and fraud will be pressed because defendant committed fraud.   Car will be returned to company in two days or charges will be pressed. 

Plaintiff works elsewhere, so he gets $2,000 judgment

Dog Bite, Huge Settlement-Plaintiff suing former neighbor for kicking his car, after plaintiff's dog bit her in the face.   Defendant has sold and moved since.    The same dog bit the defendant's daughter 13 months before, and received a settlement from the insurance company $150,000 for defendant, and $60,000 pending for the defendant's daughter.   

What kind of idiot is still friendly with the defendant and her family after they get sued for huge amounts?     In the middle of the night, defendant was apparently drunk, and on plaintiff's property, plaintiff wife went and answered the door.   Defendant claims her dog ripped her lip off, the two women argued after drinking, and then defendant repeatedly kicked the plaintiff's car.    Defendant claims the plaintiff asked her to come over.   (Defendant thinks petting the neighbor's dog is 'politically correct').   

 I can't believe the insurance company covered two dog bites from the same dog, because my insurance always told me it's standard that they cover one bite, and then that dog is no longer covered.    Usually the people I know that had their dog bite someone, the insurance no longer covered any of their animals.    How the hell can one family get two dog bite settlements from the same people's dog?   There is no way that the insurance wouldn't have cancelled the policy after the first bite.    Something is going on with this case, and it's not just a dog bite either. 

Plaintiff has $1,000 deductible on car insurance, which he didn't file claim for the car damage yet.  Plaintiff gets $1,000, and is still a spineless jelly fish.    I wonder what the real story is on this entire situation?   The damage happened two years ago, so I hope the insurance tells him it's too late. 

[CrazyInAlabama]

5 p.m.  episodes, both recent reruns-

First-

Amazon Delivery Driver Outrun by Pit Bull-Plaintiff is an Amazon delivery driver, making a delivery when he was attacked by a Pit Bull, and tried to out run it.  Defendant orders a $1,000 phone from Amazon, to defendant, and the property has a gate, and driveway gate.   Plaintiff went through the unlocked gate, to put phone on the porch, and then the loose dog ran around the house, coming towards plaintiff, driver backed out, ran into the side of the owner's truck, and man was bitten on the leg once.    Defendant says plaintiff was trespassing (No, he wasn't, it was an ordered delivery to the specific address).     JJ says, and she's right, unless delivery instructions said toss over gate, stay off property, then it's the defendant's fault this happened.   

 Plaintiff had a puncture wound.    Defendant claims his dog had shots, but city animal control said it wasn't legally done.    Defendant did his own rabies shots for dog, and bought the serum at the feed store, and gave the shots himself.    All the defendant had to do was pick up his own iPhone (why is it always an iPhone?).    Or put up a sign saying reach packages through gate and drop on bin, or something.   Defendant's witness gets booted.    Defendant counter claims because he had to neuter his dog, and dog was quarantined, dismissed.   

Plaintiff gets $2400. (cases like this one are why you see the videos of delivery people booting packages like footballs, or tossing them over a fence).  

Swindled in a Horse Deal-Plaintiff suing defendant in a horse deal gone bad.    Defendant sold horse, and was agreed to split profit with plaintiff, for training and selling the plaintiff's horse.    There is a written contract, but plaintiff paid $4k for another horse, and $500 was for Lucky.    Defendant sold horse to a dude ranch for $3000, and gave plaintiff another $498, and contract doesn't say defendant gets paid for training fees or boarding.    Badly written contract is going to ruin the defendant's case.   

$500 to plaintiff. 

Second-

Get Out of Government Debt the Easy Way-Plaintiff loaned money to new boyfriend to pay a fine, and defendant says it was a gift, and he shouldn't have to pay it. Defendant says he didn't take the money, he only accepted it.  Defendant says fixing the woman's car bumper (pushing it back into the clips, and pushing dents out) equals the $4k he borrowed. 

Defendant says plaintiff is just asking for the money back, because he didn't move forward with the relationship.  Defendant claims plaintiff took $5800 from his wallet, and drawer at his house.  Both litigants seem to keep having an intimate relationship, even after the unpaid loan, and the claims of thefts from the defendant.  JJ says it's clear that the plaintiff expected to be paid back, in her texts. 

$4000 to plaintiff. 

Beloved Mother Denied Headstone-Plaintiffs suing headstone maker for a refund for mother's headstone.   Mother died 27 years ago, and the plaintiffs finally saved up enough for the headstone.   Plaintiff claims they visited the cemetery at least three times a year, but didn't check with the cemetery about headstones, or what their rules are.  They selected an $850 headstone, ordered from defendant, and it was completed.    There is actually a signed contract.   

Unfortunately, cemetery does not allow headstones, and plaintiff expected headstone maker would have known that.     I feel sorry for the plaintiffs, but it's not the fault of the defendant that plaintiff didn't check with the cemetery first.  (Apparently mother is buried in a state cemetery in a pauper's grave, and no headstones are allowed.    I feel sorry for the two men, but the defendant did nothing wrong).    Apparently there have been rule changes over the years.   I feel sorry for the plaintiffs, but the defendant did make the headstone as the contract calls for.  

Case dismissed.   

 

 

Edited April 21, 2020 by CrazyInAlabama