All Episodes Talk: All Rise

Back Atcha · May 5, 2021

5 hours ago, gingerormaryann said:

Watch how long and silent she was.

If you're referring to the wife/mother, I believe she learned to remain silent over very long periods in her life...growing up and married to this speciman--in order to remain safe. It's second nature for her.

Also, there are producers instructing them when to speak and when to wait...and then the editors after filming is completed.

Edited May 5, 2021 by Back Atcha

Back Atcha · May 5, 2021

On 4/30/2021 at 5:16 PM, TangoDown365 said:

Others saying the defendant has mental/psychological issues is strange to me because this girl doesn’t demonstrate any signs at any point in the courtroom. I

We learned during the hearing that the defendant wanted/needed the dog for "emotional support." Didn't her father confirm that? We saw that she was confused during much of her testimony. A childlike 18yr old who thought "innoculated" meant "neutered." I noticed enough demonstrations of her "mental/psychological issues," both in her body language and her answers--to come to a different conclusion.

Edited May 5, 2021 by Back Atcha

LetsStartTalking · May 5, 2021

As the final season comes to an end, I must say - I'm glad it's going. This season in particular has seemed like such a let-down, especially for the much lauded '25th Anniversary' season. Maybe because it's COVID, maybe because there just aren't interesting cases in small claims court the past year ? It's been such a dud of a season - especially when pairing recent cases with those from 2012-13, which were dumped back then in favor of more interesting cases to air that season.

Carolina Girl · May 5, 2021

2 hours ago, LetsStartTalking said:

As the final season comes to an end, I must say - I'm glad it's going. This season in particular has seemed like such a let-down, especially for the much lauded '25th Anniversary' season. Maybe because it's COVID, maybe because there just aren't interesting cases in small claims court the past year ? It's been such a dud of a season - especially when pairing recent cases with those from 2012-13, which were dumped back then in favor of more interesting cases to air that season.

As far as the repeats go, I would have really enjoyed seeing the BEST and most interesting of the cases over the last 25 years being repeated. How many memorable cases have there been? In fact, it would have been fun to span them chronologically, so that we could see how JJ changed over the years.

As for that POS day-care couple, it would not surprise me if they had the "best friend" go to work for the defendant in an attempt to get dirt on her. Just a little too coincidental for me. And, uh, a BASEMENT? Where's the windows and the sunshine?

CrazyInAlabama · May 5, 2021

4 p.m. reruns-

First (2020)-

Video of Assault While Holding a Baby! -Plaintiff Amanda Ward, and Grandfather, Lawrence Ward, suing ex-boyfriend, Jason Enright, baby daddy, for legal fees, and a loan to move, and are suing for $5,000. There is a video of an attack on him in his home, while he was holding their baby.

The video of the attack is appalling. Defendant has two other children, that defendant has full custody of, and both litigants lived with the three kids, in Fontana, with a platonic roommate. Then they moved to Rancho Cucamonga (I love that name). Plaintiff's grandfather claims he made a loan to defendant for first, last month, and security deposit to defendant.

Grandfather made loan to both for $4800. So, it would be combined debt. Defendant still lives in home, but plaintiff only lived there for six months. No repayment by either party during the six months of shacking up.

Plaintiff Amanda Ward claims the assault resulted in her arrest, and restraining order, and attorney's fees. $1,000 for attorney fees are claimed. Plaintiff was arrested at the home the night of the assault by police, after plaintiff hit, and clawed the defendant.

Plaintiff and two girlfriends were over, defendant was out. Plaintiff heard noise at front door, then back door was broken to get into the house by defendant. You could only get in if the inside deadbolts were unlocked, but keys wouldn't work from outside. The video shows the drunk plaintiff attacking the defendant, while he's holding the baby in his arms. She actually is clawing at his arms and back, punches him in the head. Plaintiff claims defendant was belligerently drunk, but only plaintiff looks drunk on the video. Plaintiff and defendant hadn't shared a bedroom for three months, of the six-month tenancy.

The only belligerent person I saw was the plaintiff. Defendant says plaintiff and friends ignored the doorbell, and knocking. Plaintiff seems to think it's funny that she's committing an assault on a man holding a baby. She actually hits him twice, and jumps on his back. The plaintiff thinks what she did on film is funny.

Grandfather case cut in half, $2400 awarded (each partner was in a relationship when this loan was made by her grandfather).

Case dismissed, except for $2400 to grandfather for half of loan. (I would have nullified the award, grandfather thinks nothing is wrong with his granddaughter attacking the boyfriend, while he’s holding the baby. I hope defendant showed this video to the family court judge, and I hope if plaintiff gets visitation, it's supervised by impartial parties).

Second (2018)-

I Wanted to See My Grandfather’s Fake Eyeball! – Plaintiff/grandmother suing grandson for stealing money from her home safe. Defendant grandson says he was just in the safe to show his friend the late grandfather’s fake eyeball, but he stole thousands on more than one occasion.

(I've found that the remote judge on TV has changed the interactions on JJ, and the Peoples Court. Both shows have issues with litigants butting in, and there is a definite lack of control of the courtroom. The remote aspect has ruined the interactions in the cases.)

Edited May 5, 2021 by CrazyInAlabama

CrazyInAlabama · May 5, 2021

4 p.m. reruns-

First (2020)-

Video of Assault While Holding a Baby! -Plaintiff Amanda Ward, and Grandfather, Lawrence Ward, suing ex-boyfriend, Jason Enright, baby daddy, for legal fees, and a loan to move, and are suing for $5,000. There is a video of an attack on him in his home, while he was holding their baby.

The video of the attack is appalling. Defendant has another boy and girl that he has full custody of, and both litigants lived with the three kids, in Fontana, with a platonic roommate. Then they moved to Rancho Cucamonga (I love that name). Plaintiff's grandfather claims he made a loan to defendant for first, last month, and security deposit to defendant.

Grandfather made loan to both for $4800. So, it would be combined debt. Defendant still lives in home, but plaintiff only lived there for six months. No repayment by either party during the six months of shacking up.

Plaintiff Amanda Ward claims the assault resulted in her arrest, and restraining order, and attorney's fees. $1,000 for attorney fees are claimed. Plaintiff was arrested at the home the night of the assault by police, after plaintiff hit, and clawed the defendant.

Plaintiff had two girlfriends over, defendant was out. Plaintiff heard noise at front door, then back door doggy door was broken to get into the house by defendant. You could only get in if the inside deadbolts were unlocked, but keys wouldn't work from outside. The video shows the drunk plaintiff attacking the defendant, while he's holding the baby in his arms. She actually is clawing at his arms and back, punches him in the head. Plaintiff claims defendant was belligerently drunk, but only plaintiff looks drunk on the video. Plaintiff and defendant hadn't shared a bedroom for three months, of the six-month tenancy.

The only belligerent person I saw was the plaintiff. Defendant says plaintiff and friends ignored the doorbell, and knocking. Plaintiff seems to think it's funny that she's committing an assault on a man holding a baby. She actually hits him twice, and jumps on his back. The plaintiff thinks what she did on film is funny. Her grandfather seems to see nothing wrong with his drunk granddaughter assaulting a man holding their baby.

Grandfather case cut in half, $2400 awarded (each partner was in a relationship when this loan was made by her grandfather). Case dismissed, except for $2400 to grandfather for half of loan.

(I would have nullified the award. The grandfather thinks nothing is wrong with his granddaughter attacking the boyfriend, while he’s holding the baby).

Second (2018)-

I Wanted to See My Grandfather’s Fake Eyeball! – Plaintiff grandmother Valerta Darrell and her thieving grandson Hayden Lopez, are suing over the money her thieving grandson gave his cousin, and was stolen from her home safe. Plaintiff wants her money back from cousin Christian Cure, defendant mother Misty Cure, and Christian's father Michael County for stealing money from her home safe. Defendant grandson says he was just in the safe to show his friend/cousin the late grandfather’s fake eyeball, but he stole thousands on more than one occasion. Defendant mother believes her son, Christian earned the money mowing lawns, $2,000. Late grandfather gave the grandson the safe combination before grandfather died, when grandson was 11.

The grandmother/plaintiff is delusional if she believes her grandson was an innocent party, instead of a felon. The cousin/defendant is totally guilty of a felony also, and his mother and stepfather are idiots to defend the son/stepson Christian's actions. The money in the safe was from grandfather's insurance, $16,000.

Grandson gave cousin, $500, and then $1,000 at a time. Grandson took $500 for him, and cousin, then took $1000 at a time, and gave half to his cousin Christian. Grandson Hayden bought clothes for himself, and spent a lot at the fair. The grandson gave $3,000 to cousin Christian. Christian Cure knew that the money was stolen from the grandfather's inheritance to the grandmother. Christian told his mother he earned thousand from working for his uncle mowing his lawn (previous times he mowed uncle's lawn he was paid $20). Defendant mother never asked the grandmother if her son was working for her, and was paid thousands.

Defendant mother finally asked what was up with the thousands of dollars of money for months.

$3,000 to plaintiff.

(I wouldn't give any of these people a penny).

(I've found that the remote judge on TV have changed the interactions on JJ, and the Peoples Court. Both shows have issues with litigants butting in, and there is a definite lack of control of the courtroom. The remote aspect has ruined the interactions in the cases.)

CrazyInAlabama · May 5, 2021

5 p.m. episodes-

First (2021)-

Father and Son Brawl! -Plaintiff Katherine and Benjamin Fuentes (husband and wife, woman is sister and daughter) father Cesar Cuevas Sr, are suing defendant son Cesar Cuevas Jr. over an assault, and truck damage to Benjamin's truck. They were all living in the same house (except the husband), Katherine says brother only came to visit, didn't have a room in the home. There are three daughters living in the house, each girl had her own room, and defendant slept on the couch sometimes.

Father testifies daughter Katherine, and son were fighting in the kitchen. Father says son was chasing the daughter around the house. Then son was fighting the father next. Son stays with his girlfriend/baby mama sometimes. Son says sister was hostile to him. Son claims he never chased the sister, but claims father attacked him. Son claims he hit a glass, and sister claims he was throwing stuff at her. When son left, sister claims he bashed her truck, and son admits grazing the truck leaving. Son plead guilty to vandalism on husband's truck, but restitution was dismissed. Son was in jail for 10 days after this.

Plaintiff daughter is the driving force, and you can tell she wants anything she can get against the brother. Father doesn't want anything for the assault, and to me it sounds like mutual combat.

Plaintiff Benjamin Fuentes claims truck cost $15000 to fix, and his insurance company paid that, minus the deductible. He also claims damages to personal property, and that 'personal property' is the truck,

How convenient that princess plaintiff has a video of everything. Does she video everything in her life? My guess is she does, and I bet she sends out her fascinating video so everyone can see what a great influencer she is.

$1,000 to plaintiff for the deductible to plaintiff Benjamin Fuentes.

Second (2014)-

Scooter Squabble -Plaintiff Kenny Boggs suing defendants Jennifer and Kevin Gillespie for a scooter damaged by their daughter Abigail. Plaintiff takes the son, Killan, to the bus stop every morning on his electric scooter every morning to meet the bus, and waits for the bus to arrive. Plaintiff says Abigail wanted to ride the scooter, and only if she brought a note giving permission from her parents, and a helmet.

Before she brought a note, she was sitting on the scooter, but the key was in it, and it was running. Abigail gripped the handle bars, and it started to fall over, so she grabbed the throttle and the scooter surged forward. The scooter was on the kick stand, when Abigail got on the scooter, and it fell over and was scratched. As JJ says, plaintiff left the key in the scooter. so Abigail could have been injured or killed, and her parents would have owned everything plaintiff had. Plaintiff was careless.

Plaintiff case dismissed.

Spit in the Face -Plaintiff / brother Athan Anagonye suing defendant /sister Christina Anagonye who broke his TV, and tried to have him arrested when they were living in the same house on separate floors.

Plaintiff says sister came to his basement apartment to see her brand new washer and dryer delivered to the basement that day. Sister wanted to do laundry in the basement in the middle of the night, so brother turned the washer and dryer off. Then defendant spit in plaintiff's face, and she smacked his TV and broke it. So plaintiff took defendant's TV until she replaced his TV. Then defendant called the police, lied about the assault, and police didn't believe sister.

After police left, defendant took her TV back, and that's when the plaintiff decided to move out. Defendant is counter suing for rent, bills, and dryer damage. Defendant claims she loaned $700 to plaintiff, and claims she has a text verifying that. There is no due amount on the text that JJ can find.

Plaintiff receives $250 for TV. Defendant gets zero.

Edited May 6, 2021 by CrazyInAlabama

Florinaldo · May 5, 2021

Just now, CrazyInAlabama said:

Father and Son Brawl!

I got the feeling that plaintiff daughter is the precious princess in that family, perhaps her father's favourite, and that she lords over everyone else, not tolerating ever not getting things completely her way. Her husband should really watch himself, or he may one day find himself at a defendant's lectern in some other court.

badhaggis · May 6, 2021

2 hours ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

Father and Son Brawl!

I think that this might be the first time that someone told precious princess no and/or she didn't get her way. It was glorious!

nora1992 · May 6, 2021

9 hours ago, badhaggis said:

I think that this might be the first time that someone told precious princess no and/or she didn't get her way. It was glorious!

I was too distracted by the centipedes on her eyelids. Still, it could have been interesting to see the video.

Carolina Girl · May 6, 2021

12 hours ago, badhaggis said:

I think that this might be the first time that someone told precious princess no and/or she didn't get her way. It was glorious!

And that supposedly horrible brother? Calm, cool, collected and truthful. I LOVED JJ telling that obnoxious little bitch that before she said anything, she needs to know that she believed EVERY WORD of her brother's relating of the incident. And sure, she carefully unplugged the Xbox and carefully placed it on the couch. Considering how incensed she was getting when she realized she was losing, and how snotty she became when JJ refused to watch HER video (carefully timed, no doubt, to start recording AFTER her bad behavior had occurred), tells me that she's nothing but the family shit-stirrer.

I really felt bad for her father. You could tell he didn't want to be there. Oh, and I LOVED how she LIED from the get-go. No doubt she bullied Daddy into being there - the sad sack expression on his face said it all.

LetsStartTalking · May 6, 2021

16 hours ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

5 p.m. episodes-

First (2021)-

Father and Son Brawl! -Plaintiff Katherine and Benjamin Fuentes (husband and wife, woman is sister and daughter) father Cesar Cuevas Sr, are suing defendant son Cesar Cuevas Jr. over an assault, and truck damage to Benjamin's truck. They were all living in the same house (except the husband), Katherine says brother only came to visit, didn't have a room in the home. There are three daughters living in the house, each girl had her own room, and defendant slept on the couch sometimes.

Father testifies daughter Katherine, and son were fighting in the kitchen. Father says son was chasing the daughter around the house. Then son was fighting the father next. Son stays with his girlfriend/baby mama sometimes. Son says sister was hostile to him. Son claims he never chased the sister, but claims father attacked him. Son claims he hit a glass, and sister claims he was throwing stuff at her. When son left, sister claims he bashed her truck, and son admits grazing the truck leaving. Son plead guilty to vandalism on husband's truck, but restitution was dismissed. Son was in jail for 10 days after this.

Plaintiff daughter is the driving force, and you can tell she wants anything she can get against the brother. Father doesn't want anything for the assault, and to me it sounds like mutual combat.

Plaintiff Benjamin Fuentes claims truck cost $15000 to fix, and his insurance company paid that, minus the deductible. He also claims damages to personal property, and that 'personal property' is the truck,

How convenient that princess plaintiff has a video of everything. Does she video everything in her life? My guess is she does, and I bet she sends out her fascinating video so everyone can see what a great influencer she is.

$1,000 to plaintiff for the deductible to plaintiff Benjamin Fuentes.

I was waiting for JJ to look Cesar Cuevas Jr. (defendant) in the eye and ask:

"Where did you think you were coming today ? To audition for the role of the 'Cowardly Lion' in 'The Wizard of OZ' ? Go outside and cut your hair. I'll wait."

CrazyInAlabama · May 6, 2021

4 p.m. reruns-

First (2018)-

Cheerleading Nanny Time! -Plaintiff/nanny Michelle Kachin suing defendant Kristen Thomason for a loan to finance her child's cheerleading camp, for $2,000. Nanny worked for defendant for two years, and 8 year-old wanted to go to cheerleading camp. Nanny was paid in cash, and didn't file taxes (since 2017). Plaintiff took out a loan to give defendant $2,000. Defendant and then, husband were both working, but couldn't finance the kid's camp, so wife borrowed the money from the nanny. Loan is in collections.

There is no paperwork proving plaintiff took out the loan, but there were no payments made to plaintiff by defendant. Plaintiff claims defendant took her to the bank to get the cash, but she wasn't allowed to give her the $2000 (loan was $5,000) in the bank, but outside in the car. I hate that defendant ripped off the plaintiff like this, the plaintiff has some mental issues, and seems to be on the verge of a breakdown in court. Plaintiff still lives at the same house, but didn't respond to the letters about the loan.

Defendant's witness (guess he's the keeps giggling, and wants to interrupt. Defendant claims she took the loan from nanny because her now ex-husband dumped her. Defendant says the cheerleading camp was actually a 9-month program, for $300 a month. Plus other fees, travel costs uniform costs and that's where the nanny loan went, and the nanny paid for uniforms and other fees. Defendant paid a little back to the nanny.

Defendant paid back $200 to nanny. Defendant witness is kicked out.

Plaintiff receives $2500.

(I cheated, and the nanny has another job after this, and seems to be doing very well. I'm happy about that, and wish her the best).

Puppies Eat Poisonous Elephant Ears! -Plaintiff Carol Caldwell (man) suing defendant Rhianna Barone over an English Springer Spaniel puppy sold to defendant for $700, and paid $350 down. Right before the puppy was picked up, plaintiff's puppies (2 I think), and defendant puppy chewed up some Elephant Ear plants, and got sick after plaintiff picked up her puppy. Defendant still owes $350, on puppy, and wants vet bills paid too.

The morning after the puppy was picked up and got sick, defendant called plaintiff and asked what to do for the puppy, and he told her about the elephant ears. Plaintiff wants $350, and defendant refuses to pay plaintiff, and says her vet bills were over $600 (that includes the wellness program with shots I image, and for neutering, heart worm preventative, for $490) However, defendant didn't take the dog to the vet for a long time, not even right after the puppy was sick. Defendant was offered a full refund, and refused.

Plaintiff receives $350. Defendant receives nothing.

Second (2018)-

Transgender Art Drama?! -Plaintiff Caroline Radell suing defendant Jacqueline Rollins for emotional distress, exhibiting pictures of her without her permission. Litigants were in a relationship for a while, and defendant has four paintings of plaintiffs, and wants all four back, and the gift portrait. Plaintiff gave one painting to defendant as a gift, but wants it back too. Plaintiff says defendant is selling a CD with the painting/portrait being used as cover art. Plaintiff wants credit on the CD cover, and the painting back. Painting was created in an intimate setting, and according to plaintiff was as a gesture of acceptance for defendant coming out as transgender (not nice of plaintiff to out the defendant on national TV).

Only one picture was a person, the rest are a still life, an abstract, and another strange soccer ball, and a copy of another artist's painting (this was during plaintiff's art studies). Plaintiff wants the four paintings, and some of her clothes back, plaintiff stored some stuff with defendant. Defendant says she has four paintings in question, and will return two paintings to plaintiff. Defendant says the paintings that were portraits should stay with her, and the other paintings.

Two paintings go back to plaintiff. Plaintiff will send someone to pick the two pictures up. Defendant is upset that plaintiff outed her to a lot of people.

You Sold Me an Injured Horse?! -Plaintiff Marissa Brunelle suing defendant David and Kathleen Kontoes over a horse purchased from defendants for her daughter for $2,500. Plaintiff claims defendants lied to her about the horse's suitability for her purpose, and horse was injured. Plaintiff has her witness/trainer evaluate the horse, the daughter rode the horse,

(Plaintiff did not do a vet check [also called a PPE Pre-Purchase Examination]). PPE is to see if horse is lame, has defects, or other issues that would make horse unsuitable for purchaser's intended use). After the case, the defendant mentioned that the horse was ridden western, and she told plaintiff that she had no idea about the horse's suitability for being ridden English, or jumping. $2500 is a ridiculous price for a horse that will be shown in jumper classes. There is no guarantee that a horse that has been trained and ridden in a Western saddle can change, and do well in English riding or especially jumper classes.

Bill of Sale says as is at the time of signing, no warranties or guarantees, are expressed or implied. Plaintiff still says defendants lied about horse's soundness. Contract is ironclad, and there is no reason to refund, or representations about the horse in the Bill of Sale.

The plaintiff took the trainer to look at horse, daughter rode horse, so did trainer. There was no vet check, but plaintiff choose not to do that.

The reason the bill of sale says that the horse is sold on signing of the BOS is that if something happens during shipping, then it's on the plaintiff.

Plaintiff case dismissed.

Edited May 7, 2021 by CrazyInAlabama

CrazyInAlabama · May 6, 2021

5 p.m. episodes-

First (2021)-

Dueling Restraining Orders? -Plaintiff /landlord Stephen Pisani suing defendant /ex-tenant Ashley Scott for unpaid rent, attorney's fees, and damages. Defendant is counter claiming for property missing while she was incarcerated (for probation violation for injury to a child, and drug paraphernalia was also found).. Plaintiff claims while defendant was incarcerated, that a stranger moved into the condo. Defendant was on probation for” injury to a child”.

Plaintiff has six rental properties, five in Lewiston, Idaho. Defendant didn't pay rent in January, and February of 2021, but had property in the condo for both months. Plaintiff decided to repair the condo, and then sell it.

Defendant had an order of protection on her ex-husband, but he was regularly visiting the condo, so he had the door code. There was also an order of protection on defendant by ex-husband she was seeing.

Arrest in December was over defendant violating the order of protection on husband, and drug paraphernalia, and a probation violation for Injury to a Child. Probation for defendant on charges is for seven years.

Plaintiff gets $2500 rent, $1000 was the security deposit, and plaintiff kept $800, and plaintiff shows there were other damages. Defendant claims after jail, she tried to clean up. Plaintiff had to fix the outlet covers, because defendant put little lights on them, and painted them all red.

Plaintiff claims defendant replaced the lock to a code lock to VRBO the property. There are quite a few damages. Of course, JJ discounts items that are obvious damages to new items. Amazing that defendant claims she didn't know the illegal tenant, but has a power of attorney from him (that's affidavit you idiot), not admitted in evidence anyway. AirBnb wouldn't let defendant rent property to visitors because she's a convicted felon.

Plaintiff receives $2500 unpaid rent, and $250 for damages. Minus $550 from security back.

$1950 to plaintiff, plus legal fees of $1657 , total is $3607. (I would have given the plaintiff/landlord every penny he asked for. The defendant shouldn't have received anything back. Another case that makes me wonder why a landlord comes on a TV judge show? I haven't found a TV judge that isn't anti-landlord, or hates people who sell at a profit).

Second (2014)-

Stabbed in the Face! -Plaintiff Isaac Medina suing defendant Derek White for assaulting him, and stabbing him during an argument on the street. Plaintiff is suing for medical bills, and defendant is suing for property damage. Plaintiff was out with a group at Picnic Day at UC Davis. Plaintiff and friend were crossing the street to his car. Defendant was in his car, with his two children, driving down the same street. Plaintiff claims there were a lot of people in the street, and plaintiff and friend were crossing in the crosswalk. When defendant drove down the street, and almost hit the plaintiff and witness. Defendant got out of his car, after plaintiff witness and I bet others, yelled at him. Plaintiff was about 10 feet away from defendant, Other people from plaintiff's group were behind him. Plaintiff drinks the Water That Should Not Be Drunk.

Witness Kelsey Crane was a couple of arm lengths from defendant, plaintiff was about ten feet back. Plaintiff pulled his witness back, and then defendant hit him, and it turned out defendant had stabbed him in the face. The pictures are horrible. Defendant was looking for used stroller for his infant child, turned around the corner, and saw people all over the street. Witness told defendant he almost hit her friend (who was in the crosswalk). Defendant claims someone punched him first. Defendant claims he saw a hand with a knife coming at him, and he grabbed the hand, and pushed it away, slashing the plaintiff's face.

Then defendant got in his car, and went around the corner, saw some police officers, and reported the incident. Defendant also had a stab wound on his cheek, and grew a beard to cover the scar. Defendant's 8 year-old was interviewed by police right after the incident (sorry, I don't give credence to an 8 year-old's testimony).

Police report tells a different story than plaintiff. Defendant's 8 year-old on police report says plaintiff and friends attacked the father, started punching him, one man had a knife, and went after her father. Neither litigant was charged, JJ is blaming plaintiff witness for this. What about defendant almost hitting people with his car? (I wonder if the police report was made right after the confrontation? If it was, that was only claimed by defendant. I think both sides were acting like fools. Even if the plaintiff witness wasn't drinking, the plaintiff certainly was, and I think the plaintiff witness is volatile. However, the defendant certainly must have been going pretty fast, and not paying attention to people crossing all over the street, and that huge crowd. I think JJ was right, no one deserved anything.

All cases dismissed.

Edited May 7, 2021 by CrazyInAlabama

Carolina Girl · May 7, 2021

And she WAS “Little Miss Troublemaker.” Also lost on the plaintiff was the fact that one of HIS group pulled out the knife, NOT the defendant.

Florinaldo · May 7, 2021

13 hours ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

I would have given the plaintiff/landlord every penny he asked for. The defendant shouldn't have received anything back. Another case that makes me wonder why a landlord comes on a TV judge show? I haven't found a TV judge that isn't anti-landlord, or hates people who sell at a profit)

I agree she should not have gotten any money back. But we know how JJ is allergic to people other than herself making money so she begrudges any single penny she can to the landlord.

As for the plaintiff I always marvel (and not in a good way) at people who seem to think that spending time in jail and having warrants against you is a normal and expecte circumstance in everyone's life (including her spouse).

14 hours ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

You Sold Me an Injured Horse?!

Plaintiff was rather haughty while claiming she was due something, just because, despite the contract's provisions. Her witness might have been trying to shift the blame for the deficient pre-sale evaluation of the horse.

Back Atcha · May 7, 2021

19 hours ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

The morning after the puppy was picked up and got sick, defendant called plaintiff and asked what to do for the puppy, and he told her about the elephant ears. Plaintiff wants $350, and defendant refuses to pay plaintiff, and says her vet bills were over $600 (that includes the wellness program with shots I image, and for neutering, heart worm preventative, for $490) However, defendant didn't take the dog to the vet for a long time, not even right after the puppy was sick. Defendant was offered a full refund, and refused.

That defendant was SO pretty in that heavy make-up...but one of those women who always makes me wonder, "Is she even RECOGNIZABLE without make-up?" As she left her podium, her face was many shades lighter than her chestical area.

CrazyInAlabama · May 7, 2021

4 p.m. reruns-

First (2018)-

Yes, I Attacked Him! Yes, I Choked Her! -Plaintiff Emerald Grant SMMOO (Sainted Single Mother of One) suing defendants/her baby daddy's (James Woodward) other woman, Ravyn Smith, (Sainted Single Mother of One) for defamation of character, and slander.

Baby daddy has three children, one with each litigant, and a third child, older child is in question. Plaintiff had to track down baby daddy, and get his wages garnished to support the child, In retaliation, defendant posted nasty things about plaintiff, and her business.

Defendant is suing, and says plaintiff filed a false report with CPS about her and her child. JJ tells plaintiff that if she called CPS out of anger, that she's wasting CPS's time.

Police report says that plaintiff put her hands on Mr. Marvelous first, for cheating on her. (I absolutely fair to see the attraction to Mr. Marvelous). Defendant claimed plaintiff's business is a pyramid scheme. (It sounds like MLM /pyramid scheme to me). Both litigants have protective orders against each other.

Cases dismissed.

Second (2018)-

Smashed and Bashed Love! -Plaintiff Christopher Blanchard suing defendant /ex-girlfriend Valerie Lane for vandalizing his car (smashing out his windows). Defendant denies doing the vandalism, and says another of his girlfriends did it. Plaintiff moved to Texas, and litigants visited each other from Illinois, and Texas sometimes. Plaintiff met a new woman a few months after moving to Texas. Plaintiff dumped her after his booty call at her place in Illinois.

Erica, the new Texas girlfriend was living in plaintiff's home when he made the booty call to Illinois. Defendant flew to Texas to talk to plaintiff, and found the new girlfriend was living with him. Plaintiff doesn't like JJ calling him a lowlife, and other names. Plaintiff claims defendant was throwing rocks at his patio, banging on the door. And there is a video of plaintiff's fanny marching across the parking lot, and then you can hear noises of glass breaking. She also ripped his windshield wipers off. A month later, Erica dumped plaintiff, and he moved back to Illinois.

The litigants met in court two weeks ago, with defendant claiming plaintiff was arguing over the phone, and claims plaintiff threatened her by text. And then defendant said someone broke the door handle off the front door at her mother's place, and she filed for a restraining order. Restraining order wasn't approved by the judge.

$2,000 to plaintiff.

Landscaper Laziness?! -Plaintiff Wu Zhou suing defendants Danielle and Keith Lindsey over landscaping that plaintiff paid defendants for, and they never completed. Defendants want more money than plaintiff paid. There are two separate contracts and defendant wife claims she didn't sign the contract. Defendants admit they deposited the check, creating a contract. Plaintiff submits the check copy for $1200, with defendant's endorsement, and deposited, so they have a contract. The second project was to build a fence, which they did a bad job on erecting.

Replace fence, not completed, Deck, not built. And build three parking spaces for $3500 total, $1400 deposit. Plus the other $1200 deposit.

Plaintiff receives $3,770

CrazyInAlabama · May 7, 2021

5 p.m. episodes-

First (2021)-

Eye-Candy Car! -Plaintiff John Rea suing defendant Tory West for $800 for a car plaintiff sold defendant. . Plaintiff's father was a friend of defendant, and passed away. Plaintiff bought a 1997 Grand Am from the father's widow, and plaintiff wanted to sell defendant the car for $800. Defendant already has a garnishment for child support for arrears, and garnishment was about $700 a month. Garnishment was because children were getting state aid, and they took it from defendant.

Plaintiff knew about the garnishment, and it would be paid off by the new year. Plaintiff was going to take payments starting when the garnishment ended. Defendant took possession of the car in September 2019, and quit working in November 2019. Defendant didn't renew the registration, and car was parked at the curb in front of defendant's house, and gave defendant a Bill of Sale. Defendant and a son, moved in with his mother, for four years. Defendant claims he didn't drive the car, and his sons didn't either.

The car was towed from the curb in front of defendant's house, and he didn't pay plaintiff a penny. Six months later the car was sold at auction, and plaintiff received a bill for impound bill. Defendant denies he ever had a Bill of Sale for car.

Plaintiff gets the $800 purchase price, and $1450 impound fees, total $2250.

Horses Make a Run for It?! -Plaintiff Connie Bradley suing defendants Mr. Young and Katina Young over disappearing horses. Plaintiff bought horses from defendant, but sues when horses aren’t delivered to her barn. Plaintiff had two previous horses, they were killed by animals. Plaintiff bought two horses from defendant. Defendant said plaintiff was supposed to pick up horses, but instead defendants sent the two of his sons (age 21 and 16) to deliver the horses. Then the truck or trailer broke down,

Horses never arrived, and defendant offered replacement horses. There is no reason the horses weren't delivered, and plaintiff claims the the defendant's are scammers.

Plaintiff receives a refund for the two horses.

Second (2021)-

Fork-Lift Car Drop! (2021) -Plaintiff Michael Reissig is suing defendant Michael Koch over the dropping of his car at defendants wrecking yard. Plaintiff is restoring an old Nissan 300ZX, and his car needed work. Plaintiff found a suitable part car at defendant's wrecking yard, and plaintiff wanted the entire car. Plaintiff says car cost $500, defendant wanted $750, and they agreed on the $750, and plaintiff paid $500 cash, and $250 on his credit card. Defendant's operations manager Daniel Koch (son) dealt with plaintiff, and says they agreed on $750 sales price, and defendant accepted $250 on a credit card, but no cash. The $500 was supposed to be paid when car was delivered to the plaintiff in Lake Isabela, CA, and $100 delivery fee.

Plaintiff claims he has a receipt for $500 cash to defendant son.

So defendants had $750 of plaintiff's money, and when car was put on the trailer, the defendant's worker dropped the car off of the forklift.

$750 to plaintiff. (Plaintiff wanted $5,000 for this!)

Biting Dalmatian? (2014)-Plaintiff/cousin Jamie Strobel suing defendant/cousin Rebekah Strobel, for lease breaking fees. Two cousins leased an apartment together. Then, plaintiff's Dalmatian attacked defendant, Plaintiff claims after the attack she was forced to move out for her own safety. Plaintiff claims the Dalmatian was hit by a car, and abused by a burglar, and has issues with new people, and tries to attack people.

Plaintiff told defendant that dog would get used to her, and be fine with defendant's presence. They moved in during January, and in February attacked defendant, trapped her in the bathroom, and bit her leg.

The photos of the bite are bad. Then in March defendant moved out formally, but moved out right after the bite. Defendant couldn't have anyone over, especially children, without the dog becoming aggressive. Plaintiff wouldn't do anything about the dog, so defendant moved out. JJ says plaintiff has to get rid of the dog, or pay her own rent.

Plaintiff gets nothing, and deserves nothing.

andidante · May 8, 2021

On 5/6/2021 at 8:23 AM, LetsStartTalking said:

I was waiting for JJ to look Cesar Cuevas Jr. (defendant) in the eye and ask:

"Where did you think you were coming today ? To audition for the role of the 'Cowardly Lion' in 'The Wizard of OZ' ? Go outside and cut your hair. I'll wait."

LOL I actually loved his hair! I thought it was very well kept for as long as it was.

I did feel bad for the father though. He looked so sad throughout the case.

Florinaldo · May 8, 2021

18 hours ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

Horses Make a Run for It?!

Did the defendants present any real defence? I remember them just just stating that they offered her to opportunity to come by and pick up replacement horses, despite their contract saying they had to deliver the animals. Was it clearly established that the two horses she had chosen ran away and were definitely lost?

Why was the wife constantly watching (glaring at?) her husband and whispering to him; I am surprised JJ did not call her on that.

Edited May 8, 2021 by Florinaldo

parrotfeathers · May 8, 2021

I didn't understand the 18 year old demanding the Dad sign over the vehicle. I'm wondering if her mom bullied/pressed/guilted her into the suit. The girl and Dad were obviously devastated after the end of it.

CrazyInAlabama · May 8, 2021

On 5/8/2021 at 11:23 AM, parrotfeathers said:

I didn't understand the 18 year old demanding the Dad sign over the vehicle. I'm wondering if her mom bullied/pressed/guilted her into the suit. The girl and Dad were obviously devastated after the end of it.

I think it was just one more way for Mom to stick it to Dad. The daughter was supposed to pay for the car, and paid nothing. All of the money left over after selling the van the father's business owned was given to the mother, and after the two credit cards were paid off, the mother bought the car ($5500), and still had $10,000 left. The daughter never paid a penny for the car, and I think everything was pushed by the mother.

The father was paying $1,000 a month support ($600 for support, and $400 for health insurance) for the younger child, and will be for at least 7 more years, The fact that judges often don't do alimony these days, and the wife's youngest child is 11, means she can join the work force the way the rest of us did.

I think we're all looking at the mother's role differently, depending on who we've known in our own lives. The mother reminds me of my maternal grandmother, and my mother, and they both were the rulers of the home, and everyone's life. It was their way or else. You can get a lot of power by dominating everything in the household, and if people cross you it's hell.

I think the daughter thought the father would just sign the title, give up on the car loan, and Mommy would score another point against him. That the father said this was the last straw for him, and he was now out of the family was a surprise to the daughter, but I think it was the mother's goal all along. For someone who was crying, the daughter was producing zero tears. Mom better start saving up, because when the son gets a car, it won't be on the father's wallet.

Edited May 9, 2021 by CrazyInAlabama

Back Atcha · May 8, 2021

15 hours ago, andidante said:

LOL I actually loved his hair! I thought it was very well kept for as long as it was.

I also loved his hair, long, thick, shiny, healthy = beautiful. Everyone in the case had hair to be admired. I also thought his demeanor was admirable.

Edited May 8, 2021 by Back Atcha

VartanFan · May 9, 2021

Quote

I don't know....but there was something going on for sure. One of the few episodes that was disturbing to me on some level.

Man, I’ve been catching up and wanted to see what everyone thought of this episode. At first, I thought the dad was just being controlling, then I felt bad for him when he cried (and i thought the ex just tried to milk everything from him), and then he went controlling rage freak and I was back to realizing that he probably HAD to control EVERYTHING in the household. Of course, I say this with full realization that we have no idea what goes on behind closed doors. But...telling a 19 year old that she no longer has a father is immature and short-sighted.

Back Atcha · May 9, 2021

On 5/9/2021 at 10:13 AM, VartanFan said:

and then he went controlling rage freak and I was back to realizing that he probably HAD to control EVERYTHING in the household.

People are posting opinions about the mother's demeanor (too quiet, apparently). That family KNOWS exactly how to act around that man. How to NOT get hit. How to NOT get screeched at. How to NOT (probably) have him threaten to kill himself and/or them. If he couldn't control himself on national TV (an episode that will be repeated again and again and again), it's difficult to imagine what a Horror House he presided over...because he DID preside.

The mother's calming influence is the only thing that saved herself and her kids. In my opinion...of course.

Edited May 13, 2021 by Back Atcha

Florinaldo · May 9, 2021

2 hours ago, Back Atcha said:

The mother's calming influence is the only thing that saved herself and her kids.

Or it may be her efficient way to control and manipulate everyone in the family, knowing exactly what buttons to quietly push in her reserved way.

May 9, 2021

I was recently going through the backlog of episodes and came across my latest favorite defendant, Alan Hanft. Alan Hanft was a lunatic gaslighter who claimed the (super hot) man down the hall was harassing him. Video evidence produced showed it was the exact opposite. And I still can't help laughing about the caption:

"Claims." LOL

Google also tells me Alan Hanft apparently got fired from his job for being a lunatic there as well. He seemed so sane ... go figure!

Back Atcha · May 10, 2021

22 hours ago, Florinaldo said:

On 5/9/2021 at 10:30 AM, Back Atcha said:

The mother's calming influence is the only thing that saved herself and her kids.

Or it may be her efficient way to control and manipulate everyone in the family, knowing exactly what buttons to quietly push in her reserved way

I can agree with this if I make up her story: she learned to manipulate in this way only after living in a large RELIGIOUS family with an angry and controlling father. Naturally, she fell into a marriage with the same type of "righteous" man. She pushes his buttons without doing a thing.

Edited May 10, 2021 by Back Atcha

CrazyInAlabama · May 10, 2021

4 p.m. reruns-

First (2018)-

Shih Tzu Comes Between Lesbian Ex-Lovers! -Plaintiff/ex Danielle Rees suing defendant/ex Kristen Fredricey over a Shih Tzu they co-owned, car damage. Then they had a drunken argument, dog was hit by one of them, a windshield was broken. They only had the puppy together for a couple of weeks (they bought puppy for $1124 from a pet store). The litigants can't decide who paid for what part of the dog cost. Defendant wants the dog, so has to repay $400 to plaintiff. Defendant claims the windshield was collateral damage from plaintiff refusal to take her home, claims plaintiff then hit the dog, took her cellphone, and two weeks later smashed the phone. Plaintiff wanted to see the dog,

$700 for dog and windshield to plaintiff, defendant keeps the dog.

Lesson in Respect Man Won’t Forget! -Plaintiff Breanna Rodriguez suing defendant Jerry Ramirez, for the unpaid balance on a Honda Civic plaintiff sold to defendant. Defendant said he had a family emergency, everyone was in the hospital, and that's why he was late to court. His tardiness delayed JJ's exercise, the audience, and most despicable of all, Officer Byrd probably ran out of crosswords to work on. JJ lectures defendant on his disrespect for other people's time, and his stupid excuses for being late.

Plaintiff sold car for $1600 total, with $500 down. Balance owed by defendant is $1100 . Unfortunately, plaintiff gave registration to defendant to register in his name. Defendant never made any payments. Defendant came to court in a producer's car, because he was late, apparently he's always late. This was defendant's second emergency of the day, first was blamed on a hospitalized brother, second emergency was equally a lie.

Plaintiff receives $1100

Second (2018) –

Guess What a Pit Bull Did?! -Plaintiff/dog owner (of a small poodle) Matthew Tringali suing defendants Latoiya Neal and daughter Mia Whitehead over their Pit Bull attacking his poodle. Plaintiff was walking his dog in the evening, went on his usual route on his walk, and he was across the street from defendant's house. Defendants (mother, and four daughters) pulled into their driveway, garage door opened, and Pit Bull (American Bully) came out of the garage. Dog had been in the house, and defendant daughter opened the door from garage into the house. Daughter says she opened house door into garage, and her dog walked out of the garage, unleashed, and shredded the plaintiff's leashed Poodle. Defendant daughter says dogs were playing, and plaintiff over reacted and fell.

As plaintiff picked dog up, Pit attacked Poodle in mid air, and knocked plaintiff to the ground, savaging the Poodle. Defendant claims her dog is 20 lbs. but the picture submitted shows a dog that's well over 60 to 80 lbs. Plaintiff was bitten when he pried the Pit Bull's mouth open to free his dog. Then Pit Bull grabbed the Poodle's leg, and the attack was on again. Plaintiff also says only one person eventually came near him, and defendant mother is lying about Poodle being on her side of the street. Defendant does not have home owner's insurance.

Plaintiff receives vet bills, and medical bills.

You’re not Gonna Believe This One! -Plaintiff Quinn Roth suing Rayejon Demus defendant for taking plaintiff's car without permission, and had an accident. Plaintiff and witness went to defendant's house, and says defendant seemed to be under the influence. Litigants went in plaintiff's car to get something to eat, went back to defendant's house. Plaintiff went to sleep, and when he woke up the next morning, about 5:00 a.m., Rayejon was climbing out of plaintiff's car, and two police cars right after it, and car was damaged.

Police talked to Rayejon, as he was getting out of plaintiff's car. Rayejon claims that since he only has a permit, not a license, he was practicing parallel parking. Defendant says a friend was with him hit a curb, flattened a tire, and claims he didn't hurt the car. Defendant says Ben (another friend) was with him, but he doesn't have a phone number for him, or JJ will assume the defendant's stupid story is a lie.

Rayejon admits he lied, Ben doesn't exist. Car damage photos are submitted. Rayejon still claims he didn't wreck the car. Rayejon needs practice making up believeable stories, and lying to JJ.

Plaintiff receives $3200

CrazyInAlabama · May 10, 2021

5 p.m. episodes-

First –

Drinking, Driving and Vandalizing?! (2021) -Plaintiff Daniela Rodriguez suing defendant Elmer Bonilla (he's plaintiff's live-in boyfriend's former friend), for keying her car. Defendant was so drunk the night of the party that he doesn't remember anything about that night. Plaintiff claims defendant keyed her car. Plaintiff and boyfriend were having a party, defendant went to the party at plaintiff's home. Defendant got there about midnight, left at 2:00 or 2:30 a.m. after an argument with plaintiff. When defendant was leaving, he fell down the house stairs, and that's all he remembers about that night.

Plaintiff shows photo of car scratch. Car is a brand new 2021, plaintiff hasn't even made the first payment on the car.

Plaintiff receives $1,300 for the damages. (As JJ says if it was a bigger amount, she would say use the car insurance, but plaintiff's deductible is $1,000, and her insurance would go up).

Breast Cancer Faker (2013) -Plaintiff Krystal Lopez suing defendant Julia Alamillo over money plaintiff loaned and gave defendant for her cancer diagnosis. Defendant never had cancer, and plaintiff gave her a total of $8,000. Plaintiff says defendant told her that she had breast cancer, would need surgery, chemo, and needed money to pay for her medical treatment. Defendant claims she found a lump, that had a sonogram (ultrasound).

(the next commercial right after this case introduction is for a drug to treat metastatic Breast Cancer, how ironic).

JJ asks defendant if she was diagnosed with cancer, or ever was treated for cancer, defendant finally says no. Defendant has absolutely no shame. Defendant claims plaintiff kept gifting her money. When defendant started lying to plaintiff, she already had the sonogram results, and there were no further tests. Defendant stole $8,000 from plaintiff. Plaintiff says defendant had a walker, an IV in her arm (gauze wrapped around her hand), and went to Vegas. (OK, my guess from my medical knowledge from watching Grey's, ER, etc. is defendant had lumpy breasts). Plaintiff claims defendant also slept with her husband, and that ended her marriage when plaintiff found out.

$5,000 to plaintiff, meaning grifter defendant loses $3,000.

Second –

The Wild Party Injury and the Uneducated Fool?!-Plaintiff Veronica Brown-Hansen is suing Gyasi Murillo , 18 years-old who had a huge party in the back yard of grandma's house, (mom, and apparently everyone lives there too), where they were selling booze, and it turned into a wild melee.

Defendant is 18, his co-host of the party is also 18. The party invitations were on Instagram, for a Wet & Wild Pool Party, (Strictly Business is the company) with booze available. The party announcement says no outside liquor allowed, females are $7 admission, males $15 admission, and you buy a booze bracelet to get liquor inside the party.

The plaintiff was badly injured when someone threw a chair that was outdoor furniture, over a balcony rail, and hit her. It was funny about the booze, because the young man is way underage, and it's the second huge concert/party with drinking that the man, and his friends put on (the other one was in Queens, after prom).

Don't people in his neighborhood call 911 when hundreds of people show up for a backyard booze fest with a DJ? There's a video of the party, and chair toss also. Mother, and sisters were home during the party. Sister is who bought the booze I bet, or the mother.

Plaintiff says there's lots of booze, bottles in hand, and drinking inside the party.

There was $100 deductible on her health insurance, which covered the injury treatment retroactively.

Plaintiff should have filed against the grandmother, or mother, whoever owns the house, and her homeowner's insurance, and then gone after them in civil court. I bet if that house is that fancy, that someone would take it on contingency. Witness who was outside in the hall, now says this is the second party, and says the mother was also at the party. Zachary Dalce (witness) collected money at the gate for admissions, and was supposed to keep liquor out. The third partner of the defendants lives in Florida according to defendant Murillo, but Zachary says the third 18 year old partner lives on Long Island and Queens.

(Does the party host think that a club will rent to him, and his friends? Bet it will be mommy's name on the rental)

You know this a good case when some of the audience have to muffle their laughter to keep from getting booted.

Plaintiff gets $5,000. (This means the defendant receives nothing from the show payment pool).

gingerormaryann · May 11, 2021

On 5/5/2021 at 12:40 AM, Back Atcha said:

If you're referring to the wife/mother, I believe she learned to remain silent over very long periods in her life...growing up and married to this speciman--in order to remain safe. It's second nature for her.

Also, there are producers instructing them when to speak and when to wait...and then the editors after filming is completed.

No, I was referring to Judy. If she had simply instructed Byrd to show him where to sign, there wouldn't have been the outburst at the end. And she should have because the case was over, she gave her judgement. Instead, she tried to butt in and reconcile the situation which anyone could tell you was ridiculous. She kept saying stupid stuff like "Keep your heart open", which gave him an opening to say more. Even JJ has said on her show that people say things in the heat of the moment that they don't really mean but when the Judge goads you on for the sake of good television, it sours you, or at least it did me. And the reason she fails in this is the reason she's been a good TV judge. All abrasiveness, no nurturing.

As for the wife, it seemed a very well orchestrated passive aggressive display only to thank JJ in the end while her daughter is "crying".

Florinaldo · May 11, 2021

21 hours ago, Back Atcha said:

I can agree with this if I make up her story: she learned to manipulate in this way only after living in a large RELIGIOUS family with an angry and controlling father. Naturally, she fell into a marriage with the same type of "righteous" man.

It's natural to make up our own backstories for the litigants, but this one seems highly improbable to me.

12 hours ago, gingerormaryann said:

As for the wife, it seemed a very well orchestrated passive aggressive display only to thank JJ in the end while her daughter is "crying".

That seems much more plausible in my view.

17 hours ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

Breast Cancer Faker (2013)

The disgusting lying Mama Cass look-alike is given new life as she has now been integrated into one of the newer episodes.

Edited May 11, 2021 by Florinaldo

LetsStartTalking · May 11, 2021

On 5/7/2021 at 7:00 PM, CrazyInAlabama said:

5 p.m. episodes-

First (2021)-

Eye-Candy Car! -Plaintiff John Rea suing defendant Tory West for $800 for a car plaintiff sold defendant. . Plaintiff's father was a friend of defendant, and passed away. Plaintiff bought a 1997 Grand Am from the father's widow, and plaintiff wanted to sell defendant the car for $800. Defendant already has a garnishment for child support for arrears, and garnishment was about $700 a month. Garnishment was because children were getting state aid, and they took it from defendant.

Plaintiff knew about the garnishment, and it would be paid off by the new year. Plaintiff was going to take payments starting when the garnishment ended. Defendant took possession of the car in September 2019, and quit working in November 2019. Defendant didn't renew the registration, and car was parked at the curb in front of defendant's house, and gave defendant a Bill of Sale. Defendant and a son, moved in with his mother, for four years. Defendant claims he didn't drive the car, and his sons didn't either.

The car was towed from the curb in front of defendant's house, and he didn't pay plaintiff a penny. Six months later the car was sold at auction, and plaintiff received a bill for impound bill. Defendant denies he ever had a Bill of Sale for car.

Plaintiff gets the $800 purchase price, and $1450 impound fees, total $2250.

It's the end of the season, and finally Judge Judy continues to roll out the sexy bad boys - we've waited long enough! Tory West was DEFINITELY 'eye candy' - sexy, sexy, sexy!

CrazyInAlabama · May 11, 2021

4 p.m. reruns-

First (2018)-

Mother Teresa Tesla Driver?! – Plaintiff Kim (driver) and George Trahan suing defendant Heather Ramsdell for running into plaintiff’s Porsche Boxster, with defendant’s Tesla. Defendant claims she never touched the plaintiff's car. Plaintiff says defendant offered to buff out the mark on her car with a microfiber towel, even though defendant claims she didn’t touch the plaintiff’s car. Plaintiff was going straight, when defendant turned left from a side street with a stop sign, defendant blew the stop sign, pulled in front of plaintiff, then hit the plaintiff's brand new Porsche.

Defendant's son was in the car, and a witness. Plaintiff says they exchanged phone number, and one of defendant's was not her number, and out of state. Plaintiff says it was hard to track down the defendant, and get her insurance information. Defendant told her insurance company that she didn't hit the plaintiff.

As JJ points out to defendant, lying in court is a bad example for the son/witness. Son kept saying "I'm so sorry, Mom". I wonder who was driving the defendant's car, mother or son? Then defendant pulls up, offs to buff out the mark on plaintiff's car. Then when defendant lied to her insurance company, and said she didn't touch plaintiff's car, the insurance company denied coverage.

Plaintiff receives $ 1315

Baby Daddy’s Ex-Lovers’ Fight! – Plaintiff/ex-girlfriend Kimberly Mills SSMOO (Sainted Single Mother of One) suing baby daddy’s Savannah Cox other ex-girlfriend/ defendant SSMOT (Sainted Single Mother of Two ) over unpaid baby sitting fees, when plaintiff was baby sitting defendant's children with defendant.

Defendant felt overwhelmed, and she asked baby daddy, who lives with plaintiff, if he could care his two children for a while, that's when plaintiff was baby sitting. Defendant didn't talk to plaintiff about taking care of the children, and therefore, no contract.

Plaintiff was working as a nanny, and watched the boyfriend's two kids with the defendant at the same time, but there is no contract or text with defendant offering to pay.

Plaintiff case dismissed.

Second (2018) –

I’m Glad I Had My Mom Arrested! -Plaintiff/mother Sheri Garcia suing defendant/daughter Elissa Gaston for a car, punitive damages for an arrest, and . Plaintiff sold a 2003 Infinity to daughter, for over blue book price, $4,000. Plaintiff would sell the Infiniti for $4,000, with a blue book price of $2400 to $3200, and would give the F-150 daughter bought from mother to plaintiff's son/defendant's brother. Defendant bought the car from mother, half-brother has F-150. Defendant did register the car, after mother told daughter to forge her name on the registration, daughter registered it, and had insurance on the car, after paying over blue book on the car. Plaintiff witness /son/brother was driving without a license (he claims he's had a valid license for a couple of years).

Plaintiff wanted the F-150 in her name, instead of son's. Defendant sent mother a text, stating half-brother, son doesn't have a license, and can't register a vehicle. Son only had a Florida license, and couldn't register a car in California until he had a California license.

Defendant stopped paying in September, because plaintiff took the car back, and says mother stopped accepting payments online from daughter. In October plaintiff repo'd the car, which was registered in daughter's name, and so defendant reported car stolen. So mother is suing for defendant having her arrested. Having plaintiff arrested wasn't nice, but selling the car to defendant at 25% or more over Blue Book, so defendant had the right to call police about the car being stolen.

In September daughter/defendant took F-150 back from brother, because it was all in her name, had no insurance, or registration.

Defendant will pay for car, and become current within 10 days, or a marshal will pick up car. Plaintiff never said daughter was behind on payment, she just repo'd car after son's truck was repo'd by defendant.

Plaintiff's case is dismissed.

Gift-Giving 101 -Plaintiff Zachary Vanella is suing defendant/ex co-worker Angelina Rasmussen over an unpaid loan. As usual, defendant swears the money was a gift, not a loan. Defendant wanted to move, needed first month's rent, and security, and was short $1,000. Defendant agreed to pay $100 a month to plaintiff, then she says that changed to using her employee discount (they both worked at Bed, Bath & Beyond when the loan was made). Defendant started to pay the plaintiff back, then switched to discounts to the plaintiff.

$800 to plaintiff.

CrazyInAlabama · May 11, 2021

5 p.m. episodes-

First –

Tween’s Costly Rock Toss! (2021) -Plaintiff /car owner Christopher Donahoe suing defendant Raymond Greenoge (grandparent, who has custody of the grandson) because defendant's grandson Aiden Jahner, threw a rock that broke plaintiff's back windshield on his truck. Grandfather claims plaintiff has no proof, blames other kids. Plaintiff wants $500 to fix the windshield. Plaintiff's daughter didn't see the incident, but answered the door when the kids told his daughter that Aiden broke the windshield. There is ring footage from plaintiff's doorbell showing most of the action.

Video will show the kids playing, and throwing rocks. Aiden blames JP, and another little kid, but then tells JJ he threw a rock at the windshield. Grandson lied to grandfather, and said he threw nothing at the truck, and blamed others for the rock throwing.

In the hall-terview Aiden still blames the other kids. Grandfather believes him, and says he's going to find out who threw the rock.

$499 to plaintiff.

Hurricane Destruction (2013) -Plaintiff Kara Portocerrero is suing defendant Daniel Famulare for driving her car with her permission (in Florida). This means plaintiff was dropped off at work by defendant. This was after Hurricane Ike. Plaintiff had to go to work, because she's a zoo keeper.

Plaintiff drove to work, and defendant was driving the car back to plaintiff's home. Defendant was driving in horrible, driving rain, fish tailed, went into a ditch, and a canal, and had to call 911 for help. Defendant was on top of the car, and had to be rescued.

Plaintiff wants her $500 deductible, and $2700 for down payment on another car. Plaintiff claims she didn't loan anyone the car, so how did defendant get the car when she drove to work? Was plaintiff planning on defendant sitting in the car all day?

Plaintiff case dismissed.

Second –

Illegal Covid Party for Mom’s 50th (2021) -Plaintiff Tyana Levels suing defendant /party supply Ernie Chavez over plaintiff's mother's 50th birthday party with 20 to 30 people indoors, in Lancaster, CA. This number is less than the 80 plaintiff wanted chairs and tables, to have party in October 2020. 25 to 30 was over the allowed number in California for an indoor party in October. So, if plaintiff was having 25 to 30, why did she need chairs, tables, etc. for 80 people?

Defendant delivered a throne, chairs, tables, etc. Plaintiff paid $1475, party occurred, and she claims defendant overcharged her. Plaintiff claims defendant subcontracted for the chairs with a cheaper company, and she wants a refund for the difference. (I'm not commenting on the throne, supply your own snark).

Plaintiff case dismissed. JJ has Officer Byrd boot plaintiff's witness.

Defendant is counter claiming for plaintiff's friends. coming to his business to serve him for the case, disrupted his business, and yelled defamatory names in front of clients. Defendant was the only area rental place still operating in the pandemic, but he found someone to supply the chairs. There is a video of the dust up at defendant's business, and JJ tells him to file against them.

Defendant case dismissed.

Don’t Flood My Car (2013) -Plaintiff Sena (mother, car is on car title) and Nia Peden (daughter, her name was on title too, and she's only 17) suing defendant Kevin Brown for driving her car and damaging it. Plaintiff daughter was going out with two friends in her own car, and her friend Kianna Brown (daughter of defendant) said they should use the father's SUV, because it was bad weather. Then defendant father drove plaintiff's car when he needed to run an errand. Father agreed to daughter taking the SUV, but said he needed transportation, and would use the plaintiff's car. Defendant says mother of plaintiff agreed to the deal.

Plaintiff daughter, and defendant daughter, wanted the defendant's SUV because it was safer in bad weather. Plaintiff's car was flooded when defendant was driving to pick his niece up from her work-release program, car died but restarted several times, then finally died, and water was rising. Plaintiff car was totaled out, but the mother is blaming defendant for driving the car. Plaintiff mother gave permission for defendant to drive the car. Why didn't the daughters, and friend, just skip their night out for once? Staying home would have been the safest of all.

Plaintiff case dismissed.

Edited May 12, 2021 by CrazyInAlabama

VartanFan · May 12, 2021

12 hours ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

Plaintiff claims defendant subcontracted for the chairs with a cheaper company, and she wants a refund for the difference.

This was so crazy. She was angry that she could have found the chairs cheaper and was just looking for money after he fulfilled the contract. Unbelievable. Next time I buy gas and then see it cheaper down the street, I’m going to go back to the original gas station for a refund.

Florinaldo · May 12, 2021

29 minutes ago, VartanFan said:

She was angry that she could have found the chairs cheaper and was just looking for money after he fulfilled the contract.

She and her husband clearly do not understand how business and capitalism work. When you purchase a service like this one, the vendor is free to use any subcontractor he wishes, as long as he ultimately provides exactly what you contracted for with him and at the required level of quality.

One reason you hire such people is that they do all the leg work of finding the various components for your events, so you do not have to spend valuable time doing it yourself (especially since they usually would already have the necessary contacts). If he manages to slightly increase his profit margin in the process, it's none of your bee's wax, unless you do not receive what you paid for, which was clearly not the case here.

She was both cheap and an idiot.

CrazyInAlabama · May 12, 2021

4 p.m. reruns-

First (2018)-

Marital Debt Drama! -Plaintiff Nina Draper suing defendant /ex-daughter-in-law Nocole Scott over two unpaid loans for $3,012. Defendant says the soon-to-be former husband was a cheater, so what? Defendant claims she paid some back, but plaintiff forgave the loan balance if she let him live on her property (they rent the property) in a trailer. JJ points out since they are still married, working on divorce, husband had every right to live on the property.

Plaintiff loaned $5,000 to defendant for an attorney, because defendant was running a day care out of the home, and the county was suing them. JJ points out that this is marital debt, so defendant only owes half of the $5,000, or $2500, minus the $1.988 she already paid back. So JJ says plaintiff should count the $3,012 as marital debt, and split it in divorce court.

Case dismissed with prejudice to go back to divorce court.

Teenager Hit at School -Plaintiff Julisa Nungaray suing defendant Vanessa Meyou for backing into plaintiff's car outside a school. Defendant was picking up a younger sibling, backed up in the lane, hitting plaintiff's car while backing up.. Defendant claims she hit the curb, not the plaintiff's car. Plaintiff shows photos of her damaged bumper, and defendant claims her brand new car with high tech features would have prevented her from hitting the car. However, defendant hit the curb.

Defendant says her new car was used, and had some paint marks on the back. What the hell is below defendant's lip? Estimate to fix plaintiff's car is $783. Defendant says plaintiff didn't have insurance.

Plaintiff receives $783 for car.

Child’s Bike/Car Collision Caught on Tape -Plaintiff Jennifer Jackson suing defendant Shanaye "Shay" Sayles (mother of child on bicycle) for her child hitting plaintiff’s car with his bicycle. The video shows child going down sidewalk (apparently legal some places), while from a driveway, plaintiff blocks sidewalk with their car, he swerves to the right, and child hits car on driver side, between back door, and wheel. Totally plaintiff's fault.

Plaintiff claims she saw child riding towards her, but kept pulling across the sidewalk.

I see why my HOA says nothing can be planted to block a driver's view in our front yards. Plaintiff needs to cut that hedge short. And why didn't the plaintiff stop before she blocked the sidewalk? Plaintiff claims she saw the child, but kept going. Was she trying to force him to stop, or stop riding on the sidewalk? I wonder if plaintiff was insured?

Plaintiff case dismissed.

Second (2018) –

When the Aggressor Becomes the Victim?! -Plaintiff /former tenant Denise Bubonic suing defendant/landlord Aves Choi over the living conditions at defendants ADU, harassment, loss of personal property, return of rent, and stopping her mail. Plaintiff saw the ADU (additional living unit) before signing the lease, but claims it was a converted garage, slanted floor, and uninhabitable. Plaintiff's previous lease at Dana Point expired, and she moved to defendant's place. There is a written lease, for $1650 a month, paid December's rent, but not January's, or February. Plaintiff moved in on 4 December, and paid the security deposit of $590. The lease says security of $1650 can be paid in thirds, plus $250 pet deposit. Plaintiff owes $2,710. Oh no! The "ate the steak story".

Plaintiff called the city housing people to complain about the property, and so stopped paying rent. It's not as if she signed without viewing the property. Plaintiff says converted garage/cottage 1 bedroom had a sloping floor, non-operational windows in the living room, Plaintiff paid a handyman to fix the windows and he did, for $100.

Plaintiff still owes $2610. (On a tacky note, who did the plaintiff's strange dye job? ). Plaintiff claims defendant withheld her SSDI mail, and interfered with her benefits, but then says her check is direct deposit. Defendant is counter claiming for mail theft, unpaid rent, unpaid utilities, and property damages.

Defendant gets rent, minus security and handyman bill, $2610.

Pit Bull Takes Bit Out of Man’s Ear -Plaintiff Ronald Fulcomer suing defendant Allen Agee for pit bull bite that required plastic surgery to repair. Defendant's witness is plaintiff's ex-girlfriend. Plaintiff wants medical bills, lost wages, and pain and suffering. Defendant is girlfriend's father, and dog owner.

A month earlier plaintiff was at defendant's house, and the dog came up to plaintiff. Plaintiff attempted to hug the dog, and the dog bit plaintiff on the ear. Plaintiff grabbed the dog, and dog nailed him on the ear. A month later plaintiff went to defendant's house, asked for his key back from girlfriend, after seeing a text on her phone from another man. Plaintiff and girlfriend lived together for a month after the bite, and after the break up plaintiff filed the law suit.

(If you grab me like that, I'll bite you too. Not blaming the dog for this bite).

Plaintiff case dismissed.

CrazyInAlabama · May 12, 2021

5 p.m. episodes-

First –

Don’t Date My Ex-Wife?! (2021) -Plaintiff Timothy McCarter is suing defendant, Paul Frutiger, for harassment, loss of his job, and a false CPS report. Plaintiff's girlfriend is mother of defendant's child, they have a 3 year-old child together. Defendant admits to calling CPS, and denied contacting plaintiff's work place. There is a court custody, and visitation in place. Primary Physical Custody, is defendant's, but there are going back to court soon over custody.

After the CPS complaint, plaintiff was told by CPS to move out or child couldn't stay with mother (she was living with plaintiff). So plaintiff left after the CPS report, and moved back to Escondido. Plaintiff claims defendant caused him to lose his job.

Court ordered that child could no longer have contact with plaintiff. As JJ says, there is no requirement that CPS interview plaintiff, but they must have had a reason to keep plaintiff away from the child. False CPS complaint is tossed by JJ.

Plaintiff was working at a nursing home for 8 months, and then fired. Plaintiff claims he was never tested dirty on the drug test, which JJ keeps asking about. Plaintiff signed the separation agreement at his last job, and then was terminated shortly after. Plaintiff was terminated in late December by nursing home, but court order was issued a week earlier, and plaintiff stayed at child's mother's place for another month. This job was plaintiff's second at a nursing home in San DIego in less than two years.

Defendant denies he ever contacted the plaintiff's employer. Plaintiff submits defendant's 'manifesto', which is notes to himself, so how did plaintiff get this? Also, defendant claims that plaintiff only admitted to two nursing home jobs he had, that were in San Diego, and he was terminated from. Defendant starts to say something about another job plaintiff had in Escondido, across the street from... and JJ stops the testimony.

Plaintiff claims he's going to get an attorney, and sue for visitation with a child that he's not biologically related to, and he wasn't married to the ex-girlfriend. Plaintiff will never get visitation with an ex-girlfriend's kid, that's not ever going to happen. I know people who were stepparents to kids for years, no visitation after divorce unless the ex wants it.

Plaintiff's case dismissed.

Maltipoo Attack! (2014) -Plaintiff Toni Carranza suing Mara Foley defendant over defendant's white dog biting plaintiff. However, defendant admits the plaintiff was bitten, but claims it was the brown or black small dog that bit, and not the white Maltipoo that plaintiff says it was. Why is my guess that the white dog would chomp anyone near her, and the other dog is in court because it's not vicious. Plaintiff was walking across the street to her car, when defendant's dog ran out from the house, and bit plaintiff on both ankles, one after the other.

Defendant came out of the house, retrieved her dogs, and asked if plaintiff was bitten. Defendant claims her dogs have their shots. When plaintiff got home, her leg started bothering her, and she didn't go to the doctor, because she doesn't have insurance. Defendant refused to communicate with plaintiff about the injury. Plaintiff reported the dog bite to animal control.

Defendant claims plaintiff was chasing her dogs, stomped on the white dog's tail, (what garbage that is).

Defendant claims her dog would be put down if it bites another person (why do I guess that happened before this bite?), and expects sympathy for that. Defendant claims plaintiff getting bitten has hurt her family.

Plaintiff receives $1500.

Second –

Blind Man's Outrageous Request-Uber driver Kimyade Johnson is suing blind customer, Darrell Bowles II, for complaining about her to Uber. Plaintiff drove defendant to Sonic, he ordered at the parking slot, and defendant forgot his debit card, and had no cash, but he had other cards on him. Defendant asked driver to pay for the ride and his food, and then didn't pay her back. Defendant wanted driver to pay for ride, and food for him.

Defendant says plaintiff threatened to file police charges, and instead of paying her back, he called Uber and filed a complaint. Two negative reports were made to Uber, by defendant. Defendant finally paid woman back, but did nothing about the complaints. Defendant called the police whining about someone expecting him to pay them back.

Plaintiff gets $586, and defendant is a total jerk.

Service Dog Attacked in Coffee Shop-Plaintiff Mingje Zhai suing coffee shop, and dog owner Pamela Stallings for defendant’s dogs attacking plaintiff's dog at a coffee shop. Defendant's dogs were on leashes, but no one was holding the leashes. And defendant still claims it was the plaintiff's fault. The defendant's dogs are Lab/Pit mixes. about two years old. Personally, most service dogs I've seen are a bit bigger than the 10 lb. Papillon the plaintiff has, but they do all kinds of jobs, so if plaintiff says it’s a service dog, I believe her. Foxy is one cute dog, and really likes Officer Byrd.

Plaintiff claims both of defendant's dogs bit her service dog. Defendant claims plaintiff opened door to coffee shop, and threw her service dog inside, so her dogs attacked. That's the most outrageous thing I've heard in a long time. Dogs were seldom at the coffee shop. Defendant tells the ludicrous story about how it happened, and she's absolutely lying.

Defendant should have paid the vet bills, and hoped no one would tell animal control what happened. I hope animal control took action about this, and you're not allowed to have pets in food prep areas, so I hope the health department did also. Defendant claims that only one of her dogs bit the plaintiff's dog. Defendant was happy about the decision, because Byrd pays the money, not her.

Plaintiff gets $2100.

Edited May 13, 2021 by CrazyInAlabama

One Tough Cookie · May 12, 2021

On 5/7/2021 at 5:59 PM, CrazyInAlabama said:

Erica, the new Texas girlfriend was living in plaintiff's home when he made the booty call to Illinois.

Boy, that must have some serious booty!

One Tough Cookie · May 13, 2021

1 hour ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

lind Man's Outrageous Request-Uber driver Kimyade Johnson is suing blind customer, Darrell Bowles II, for complaining about her to Uber. Plaintiff drove defendant to Sonic, he ordered at the parking slot, and defendant forgot his debit card, and had no cash, but he had other cards on him. Defendant asked driver to pay for the ride and his food, and then didn't pay her back. Defendant wanted driver to pay for ride, and food for him.

Defendant says plaintiff threatened to file police charges, and instead of paying her back, he called Uber and filed a complaint. Two negative reports were made to Uber, by defendant. Defendant finally paid woman back, but did nothing about the complaints. Defendant called the police whining about someone expecting him to pay them back.

I seriously wanted to smack the crap outta that guy, I hope the producers give the litigant a copy of this raving asshole's complaint and remove any detrimental complaint on her record.

Edited May 13, 2021 by One Tough Cookie

Back Atcha · May 13, 2021

3 hours ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

Don’t Date My Ex-Wife?! (2021) -Plaintiff Timothy McCarter is suing defendant, Paul Frutiger, for harassment, loss of his job, and a false CPS report.

3 hours ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

Defendant denies he ever contacted the plaintiff's employer. Plaintiff submits defendant's manifesto, which is notes to himself, so how did plaintiff get this?

This case is a bit too weird. WHO declared the defendant's paper was a "manifesto"? If it's the defendant--beware! Judge Judy sees them simply as notes. To me, they look a bit scary. The plaintiff looked pale and sketchy, but the defendant could be a dangerous wacko. Check his "notes" again ... Plan A appears to be HIS plan ... and it has several controlling features.

Perhaps the ex-wife got the "manifesto" as part of the divorce paperwork. Somehow.

Do we know if the female in question is an ex-girlfriend AND an ex-wife? Maybe she's a current girlfriend who's lucky to be away from that ex-husband ... and she and the plaintiff will figure a way to correct the errors of the court system and live together again. Anyway...very interesting.

Carolina Girl · May 13, 2021

15 hours ago, One Tough Cookie said:

I seriously wanted to smack the crap outta that guy, I hope the producers give the litigant a copy of this raving asshole's complaint and remove any detrimental complaint on her record.

What a whiney little shit he was. "Why did you bring me here?" as if he was taken from his home at gunpoint and forced into the studio. The fact that he had other cards on his person but chose NOT to use them tells me this is not the first time he's pulled this ruse on Lyft or Uber drivers.

Also notice that he mentions a girlfriend, which begs the question - is she also blind? Does she have a driver's license? Since he was getting food for her as well (as I understood it), why didn't she drive to Sonic? Something's really odd here.

And yes, I agree with the plaintiff that this schmuck probably uses his disability to great advantage, that he counts on the Uber/Lyft drivers to feel sorry for him and not pursue the food money. And am I evil for thinking for a minute that he's not really blind? (my going to hell moment of the day).

Zahdii · May 13, 2021

18 hours ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

Blind Man's Outrageous Request-Uber driver Kimyade Johnson is suing blind customer, Darrell Bowles II, for complaining about her to Uber. Plaintiff drove defendant to Sonic, he ordered at the parking slot, and defendant forgot his debit card, and had no cash, but he had other cards on him. Defendant asked driver to pay for the ride and his food, and then didn't pay her back. Defendant wanted driver to pay for ride, and food for him.

Defendant says plaintiff threatened to file police charges, and instead of paying her back, he called Uber and filed a complaint. Two negative reports were made to Uber, by defendant. Defendant finally paid woman back, but did nothing about the complaints. Defendant called the police whining about someone expecting him to pay them back.

Plaintiff gets $586, and defendant is a total jerk.

I looked him up online, but what I found didn't go back more than 3 or 4 years.

He's complained about how there's not enough ease of use for people with sight disabilities when on the internet, mostly regarding playing video games.

More recently, he either works for or runs a company called Marketplace Simulations.

"JAWS certified assistive technology trainer, Darrell Bowles, provides his professional assessment on the accessibility enhancements made by Marketplace to their higher education simulations. Marketplace Simulations has worked to re-engineer all of their business games to remove barriers so that all students can easily, equally, and independently engage with our family of simulations."

Whatever he's doing in real life, I'm pretty sure that he uses his possible blindness to get stuff from people.

Edited May 13, 2021 by Zahdii

Carolina Girl · May 13, 2021

50 minutes ago, Zahdii said:

I looked him up online, but what I found didn't go back more than 3 or 4 years.

He's complained about how there's not enough ease of use for people with sight disabilities when on the internet, mostly regarding playing video games.

More recently, he either works for or runs a company called Marketplace Simulations.

"JAWS certified assistive technology trainer, Darrell Bowles, provides his professional assessment on the accessibility enhancements made by Marketplace to their higher education simulations. Marketplace Simulations has worked to re-engineer all of their business games to remove barriers so that all students can easily, equally, and independently engage with our family of simulations."

Whatever he's doing in real life, I'm pretty sure that he uses his possible blindness to get stuff from people.

All the while INSISTING how he wants to be self-sufficient, no doubt. Like I said, I'm very suspicious of the whole use of Uber when he says he has a girlfriend. That and the array of cards that he didn't want to use (then why carry them?) I'm surprised JJ didn't delve into that. I think he's a user - you could see him getting agitated when he realized JJ was not sympathetic to him. "She was going to show up with the police!" (subtext: she threatened a blind man - how could she!). He must have been very visibly surprised when JJ said "She should! You STOLE from her."

I remember Charla and Mirna from Amazing Race and how much it infuriated me how they would go on and on about how Charla could do anything a normal-sized person could do - until it became advantageous for them to use her smaller size to gain sympathy and get ahead.

CrazyInAlabama · May 13, 2021

4 p.m. reruns-

First (2018)-

Gorgeous Engagement Ring Setback! -Plaintiff Cortney Hurlock suing defendant/jewelry seller Stephen Arnold over an engagement ring defendant was going to make for plaintiff. Plaintiff wants her $3224 back, and the stones. However, cost of ring was raised over and over, $6000 extra, on top of the initial price, with $3200 down. Plaintiff wanted defendant to create an engagement ring using a family heirloom stone, after seeing online reviews and examples of his work. Plaintiff drove stones from San Francisco to L.A., after seeing the rendering of what plaintiff wanted. Defendant was supposed to get the extra small stones, and Emeralds, all for $4900. Defendant says the Emeralds were upgraded quality, and budget blew up, by over $6,000 more.

Plaintiff says with cheaper Emeralds, the ring would have cost $4900. With the better Emeralds the cost would have been $12,000 to $15,000 total. Plaintiff went to another jeweler, and had another ring made.

Defendant returned $444 to plaintiff, but check was never cashed. Other jewelers refused to try to complete the settings.

$3200 to plaintiff.

Conspiracy Theory Flight Plan?! -Plaintiff Jyvanni Thibodeaux suing defendant/former friend Mariah Johnson for airline tickets, and punitive damages. Plaintiff needed cheap tickets from Miami to Dallas, for mother and grandmother, and plaintiff were moving for school. The tickets plaintiff bought cheap from defendant turned out to be bogus. However, JJ says plaintiff has to prove that defendant knew tickets were bogus.

Source of tickets was a friend of defendant (Ken) that worked for American Airlines, Defendant claims her mother bought bogus tickets for $1500 also. Plaintiff gave the money to defendant to give to her friend, and received confirmation numbers for the tickets from the airline source (Ken).

Plaintiff can't prove that defendant was the person who stole her money, but the source at the airline was. Plaintiff demands a highlighter from Officer Byrd, I wish JJ would cancel her claim for being rude to Officer Byrd. When plaintiff got to the airport, and found out her tickets were bogus, she was escorted out of the airport by security. I really wish we could see the video of the plaintiff's journey out of the airport. The De Soto police department refused to file the complaint for fraud, because it wasn't plaintiff's credit card that was used.

Plaintiff claim dismissed.

Second (2018) –

Rumors of Arson -Plaintiff / former tenant Michelle Ingle is suing former landlord Michael Hixson for destroying her above ground pool. Tony Ingle is plaintiff's witness, and husband. Bad tenants were evicted, for non-payment, because they 'didn't feel they owed rent to him', they get evicted, and the next day the house burns with 90% damage. This was a lease to own situation.

The plaintiff, evicted tenant, is suing for her 24 foot above ground pool that landlord/defendant destroyed. Plaintiff (with a bad highlight job, resembling Pepe Le Pew), started moving out in January of 2018, and didn't pay for January 2018 either. They didn't pay full rent in November 2017 (shorted rent 850), December 2017 paid nothing. Plaintiffs were buying house, and they claim the landlord didn't repair enough for them to qualify,

Plaintiffs were evicted and the day after they moved out with their furniture to their new residence, and had some small things left behind. Including laptops, they are the first thing we move isn't it? Plaintiff's paid first month, and security deposit to new landlord down the street (poor new landlord must have had heart failure watching this first time around, because he knows he's screwed, and when he evicts these losers, he'll have another fire too). Plaintiffs were squatters, and I'm sure are arsonists.

Plaintiffs get nothing, because they're jerks, have no proof, and are squatters. The pool in question was on part of the septic field too, that's a big no-no (nothing heavier than lawn goes on top of the septic tank or drain field).

Defendant mentions investigation thinks the fire started with a discarded cigarette, and I know I saw a forensic show showing how to start a fire with a burning cigarette so it takes a while for the fire to spread after it's set.

The septic tank is a total failure, so it will have to be redone from scratch, and that's going to cost many thousands. The landlord would be smart to bulldoze, and start over. Plaintiffs claim their electronics, and computers were in the house that burned, but who moves and leaves the computers behind? No fire marshal's report or insurance investigator's report are submitted. Plaintiffs rented another home down the road from defendant's property.

Defendant gets nothing either, too bad he didn't bring the insurance company fire report.

Claims dismissed. Defendant didn't file any proof of the fire origin, or the septic system's damages, or he could have received $5,000.

Struggling Father's Uphill Battle- Plaintiff/uncle Peter Violi suing for room damage in his house, unpaid rent, and car damages by defendant/nephew Ryan Violi. Defendant Ryan moved in with uncle. Interesting hairlines on uncle and nephew, totally round heads, with the same round, receding hairline. They look like the moon.

Defendant was kicked out by his mother, he moved in April 2014 to grandma's house, then into uncle's house in May 2015. 1 December 2017 loser nephew moved out, the plaintiff's let defendant use a car in plaintiff's name, and insurance in defendant's name . In July 2017 defendant had a wreck, with $1,000 deductible, and defendant didn't pay deductible. Nephew had a large insurance payout for him, and never got the car fixed.

Ryan/defendant got the boot, and now lives in a room somewhere. Defendant claims car could have been fixed for $250, but as usual, brings no proof of that ridiculous statement. Since nephew/defendant shared room with plaintiff's son, good luck proving who did the damage.

However, the nephew is still a loser, and always will be. (The title is Struggling Father, because his son was living in the house for a while, rooming with nephew. Son was struggling).

Plaintiff gets $1,000 to fix the car, and nothing for damages to room, no pictures, and no proof of who did any damages.

Edited May 13, 2021 by CrazyInAlabama

CrazyInAlabama · May 13, 2021

5 p.m. episodes-

First (2021)–

Vicious Dog Attack Tracked by GPS?! - Plaintiff /mini Schnauzer owner Thomas Pelly is suing defendant/German Shepherd Dog (2 GSDs) owner Harish Kathuria for attack by defendant’s dogs on plaintiff’s Schnauzer. Defendant claims his dogs have no bite or other history. Plaintiff has a map showing his GPS movements, was jogging in the park with his 11 year-old mini Schnauzer, when defendant and two GSDs approached in the park.

The were approaching each other across the park. Then the GSDs started barking at plaintiff and his dog, and one GSD got loose, grabbed the little dog by the neck, and pinned the little dog down. (I find it unbelievable that this was the GSDs first attack of any kind). Plaintiff's dog was on a flexi-leash. A bystander separated the GSD from the Schnauzer, the other GSD just stood and watched, and defendant did nothing to help.

(The witness that helped save the plaintiff's dog, wasn't friends with either litigant, and from what JJ said, his statement supported the plaintiff's story. The plaintiff was jogging on the outer sidewalk of the big park, when the GSDs started barking at his dog, and then the one slipped his collar and attacked. The plaintiff and his dog were on the outer path, were no where near the defendant and his dogs, and did not do anything to the GSDs.

I refuse to believe the defendant's statement that his dogs have never had any other incident with people or animals. The plaintiff in the hall-terview said that everyone avoids the defendant's dogs, and they are not well behaved, and people are afraid of them. I think the defendant is another deluded person who refuses to accept his animals are a menace).

The plaintiff's Schnauzer is totally quiet, and happy in court.

There is a report from Animal Control. Vet bills were $2870.

Plaintiff's says his 11 year-old Mini Schnauzer is a JJ fan, and jumps on the TV screen when she's on. I'm surprised that an 11 year old dog recovered so well from the injuries. (I've had several mini Schnauzers over the years, and 11 isn't young).

Defendant admits his one dog bit the plaintiff's dog. Defendant says dog was leashed, but ‘got away’ from defendant. Witness statement to animal control contradicts what defendant says in sworn statement to the court. Defendant claims he saw plaintiff, stopped walking, and shortened his leashes, and says plaintiff ran right up to the GSDs.

$2870 to plaintiff for vet bills.

Marriage Proposal to the Judge?! -Plaintiff Jarrett Cole suing defendant Robert Roehr for the value of a cargo container, and the property inside the container. As a part of a business venture, the plaintiff bought a storage container for $1200, on defendant's father's property, and container is still there. Defendant decided that plaintiff was flirting with his girlfriend, and dissolved the partnership, and claims the container is abandoned.

Defendant claims the container isn't up to holding heavy weight, and is dangerous. So why does he want to keep it? The container looks like the usual pod storage container. . Defendant's foundation improvements to the pod are not going to be plaintiff's responsibility.

Plaintiff gets his container back with a marshal's order in eight days. If plaintiff doesn't pick up the container, then it belongs to defendant. Then plaintiff proposes to JJ.

Second –

Hot Mess Move In! (2021) -Plaintiffs Carl and Gloria Abplanalp suing defendants/landlords Gene and Lois Day over a mobile home they bought from defendants, on 1 November 2019, and plaintiffs moved in on 1 November 2019. When the plaintiffs moved in, they discovered a water leak, and damages, from a leaky water valve on the refrigerator ice machine (refrigerator space was empty, fridge was not left with the house). Plaintiff says defendants moved out on 19 October, but closing and move in by plaintiffs occurred on 1 November. Plaintiff husband won't stop whispering to his wife, and interrupting.

Plaintiff claims they found the leak on 1 November, and six days later the floor started buckling. However, the refrigerator didn't convey, and that space was empty on move in, so why didn't they see and fix the leak, and clean up the water? Plaintiffs claim the damages were behind the wall. Plaintiff and defendant's insurance companies declined to cover the damages. My guess is the 'leak' was the connector from fridge water line, to the wall outlet wasn't tight, and needed a turn with a wrench, or the valve wasn't turned off all of the way. Either one is a quick fix. I also think that when plaintiffs moved in, that if the water line was leaking in the kitchen, it would have been obvious. The plaintiffs didn't even contact the defendants about the leak for quite a while after move in, so I suspect the line was fine when defendants moved out.

Why didn't plaintiffs do a walk through on the house a day or two before move in, and they did their walk through two weeks before the purchase. Plaintiff blames her own real estate agent for the lack of walk through the day or two before closing. Plaintiffs are suing their real estate agent too.

Plaintiff claim dismissed.

Show Me the Money! (2013) -Plaintiff/car seller JoshuaSparks suing defendant/car buyer Ryan Benniventall over a car he sold to him, and he didn't pay for. Car blue book was $4,500 less than defendant paid for the car ($20,000), and paid one third more than blue book ($20,000) for having a car he wanted to impress people with.

Plaintiff paid $24630 for the car, when purchased from the dealer he works for, and five months later put up a sales ad for the car. $24,000 or best offer, and sold for $24500 to defendant. There were mods added to car to make it worth more than the $20,000 blue book. Defendant agreed to the price, paid off the $22400 to cancel plaintiff's loan. Defendant still owes $2400 to plaintiff.

Defendant says his bank paid off the loan, and sent the $2400 to plaintiff.

Plaintiff receives $2400.

Edited May 14, 2021 by CrazyInAlabama

NYGirl · May 14, 2021

I sided with the defendant in the dog case because plaintiff had a retractable leash and I bet his schnauzer got all up in the faces of those German shepherds. Defendant said he lost the leash when the incident happened. I'm probably wrong but I don't trust those retractable leashes.

parrotfeathers · May 14, 2021

16 hours ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

Plaintiffs claim the damages were behind the wall. Plaintiff and defendant's insurance companies declined to cover the damages. Why didn't plaintiffs do a walk through on the house a day or two before move in, and they did their walk through two weeks before the purchase. Plaintiff blames her own real estate agent for the lack of walk through the day or two before closing. Plaintiffs are suing their real estate agent too.

I think JJ got this one wrong.

Sign In

All Episodes Talk: All Rise

Recommended Posts

Link to comment

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

ItsHelloPattiagain

bad things are bad

AZChristian

Posted Images

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Guest

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment