All Episodes Talk: All Rise

[CrazyInAlabama]

Most Ridiculous Error in Judgment Goes To (woman cosigns for apartment lease for idiot son, and idiot friend)-Plaintiff arrested with suspended license, for old ticket for not having insurance.   Defendant Mom actually says "It's nice having him gone" about idiot son.   Mother signed for lease for son and friend, 70 year old friend, and her 50's age son.    Defendant paid bail $1245 for idiot plaintiff, and got $1k back, still owes $245 to plaintiff.    $1945, security deposit not given back, so defendant owes $732.50, and was evicted for not paying rent.    Defendant also borrowed $700 from plaintiff idiot Mom.    Plaintiff gets $1700, and still is making excuses for everyone else involved in this.  I wonder how Thanksgiving dinner was at plaintiff's house, since she said how glad she was for idiot son to move out?     How sad that the older friend and her adult son can't get a place to live.   

Hooters Manager Not So Manageable-Plaintiff has 3 bedroom apartment, and rents 2 bedrooms out (he's lived there for years).    He rents room for $500 plus utilities.    Defendant gave plaintiff $500, and $250 in July, no lease of course.     Plaintiff claims he loaned $50 to defendant, and was paid back.   Then plaintiff loaned the defendant $50 more, and was never paid back; $60 another time, not repaid; $120 in July, not repaid; $100 end of July, not paid back.  If the plaintiff says what letter he assigned to the exhibits, I hope Byrd beats the snot out of him, because he's not Perry Mason, and this isn't the Supreme Court.     Then defendant wants $20.    Plaintiff  claims defendant moved out without notice, owes back rent, and loans, which equal $825.    Plaintiff claims defendant who never drinks coffee stole a Keurig.    Plaintiff is up to 112 text messages, and a bunch of exhibits, and I'd like to hit him.     Defendant is a loser, and deadbeat, but the plaintiff is a total pain.     Defendant moves out 1 August, and mysteriously stopped receiving texts from plaintiff.      Plaintiff gets $975, and the exhibits end.   I think defendant is right, and something is seriously off with plaintiff, but defendant is still a deadbeat, and d. absolutely stole the Keurig, just to piss off the plaintiff.   Why do I have the feeling the plaintiff is unfortunately experienced at small claims court, and housing court (if they have one where he lives), but I can't believe he kept loaning money to the deadbeat defendant.      

Marital Debt Drama-Plaintiff does two loans to soon-to-be ex daughter-in-law.     On a shallow note, are those cheap extensions on the plaitiff?     Outstanding balance on loans is $3012, and defendant claims they're a gift, so soon to be ex could live in a trailer on some land they own.    Neat trick to state that husband dumped her, after his second affair, and wanted her to forgive him.     Since the defendant and husband are still married, so $3k is marital debt, and should be in the divorce agreement, and plaintiff should have it included in the divorce, and half is the defendant's debt.  

Teenager Hit at School-Plaintiff has ugly mole or something next to her lip, and it already bugs me.   Defendant backed into plaintiff's car outside of school picking up brother.    Defendant of course says she hit a curb, not the other car.     There are matching dents in the cars that correspond to the accident the way the plaintiff says it happened.   The defendant is an idiot, and her brother the witness is also an idiot, and both are liars.    Plaintiff didn't have insurance, naughty girl!     $783 to plaintiff, and defendant is still a jerk.   I bet the defendant always claims everything is someone else's fault. 

Child's Bike / Car Collision Caught on Tape-Plaintiff claims neighbor's little boy whacked into her car with his bicycle, and it's all on video!    Kid was riding on the sidewalk, plaintiff moved out of driveway blocking the sidewalk, and kid ran into the left side back door.       Judge Judy said no money for plaintiff, because the bush on plaintiff's property blocks her vision of pedestrians.   Now plaintiff claims she saw the kid, and blocked the sidewalk anyway.     I hope the defendant and son move, because the plaintiff is not a good person to live around, and now claims she deliberately blocked the sidewalk.    Case dismissed, and plaintiff is a jerk.

Edited November 28, 2018 by CrazyInAlabama

[CrazyInAlabama]

I bet the tax accountant just used the pin filing number that is used lieu of the actual signature you put on electronic taxes.   My suspicion is the plaintiff said something in the heat of anger after finding out that the prep fees, and interest on the money loan she got for the refund (so you get it immediately, they all charge a bundle on that, I think about 20% or so).   Then when she talked to the defendant she said something that screwed up her original tax form, such as not really qualifying for head of household or something that gets you a big refund.   So the defendant filed an amended tax form, which is a requirement of the IRS to be a tax prep. office.     

My guess is the defendant acting rather calm about the outcome is that she was going to rat out the plaintiff to the IRS, with both versions of the taxes, and her information the plaintiff swore was correct.      Never cheat on your taxes, or the IRS will get you, that's the only way they got Al Capone, and a lot of other people who escaped the law for years.    And if there's deliberate fraud, then the informant gets a percentage of the recovery, and if they prove you committed fraud, then the audit is to your first tax return, not just three years that is the limit for most audits.  

Edited November 28, 2018 by CrazyInAlabama

[Brattinella]

58 minutes ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

Hooters Manager Not So Manageable.         defendant is still a deadbeat. 

 

I adored the Plaintiff.  He kept such good records!

 

Quote

Teenager Hit at School-Plaintiff has ugly mole or something next to her lip, and it already bugs me.  

Yeah, that was an ugly cold sore.  Gross. 

[AngelaHunter]

2 hours ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

Most Ridiculous Error in Judgment Goes To (woman cosigns for apartment lease for idiot son, and idiot friend)

She also moved in her deadbeat, does "odd jobs", 52-year old bum friend and his mommy, in addition to loser son who can't keep a job and insolent stupid porker def. How this woman has managed to live this long with such terminal stupidity is truly amazing. Really, I'm amazed, both at the degree of idiocy and the longevity!

2 hours ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

Hooters Manager Not So Manageable-

Oy vey! Mr. Sluka, a persnickety, peculiar, particular (and vastly annoying) little person ("Here is exhibit G, and exhibit F and exhibit O and texts 109 through 112")always invites strangers to bunk in with him. He is so buttoned-down and tidy it's truly a wonder when you see what he chose to live with him this time - the 29-year old, shifty, slimy little wharf rat def. But I guess we all would, right? We see yet again the Ultimate in Douche-tastic 'Dos - the shaved sides with pelt on top of his narrow little head, but the big earplugs were hot. Is there such a thing as a man (loosely described as such) sporting such a 'do who is not a douchebag? Could be, but I have yet to see him. Anyway, Mr. Sluka felt the wormy little shit was not only going to be the ideal housemate, but a great candidate for a whole bunch of loans - again, as would we all, I'm sure. Really, Mr. Sluka?? Byrd's facial expressions as he was collecting the growing pile of exhibits were subtle, but said it all.

2 hours ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

 I bet the defendant always claims everything is someone else's fault. 

Kind of funny: "My car has the latest technology and I could not have hit her car because it would warn me. Oh, I hit a curb." Must have been some high curb. She was so colossal it was almost majestic. The huge shiny lip bubble, not so much.

[AZChristian]

After 20 seconds with the Hooters "manager," I figured he MIGHT have risen to the ranks of dishwasher at a Hooters, but that would have been pushing it.  

[ItsHelloPattiagain]

12 hours ago, AngelaHunter said:

Oy vey! Mr. Sluka, a persnickety, peculiar, particular (and vastly annoying) little person ("Here is exhibit G, and exhibit F and exhibit O and texts 109 through 112")always invites strangers to bunk in with him. He is so buttoned-down and tidy it's truly a wonder when you see what he chose to live with him this time - the 29-year old, shifty, slimy little wharf rat def.

I actually admired Mr. Sluka for his organizational skills - there's nothing worse than litigants shuffling through piles of paper when JJ asks for something simple like a receipt (I notice that lots of people these days have Post-Its on their paperwork, so I'm guessing the assistants at JJ are helping them mark their stuff, cos most of them don't seem too organized in their personal lives. Anywho. . . back to Mr. Sluka who  made me wonder why he had Hooter Hoodrat in his house. Perhaps he enjoys a walk on the wild side, watching that half shaved head tell of the exploits of Hooterville when he arrived home. However, Hooter Hoodrat was just pitiful, y'all. Pretending he didn't get any texts from the defendant after a certain time? Pshhh, sit down, dude. 

[AngelaHunter]

31 minutes ago, ItsHelloPattiagain said:

I actually admired Mr. Sluka for his organizational skills

Definitely. It was all this endless "Exhibit" stuff (for a 20$ loan) that seemed like he watches too much Perry Mason on MeTV. The people who endlessly shuffle papers when asked for something are those who know they don't have what is needed ("I didn't bring that with me today." "I DO have it, but I left it at home.") and are probably hoping JJ will say, "Oh, well. Forget about it."

 

32 minutes ago, ItsHelloPattiagain said:

back to Mr. Sluka who  made me wonder why he had Hooter Hoodrat in his house.

That is truly the mystery. The oddest Odd Couple ever. What was it about Wharf Rat that made Mr. Sluka say, "A likely lad -  perfect for my next roommate"? What??

[funky-rat]

1 hour ago, ItsHelloPattiagain said:

I actually admired Mr. Sluka for his organizational skills - there's nothing worse than litigants shuffling through piles of paper when JJ asks for something simple like a receipt (I notice that lots of people these days have Post-Its on their paperwork, so I'm guessing the assistants at JJ are helping them mark their stuff, cos most of them don't seem too organized in their personal lives. Anywho. . . back to Mr. Sluka who  made me wonder why he had Hooter Hoodrat in his house. Perhaps he enjoys a walk on the wild side, watching that half shaved head tell of the exploits of Hooterville when he arrived home. However, Hooter Hoodrat was just pitiful, y'all. Pretending he didn't get any texts from the defendant after a certain time? Pshhh, sit down, dude. 

It's possible he could have blocked Plaintiff's phone number.  That would stop the texts from showing up.

[Byrd is the Word]

Hooters Manager Not So Manageable A lonely old man renting rooms via craigslist to shifty little hustlers like the defendant should at least know better than to hand them any money.  Good grief.  And who doesn't admire the "If I was going to steal something of his, I'd steal his TV" defense against the charge of stealing a cheap coffee maker?  Hopefully Hooters upper management recognizes that this guy should not be trusted with the dishes and certainly not allowed within 20' of the cash register.  But unless the labor pool in Cincinnati is more shallow than most it's unlikely that this looser is anything more than the guy picking cigarette butts from the urinals.

[Brattinella]

I've always liked the looks of the Keurig coffee maker, but it is too pricy for me, same for the individual cups. If I had one, I would be pissed if someone stole it, though.

[AngelaHunter]

1 hour ago, Byrd is the Word said:

And who doesn't admire the "If I was going to steal something of his, I'd steal his TV" defense against the charge of stealing a cheap coffee maker? 

I know? "When I steal things, I don't bother with the cheap stuff." That's right, Al Capone, you're so in the Big Time you hustle 20 bucks for gas money from some naive little man. Truly a criminal mastermind.

I've had a Keurig coffee maker for years and I'm on my 3rd one. I use it to dispense hot water for tea as well. Yes, I have now reached a stage where I am too lazy to boil water.

[funky-rat]

1 hour ago, Brattinella said:

I've always liked the looks of the Keurig coffee maker, but it is too pricy for me, same for the individual cups. If I had one, I would be pissed if someone stole it, though.

We got a basic model off of FB Marketplace for reasonable.  Right around $25.  You can buy a little mesh cup from Keurig and put your own coffee in.  We bought one of FB Marketplace to donate to my husband's AA group, who barely has enough money to keep going.  They were making an urn of coffee for 3 people and throwing the rest out.  They all pitched high holy heck about the Keurig and whined about it, and when my husband's prior job kept him away from meetings, they packed it up and got the urn back out, and continue to throw away coffee.  

[bad things are bad]

Quote

 

Mr. Sluka, a persnickety, peculiar, particular (and vastly annoying) little person

 

Oh yeah, Team Annoying for me. I was half expecting him to ask the court to have the evidence admitted, just like a real lawyer. 

[Byrd is the Word]

Translating some famous parting words of unsuccessful defendants:

"It is what it is" = I tried to lie and bullshit my way out of this and it didn't work.

"No good deed goes unpunished" = I'm an entitled asshole who can't be expected to be accountable for my actions.

[Brattinella]

2 hours ago, funky-rat said:

We got a basic model off of FB Marketplace for reasonable.  Right around $25.  You can buy a little mesh cup from Keurig and put your own coffee in.  We bought one of FB Marketplace to donate to my husband's AA group, who barely has enough money to keep going.  They were making an urn of coffee for 3 people and throwing the rest out.  They all pitched high holy heck about the Keurig and whined about it, and when my husband's prior job kept him away from meetings, they packed it up and got the urn back out, and continue to throw away coffee.  

From experience, that urn of coffee is some nasty-ass stuff!  Thanks for the Keurig info, now I am a little more interested!

[ButYourHonor]

Quote

3 hours ago, bad things are bad said:

Oh yeah, Team Annoying for me. I was half expecting him to ask the court to have the evidence admitted, just like a real lawyer. 

 

Team Annoying here too.  Of course the defendant never intended to return that money, but doesn’t JJ usually say “you loaned him X and he never paid you back so you loaned him Y?  Sorry, you’re an idiot.  You knew you weren’t getting that money back.”  I mean C’MON.  Exhibits A-F or whatever of multiple piddly little “loans”?  I also think the defendant was truthful in the “halterview” when he said that the plaintiff freaked him out.  He freaked me out and I never lived with him!  Frankly he strikes me as the quiet serial killer type.

[Brattinella]

5 minutes ago, ButYourHonor said:

multiple piddly little “loans”?

That added up to almost a thousand dollars.

[ButYourHonor]

Even more irresponsible for the plaintiff to allow them to mount up like that, but I believe half of that was rent.

[CrazyInAlabama]

Personally, I think the Hooters 'manager' is a total jerk, and a user, and if the plaintiff was a quiet serial killer type, we wouldn't be seeing the defendant on my TV, and giving me heartburn.

Todays first 30 minute case is a rerun, but it totally enrages me, and I hate the plaintiff, and her idiot grandpa.      The defendant plumber supported himself, and two little kids he has full custody of, makes the mistake of his life by knocking up the Sainted Single Mother Daughter of Satan (SSMDS).     Grandpa loaned money to both parties, so he gets $2400 back.   

One night plaintiff SSMDofS got drunk, had some friends over, locked the defendant out, and defendant had to crawl in through the doggy door.      Plaintiff SSMDofS wants money for having to get a lawyer when the police did their duty, arrest the heifer for domestic violence, and defending herself against a restraining order.   I've seldom seen a plaintiff more deserving of having a permanent restraining order against her, and have her parental rights severed to that poor little kid she spawned.  The look on JJ's face at the video is amazing.    Where this loser videos the assault on the defendant while he is holding the baby.    The way she went after the defendant punching at him could easily have severely injured the baby.       The plaintiff is actually proud of her actions.   I suspect there is a good reason that the defendant was locked out, and her friends were there, and a video camera was going for the entire assault, and I bet she wanted to set him up for an arrest.       Nothing for anyone except the grandpa of Satan, so he gets $2400, and she gets nothing.  Defendant is a fool if he thinks she'll ever be a good mother to that poor kid, and ever stop being a total pain.

 

Puppy Death Drama-Plaintiff owners blame the puppy breeder for the death of a German Shepherd.    Plaintiffs paid $500 for the puppy.      However, after the puppy died defendant posted the remaining puppies as German Shepherd/Lab mixes.    A bargain price for a puppy, isn't a bargain at all, as the plaintiffs found out.     Plaintiff claims puppy had parvo, but vet says puppy didn't have that at all.    Plaintiff also had parvo tests on the rest of the litter, and the tests were all negative.     I agree with the judge, a few vets over-treat, and I think this puppy either had a virus, or the idiot plaintiffs fed him something he shouldn't have, and I bet they switched his food out too, which can have horrible consequences.    Plaintiffs get $500 back for the puppy, since it wasn't a pure bred.    The staff will contact other owners of the puppies to see if the puppies are sick or not.  Plaintiffs spoke to three owners, and both plaintiffs look like they're sad the puppies are okay.        The other puppies were fine, so the whiny plaintiffs get the money for the puppy, but no vet bills, which were $3,000.    Like everyone these days, they couldn't afford the puppies treatment, and set up a Gofundme page.  

 

Lightning Strike Strife-Air conditioning repairman sues old hag defendant over insurance payment on air conditioning repair.    Lightning strike on heat pump, plaintiff gave an estimate for $6900, she submitted the claim to her insurance company, and they paid the entire amount.   She only paid the repairman $3000, and she pocketed $2300 after the deductible.      Repairman gets a well deserved $2347, but the check from the insurance deducted her $1500 deductible, so the a/c man was screwed over.     I hope the old bat's insurance company saw this, and every workman within a 100 miles of Atlanta puts her on the refusal of service list.  

Edited November 29, 2018 by CrazyInAlabama

[AngelaHunter]

5 hours ago, funky-rat said:

You can buy a little mesh cup from Keurig and put your own coffee in.

Yes, you can. I have one but I'm also too lazy to use that. I get the K-cups at my local grocery - 30/14$.

I didn't see persnickety exhibiting wanna-be lawyer as a serial killer type. More of an exaggerated Mr. Belvedere.

Thanks, CrazyInAlabama. I now know which eps to skip. I think I actually hate the people who financially support the scumbag BYBers more than I hate the puppy peddlers themselves. No excuse for ignorance these days. I guess "I want what I want and I want it NOW", is the bottom line.

[zillabreeze]

So re-run today.  Two Old Bitches screw over AC repair dude.

Old Bitch #1 (homeowner) has AC hit by lightning.  Hires AC dude to repair.  SIGNS his bid for $6900.  She files insurance claim and ultimately receives $5300, but gives repair guy only $3000.

Old Bitch #2 (JJ) reams her out while bragging about law degree, etc.  So. Finally gives AC guy another $2300.  

Here's the rub, AC guy is still getting shorted the last $1600.00 because that's the deductible.  That is a legitimate debt owed by OB#1.  When repair guy tried to ask about his remaining money OB#2 denies and gives him the bums rush.

So OB#1 smirks on the way out because she still managed to screw AC dude in the end.

That chapped my ample ass!  Does OB#2 have any idea how insurance works???  Dude legit earned that money.  I hope he put a lien on OB#1's house for balance.

OB#2 is such a hypocrite.  Constantly harping about people getting A JOB, but having no trouble jacking a blue collar professional out of his money.  It's not the first time someone drew up short because either A, she knows squat about how things work and/or B, she has disdain for everyone in the trades.

Aaargh.

[Florinaldo]

12 hours ago, zillabreeze said:

Does OB#2 have any idea how insurance works???

It's not the first time she rules along those lines, forcing the contractor to eat the deductible. She may have gone to law school, contrary to most of us lowly peons as she reminded OB#1 during the case, but she obvioulsy needs a refresher course in insurance law and claims procedure.

 

22 hours ago, ItsHelloPattiagain said:

I actually admired Mr. Sluka for his organizational skills - there's nothing worse than litigants shuffling through piles of paper when JJ asks for something simple like a receipt (I notice that lots of people these days have Post-Its on their paperwork, so I'm guessing the assistants at JJ are helping them mark their stuff, cos most of them don't seem too organized in their personal lives.

I did appreciate that he organised his evidence so we were spared the constant shuffling and reshuffling of papers so many litigants go through, probably failing to notice the salient document at least once before they locate it, but he was another example of someone making questionables choices and then feeling a compulsion to come on national TV to let the world know all about them.

Even more annoying than the shufflers though are the litigants who come on and say "yes, I do have that document or piece of evidence... just not here". Bloody idiots.

Sometimes they say that they were notified of the countersuit too late for them to have time to gather the relevant evidence. How long in advance do they get notice of a counterclaim (or of an amended claim)? They make it sound as if they were informed only the day before, or is it nasty of me to suppose that in many cases they did not even bother to read the documentation that the show sends them or are simply unable to understand it?

Edited November 29, 2018 by Florinaldo

[jww]

 "She may have gone to law school, contrary to most of us lowly peons as she reminded OB#1 during the case, but she obvioulsy needs a refresher course in insurance law and claims procedure."

I don't believe what  OB1 did  in stiffing the AC repairman  was insurance "fraud".  In my experience with insurance claims for hail damaged  roofs, the adjuster/inspector  will come out determine the damage and  the estimated cost and then give you a check for 50% of the repair  cost minus your deductible, then when the job is done you get a check for the remaining 50% made out to you and your mortgage holder who will want proof the repair was made before they endorse the check.  You are perfectly in your rights to pocket the first check and not do any repairs (you may be in violation of your mortgage  contract in not maintain the house),  the insurance  company keeps the remaining 50% and will not honor any future claims resulting from not making the earlier repairs such as not repairing the roof which then leaks.  Fraud would be if OB1 intentionally damaged her old AC unit and then put in a claim or submitted bogus high repair bills.

[funky-rat]

1 hour ago, jww said:

I don't believe what  OB1 did  in stiffing the AC repairman  was insurance "fraud".  In my experience with insurance claims for hail damaged  roofs, the adjuster/inspector  will come out determine the damage and  the estimated cost and then give you a check for 50% of the repair  cost minus your deductible, then when the job is done you get a check for the remaining 50% made out to you and your mortgage holder who will want proof the repair was made before they endorse the check.  You are perfectly in your rights to pocket the first check and not do any repairs (you may be in violation of your mortgage  contract in not maintain the house),  the insurance  company keeps the remaining 50% and will not honor any future claims resulting from not making the earlier repairs such as not repairing the roof which then leaks.  Fraud would be if OB1 intentionally damaged her old AC unit and then put in a claim or submitted bogus high repair bills.

It's not fraud, at least in my state.  I bumped a person at my old job in the parking lot.  She was parked illegally and I put a very small scratch on her old hoopty beater car.  I offered to have it fixed for her, but she demanded it go through my insurance.  She never fixed the car, but she cashed the check.  I went to my insurance and they said that she's not required to fix the car by law.  And it didn't matter that she was parked illegally either, unfortunately for me.

Less than a year before I got rid of my beater car, someone hit me in an ice storm.  I didn't know if the car had hidden damage, so I took her insurance info, and they examined my car.  Next thing I knew, I had a check.  I took it to two body shops and they laughed at me, and said "don't bother" (the car had rust, etc) and they were afraid to even attempt to taking the fender apart.  So I admit to keeping the $300 (no hidden damage - just a scratch and small dent) in that case.  My insurance company told me I was legal to do so, and they agreed it was not worth fixing (and was shocked her insurance paid out).  But what the P did in that case was terrible.  That was thousands of dollars, and they did the work and she stiffed them.

Edited November 29, 2018 by funky-rat
A bumper is not a fender

[bad things are bad]

19 hours ago, ButYourHonor said:

doesn’t JJ usually say “you loaned him X and he never paid you back so you loaned him Y?  Sorry, you’re an idiot.  You knew you weren’t getting that money back.”  I mean C’MON

YES. My DH and I were both saying this as the case went on. Jeebus Christmas. What reasonable expectation would you have of being paid back after the 4th "loan"?

[Florinaldo]

It may not meet the legal definition of "fraud" in some jurisdictions, but the fraud aspect was not the main reason I was disgusted by OB#1's behaviour and JJ's ruling. The contractor had provided a legitimate estimate, which was accepted. This means that the defendant had the obligation to see that he got paid that amount,  both with the money paid by the insurance company and out of her own pocket to make up the difference resulting from to the deductible.

He did not "agree to do it for 5 000 $" as JJ said dismissively; he did work which was worth the full amount of his estimate but got stiffed by OB#1 and OB#2. The defendant probably had the right to not have the repairs made and pocket the money, accepting to live with the consequences of living without AC. But as soon as she let him do the repairs, he was allowed to collect the full amount. JJ does not seem to know how insurance claims work. Unless there was somewhere in the file a notation that the did agree to do it for 5 k$, but I doubt a contractor would be stupid enough to do that.

JJ's ruling also had the collateral effect of enriching the defendant since the amount for the deductible was not paid out of the awards kitty, which left a bigger sum to be split amongst the two litigants. If he had been awarded the rest of his estimate, that would have reduced substantially the sum OB#1 got for her appearance on the show.

Edited November 29, 2018 by Florinaldo

[CrazyInAlabama]

Frightened Mother's Telling Texts (woman claims she was scared for her and kids's lives by ex, his texts tell it differently).  Man who was desperate to move (previous place condemned) so he moves in with defendant, and her kids, she was already behind on rent.    $895 was rent of house for month.     I'm guessing plaintiff is a Sainted Single Mother (SSM).     They had a kerfuffle, and plaintiff was removed by police, after defendant told police p. threatened her.     Police escorted him out, and only let him get some personal belongings, and not his electronics, and furniture.    The plaintiff paid by check, and has copies.   Defendant claims plaintiff's cancelled check was $895 was actually hers, and she gave it to him-what a stupid fool the defendant is.

Defendant conned landlord into giving plaintiff eviction notice in February, but they were still sleeping in the same room through 22 February.     Am I the only person on Earth that doesn't have a huge TV?     He gets his sound bar (I guess for the TV), intake he doesn't get, and some other stuff that I don't have a clue what it is.  Apparently, when ho defendant moved out of the house (my guess evicted), she dumped his stuff on the porch, and it was stolen.      She also had a restraining order against him, and she claims she was terrified of him, but she was sending him messages on Facebook at the same time.   She is such a schemer.  And if she has extra money, she should give her mother money for dentures, by the way this is what meth does to your teeth.     She posted on his brother's facebook a taunt about finding her, and that's pretty stupid of someone who is in fear of her life.     

 

Defendant owes Plaintiff $895 for rent.    1218, owed by defendant, plus $300 for something else= $1,518 for the plaintiff, 

 

Bed Rest Made Me Do It (missed car payments because she was ill)-Defendant buys car, aunt purchased it, and defendant claimed she would pay for it, and d. didn't pay for it and it was towed.   To get car back d. had to pay $1400 to get it back.      Then defendant didn't pay after that, car was repossessed at plaintiff Aunt's call to the bank, car was sold at auction, and there was a $9,000 shortfall.    By the way, when the tow company is call something like repossession, it wasn't just towed, it was repo'ed.     Defendant got the car back, then aunt repo'd from her, and had it towed back to the finance company on January 10, after the police report.     The aunt was stupid to trust the niece, and her credit is trashed by this.     Niece owed well over $1,000 with 2 months payments, and fees when it was repo'ed.   Defendant's insurance is over $400 a month, and claims she didn't pay for the insurance either.    The defendant niece is a total liar. 

Plaintiff gets $ 5000 paid to Capital One. toward the shortfall of $9558. 

 

Worst Teen Driver Award- Idiot defendant teen is being sued by plaintiff for car wreck caused by defendant.    It took quite a while for plaintiff to track down the defendant, and idiot defendant was driving without a license, but drives constantly.   Defendant changed lanes without looking, and hit plaintiff, but was in the left turn lane, and changed to straight ahead lane, and hit plaintiff.     Phone number the defendant gave was wrong, and it took two months to get the defendant's information, and track the loser down.     Defendant didn't  pass the driver's test.     Father of defendant is as stupid as his idiot son.      Plaintiff gets over $1900.        

[Brattinella]

22 minutes ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

Worst Teen Driver Award- Idiot defendant teen is being sued by plaintiff for car wreck caused by defendant.    It took quite a while for plaintiff to track down the defendant, and idiot defendant was driving without a license, but drives constantly.   Defendant changed lanes without looking, and hit plaintiff, but was in the left turn lane, and changed to straight ahead lane, and hit plaintiff.     Phone number the defendant gave was wrong, and it took two months to get the defendant's information, and track the loser down.     Defendant didn't  pass the driver's test.     Father of defendant is as stupid as his idiot son.      Plaintiff gets over $1900. 

What a maroon!  Did you notice he used the term 'lane-switching'?  Like that is really a thing?  I know what that means; that is when you see an idiot slaloming down the freeway in and out of all the lanes, passing everyone because he is entitled to it!

[augmentedfourth]

Mr. Sluka is going to make the website I use to buy my exhibit stickers start requiring customers prove their credentials, because right now, any Joe Schmo can go on there and order a bunch. Hey, those $7 packs last a long time! (And when I go in to do my taxes and the accountant gives me some side-eye when I tell him I spent $14 on exhibit stickers last year, I make him put it down because it's a legitimate business expense, dammit.)

 

Costco sells K-cups by the case, and Christmas Tree Shop also sometimes has some great deals on them. Just make sure to check the expiration dates with the latter.

[CrazyInAlabama]

There's a local bargain place that sells K-cups in huge boxes (I guess for offices?), and all kinds of huge amounts of odds and ends.    However, I went in there once, and the K-cups looked old enough to vote.

 

I hated that little twerp without a license.    His father was even worse, "he has to drive to work without a license, because it costs too much for Uber"-tell that to the next person numb-nuts runs into, and that person isn't as law abiding as the plaintiff, and beats the living snot out of the little twerp.  I hope there's a video too, and I would love to see it.       I wonder how long it will be before Cuadro (?) Jr runs over some kid, or someone else, and daddy is telling people why the little cretin has no insurance, no license, and is totally justified in leaving the scene.  I know it's going to happen.  I hope daddy's insurance company saw this episode also, and cancelled his insurance, and he has to go to one of those high risk pools, or alternative insurance for bad drivers (like The General), and that will cost him thousands.  

Edited November 30, 2018 by CrazyInAlabama

[Brattinella]

2 minutes ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

I hated that little twerp without a license.    His father was even worse, "he has to drive to work without a license, because it costs too much for Uber"-tell that to the next person numb-nuts runs into, and that person isn't as law abiding as the plaintiff, and beats the living snot out of the little twerp.   I wonder how long it will be before Cuadro (?) Jr runs over some kid, or someone else, and daddy is telling people why the little cretin has no insurance, no license, and is totally justified in leaving the scene.  I know it's going to happen.  

Wasn't this in Orange County?  LA?  I KNOW they have buses there!  WTF?  Uber?

[CrazyInAlabama]

I guess Jr. is too special to ride with us peasants, or get a job closer to home.  

[Byrd is the Word]

23 hours ago, funky-rat said:

It's not fraud, at least in my state.  I bumped a person at my old job in the parking lot.  She was parked illegally and I put a very small scratch on her old hoopty beater car.  I offered to have it fixed for her, but she demanded it go through my insurance.  She never fixed the car, but she cashed the check.  I went to my insurance and they said that she's not required to fix the car by law.  And it didn't matter that she was parked illegally either, unfortunately for me.

Less than a year before I got rid of my beater car, someone hit me in an ice storm.  I didn't know if the car had hidden damage, so I took her insurance info, and they examined my car.  Next thing I knew, I had a check.  I took it to two body shops and they laughed at me, and said "don't bother" (the car had rust, etc) and they were afraid to even attempt to taking the fender apart.  So I admit to keeping the $300 (no hidden damage - just a scratch and small dent) in that case.  My insurance company told me I was legal to do so, and they agreed it was not worth fixing (and was shocked her insurance paid out).  But what the P did in that case was terrible.  That was thousands of dollars, and they did the work and she stiffed them.

I doubt it's fraud either.  It's an insurance settlement.  It's probably no less a fraud than the insurance company settling for a lesser amount than it will cost you to replace your totaled automobile.  The real injustice is that the old bitch still managed to screw the tradesman out of her $1,500 deductible that he earned and that she's obligated to pay.  BTW, did anyone else notice that her turkey neck looked like a certain part of female anatomy?

[Byrd is the Word]

This case with the 17 unlicensed drive was a total waste of time.  He looses for anyone ONE of the following reasons: 1.) No driver's license. 2.) No insurance 3.) Failuer to yield the right of way 4.) Changing lanes in an intersection.  The only mystery here is why we wasn't at least ticketed if not even arrested.

[TheLastKidPicked]

2 hours ago, Byrd is the Word said:

This case with the 17 unlicensed driver was a total waste of time.  He looses for anyone ONE of the following reasons: 1.) No driver's license. 2.) No insurance 3.) Failure to yield the right of way 4.) Changing lanes in an intersection.  The only mystery here is why we wasn't at least ticketed if not even arrested.

I've noticed the trend of people with no insurance lately.  The solution to this is so obvious that I'm at a loss as to why we don't do it:

1.  Forget about paper insurance cards.  When a person is pulled over or in an accident, have the police access an insurance database that shows them in real time if the car is insured.

2.  If there is no insurance, that person is not driving home.  They call a tow truck and impound the car.

If an ignoramus like me can figure this out, why can't people like Judge Judy get this done?

[zillabreeze]

16 minutes ago, TheLastKidPicked said:

If an ignoramus like me can figure this out, why can't people like Judge Judy get this done?

A small city close to me has a scan gun that looks like a radar gun.  It accesses the state (Tx) insurance data base and lets them know on the fly.  Probably wildly expensive.

[TheLastKidPicked]

38 minutes ago, zillabreeze said:

A small city close to me has a scan gun that looks like a radar gun.  It accesses the state (Tx) insurance data base and lets them know on the fly.  Probably wildly expensive.

And here is the solution to that:  Use the money from no insurance tickets to pay for the radar guns.

To put a finer point on it:  We don't have to watch Judge Judy for very long before we notice that certain cases come up over and over, such as people running around with no insurance.  If we see this so often on Judge Judy, then it makes sense that in courts around the country they are dealing with the same thing over and over.

[zillabreeze]

14 minutes ago, TheLastKidPicked said:

And here is the solution to that:  Use the money from no insurance tickets to pay for the radar guns.

As my Dad says: "There you go, trying to apply logic to government again.'

I bet JJ & JM have saved me $$$ over the years as I watch for hooptys and drive waaaay away from them.  Of course, I also pay $15. mo extra for uninsured coverage.

Edited November 30, 2018 by zillabreeze

[Brattinella]

18 minutes ago, zillabreeze said:

I watch for hooptys and drive waaaay away from them. 

I watch for cell phones. :(

[badhaggis]

If you are in an accident or pulled over in my town, Tucson, AZ law enforcement can look in the computer and see if you are insured. If the answer is no your vehicle will be impounded. Unfortunately there might be an issue with that due to single sainted mothers who cannot afford insurance and how can they be abandoned by the side of the road...

[Zahdii]

Where I live the cops automatically look up your insurance coverage if you're pulled over or in an accident.  If they are told you're not insured, your car is towed, but they'll call a cab for you if you want!  One of my neighbors was even offered a ride home when she went into a ditch and the cops said that the cabs and the tow trucks were going to take awhile due to all the traffic problems due to the snow.

[zillabreeze]

OMG!  Thank goodness I have a beer to wash down the bile in throat after the hallway poop case!  That guy really believes it was ok.  On what f-ing planet????

I can smell a potty accident clear across the house within minutes, and my greys have little poops.  Just one on the tile and I'm scrubbing and flooding with OdoBan instantly.   

That building had wood floors....the saturation!   ANIMALS!!! and I don't mean the dog.

[CrazyInAlabama]

Son Spits in Father's Face, and Police Arrested Son-I really want to know what the son is on?    There's something seriously wrong with the son.

Father (defendant) and Son (plaintiff) had fight, right after dad got out of hospital, and it culminated in the son spitting in his father's face.   Apparently, the father owns the apartment, and I suspect is a real estate developer, evicts son, after the assault and arrest.   Son then breaks the door glass on the vintage front door, and other apartment damage, and father has receipts with labor included, and they're from real repair people.     The son wants all kinds of electronics (including the usual 50" TV), and dad says it's all gone, but aunt is testifying for the son.    The son is seriously out of control, and the father should stop thinking of him as a relative, and instead think of the son as his enemy.       I dread to think of the repercussions of the son losing this case, and wonder if the father is safe.   

Defendant gets $419, for damage, and plaintiff gets nothing.  

Woman Suing Ex Fiance For Half the Cost of a Ring, Apartment Damages, etc.-Son, with lip rings (damn I hate those, and he can't talk with them).  Plaintiff, former fiance has the ring, and wants money, JJ tells her to sell it.     Plaintiff owns two cars, and defendant didn't pay for car payment for the car he used to go to work, but this was after he quit working for his daddy.     Plaintiff gets two car payments, almost $800.     Then there was the apartment lease break, and extensive damages, of  $965 over the $500 security deposit, and the defendant has to pay half.    What are people doing to smash a door?   Defendant pays plaintiff $1190.

I hate both of these whiny idiots, and hope they didn't reproduce.  

Dog Uses Bathroom in Shared Hallway-Can I just say ick!   Apartment Landlord defendant had brother and huge dog living there, and brother's dog crapped in the hallway constantly.   The building is a two-unit upstairs/downstairs building.    Brother moved in to the apartment in 2013in the lower apartment.   Plaintiff moved in to upper apartment in 2017.    Landlord visited apartment with brother, and plaintiff complained about dog dumps on the floor behind her kitchen.    By the way, that 'Mastiff' doesn't look like a pure bred at all.   Defendant (now owner of building) makes lame excuses about dog.    Verdel Hogues is a jerk (neighbor, new landlord), and I can see why the brother (former owner) sold the place to him for $1, to get away from this.  

Plaintiff was evicted, and landlord says he has nothing of hers that she left behind.     Landlord claims TV was picked up by son, and plaintiff picked up everything under police supervision.   How does the plaintiff keep getting evicted, can't afford much rent, and still has 4 TV's?     Barbara has been naughty with some kind of arrest record, and several liens and bankruptcies in the past.    She supposedly works preparing taxes, and it will be a hot day in Buffalo when she touched my income tax.    Plaintiff wants $5k for harassment, property, etc.   She's now living with her dad, and stored everything.     Plaintiff and defendants dress nicely, but they're all nuts.     Defendant claims several family members and picked her remaining stuff on 1 October.   

The apartment is severely damaged, and since it was subsidized JJ contends that no subsidized apartment in the condition on move out would have been approved.     The pictures show one room with nice hardwoods, and the other room has either black paint, or tar dumped on it.     Apparently Ms. Goodrum tried to stain the hardwood floor, and it looks like cheap paint, and there is severe wall damage too.      Plaintiff claims the subsidized housing inspector missed all of the damages, and she's full of it.    I know people that rented Section 8 apartments as landlords, and the inspectors were very thorough.    Plaintiff likes to show off her body, in sexy lingerie and defendant says she wanted more than friendship, I think I'm skipping dinner tonight, because my appetite just disappeared.     

So woman of advanced years has been evicted from two apartments in a row, the second was subsidized, and then has to move in with her father?     Tell me there's a limit on how many times you get subsidized apartments after repeated evictions.    

Defendant gets $2,500 for damage, however because of the dog, plaintiff gets $2,500, and no one gets anything.      

Edited December 1, 2018 by CrazyInAlabama

[AngelaHunter]

1 hour ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

Son Spits in Father's Face, and Police Arrested Son-I really want to know what the son is on? 

Omg. Deonta Slayton suing his dad, who did such horrible things to him, like letting him and his nefarious buddy (who probably stole all the shit in question) live in an apartment Daddy (who of course has a different surname than his son) for a mere 200$/mth each. Sadly, Deonta can't keep enough hours at his job at some chicken joint, so can't pay his measly 200$ rent. Daddy has the unmitigated gall to tell him to get another job, or two or three jobs to pay what he owes. How dare he! Deonta, who is unable to articulate his thoughts and state his case even though JJ patiently waited for him, seems to think he should his spend what money he makes on earrings, 50" TVs and elaborate hairdos. His Unty is there to back him up. Deonta spits in his father's face. Okay then. Byrd looked mighty pissed with all this disgraceful display.

1 hour ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

Woman Suing Ex Fiance

Just when I thought we'd seen the outer limits of what some women Will Do for Love. Ms. Davis is so damned terminally desperate fora warm body and a ring on her finger, she not only moves in with the incredibly trollish, big-bellied, idiotic loser Shane Barbush (sporting an Extreme Douchebag hairdo and lip rings - yeah, Shane, those make you look really hot!) but puts a car and insurance for him in her name and "she pays for everything" as Shane explains. Why wouldn't she? Look what she's getting in return: A loser who can't even keep a job with Daddy. OH, wait, no - Shane quit his job with Daddy because it seems Daddy was not paying him what he's worth with all his skills and talents, and besides Ms. Davis will support him. I may have zoned out for a moment, but was Ms. Davis so pathetically hard up she paid for her own engagement ring? I might too, if I thought there was a chance that that Dumbo-eared fool might slip out of my grasp. Strike while the iron's hot! Men like this don't come around every day, you know.

[CrazyInAlabama]

Not only did Ms. Desperate Davis pay for the ring, she still had the ring.    It terrifies me that Love Muffin Shane's job with daddy was helping with his transport service for the handicapped, and after no one wanted to make Shane a CEO or something equal to his talents, that he went back to working for daddy. 

[zillabreeze]

14 minutes ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

Not only did Ms. Desperate Davis pay for the ring, she still had the ring.    It terrifies me that Love Muffin Shane's job with daddy was helping with his transport service for the handicapped, and after no one wanted to make Shane a CEO or something equal to his talents, that he went back to working for daddy. 

All I could focus on was both parties greasy dirty hair and D's nose fishhooks. Really folks.  Shampoo.

[Mondrianyone]

That haircut (rightly or wrongly) signals white supremacy and anti-Semitism to me.  And I always marvel at the people who think they're genetically superior.  Despite all visible evidence to the contrary.

[DoctorK]

21 minutes ago, zillabreeze said:

All I could focus on was both parties greasy dirty hair and D's nose fishhooks. Really folks.  Shampoo.

For a lot of the litigants we see on these shows, I wonder if the low rent hotels the show puts them in do not provide complimentary shampoo.

[AngelaHunter]

25 minutes ago, Mondrianyone said:

That haircut (rightly or wrongly) signals white supremacy and anti-Semitism to me. 

You mean on Mr. Barbush? To me it signals typical, over-grown, pansy-assed, ball-less, Utter Douchebag cucks whose mommies and daddies will be footing their bills forever. I doubt Barbush knows anything beyond when his next meal is to be served. I could be dead wrong about both, of course.

But, yeah - wash your hair, Ms. Davis. I know you're probably still in a state of shock and grief that you will never know wedded bliss with Barbush, but personal hygiene needs to be maintained.

[Zahdii]

I have to know, do these people really look and act like that in real life, or does the show encourage, even help the litigants create a TV persona?  Is there a makeup and wardrobe department handing out makeup, wigs, and bad clothing? 

Is there a PA somewhere whispering "You don't need to cover up those tats and everybody has exposed bra straps, but you know, your girls are so awesome you don't even need to pen them in if you don't want to."  "Wanna go through our selection of used party heels so you can really make an entrance?  I bet a woman like you is used to getting attention when you enter a room.  If Byrd doesn't have to wipe his jaw off the floor than I'm the Queen of England."  "Don't be afraid to drink the water, the lights make it hot out there."  "Look JJ right in the eye and tell her what's what.  She respects a confident person.  You two could probably do lunch together, that'd be a trip!"  "Now don't forget, you don't get paid (and we won't pay your debt if you lose) if you don't put on a good enough show to have your case shown on air."

I actually have a relative who went on the show, but after she got back, she has refused to discuss the case, citing an NDA.  I don't know why, her case was a  pretty dry, minor car accident case that she won.  I haven't heard that anyone showed up looking odd or acting OTT, so it was short and forgettable.