All Episodes Talk: All Rise

[Florinaldo]

On 5/21/2019 at 11:36 PM, shksabelle said:

Just yesterday we learned that JJ’s preferred form of address is “Your Majesty”

I believe that the HOA where she lives had the by-laws changed so that this is the mandatory form of reply as she benignly waves at passers-by from the palanquin she gets carried in through that gated community.

[AngelaHunter]

52 minutes ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

The plaintiff's witness is right, stallions need special fencing, and can be dangerous. 

Very dangerous. The people in a house near me had a stallion out in the front paddock. They must have had a mare in heat because the stallion was bucking, kicking, rearing and screaming. I was walking my dog along the public street in front and the owners yelled at me to cross the street, lest the horse busts the fence down. I really think people who are in the horse-breeding business should be obligated to keep everyone, including their horse, safe and people like me shouldn't have to avoid a public walkway because they want to keep this stallion out in front.

[CrazyInAlabama]

5 p.m. both reruns-

Dog Abuse vs. Puppy Deaths?!-Disgusting plaintiff breeder says she didn't get pick of litter, and is suing disgusting defendant who is accused of six puppies dying in her care.   The defendant raises tons of American Bullies (not AKC by the way), and has tons of dogs on her property.    Defendant claims boyfriend of plaintiff physically abused the dog, but defendant had a lot of dead dogs.    Plaintiff gets two puppies.    Smart mouthed defendant needs a Byrd boot up her butt, and so does the plaintiff.     

High Kick to Antique Dresser?!-Plaintiff suing former landlord for return of security deposit, emotional distress, etc after room rental went bad.   Plaintiff claims he never really moved in, paid security deposit $750.    Plaintiff gets pro-rated rent, and security deposit back. $1450 for plaintiff.

Show Me Proof of Internal Bruising!-Plaintiff and defendants rented an apartment together, things went very badly, and defendants are sued for lease breaking fee, assault, etc.  Defendant claims she had internal bruising from an assault, without proof.    There are also extensive cleaning fees, one month unpaid rent by the defendants, and everyone in this case seems like a royal pain in the fanny.  $1460 to plaintiff.  

Bitter About Boy Toy!?-Plaintiff bought her lover a camper, and an ATV, but wants them back after the breakup.   The defendant is so far from a boy toy, that's it's ridiculous.    Another desperate foolish woman.   Plaintiff received an accident settlement, and spent it on camper for love muffin, and an ATV.    Defendant claims he sold the ATV to a friend, and JJ doesn't believe him, and says she wants the name and number of the 'buyer', or love muffin is walking back to Missouri.   Plaintiff gets camper and ATV, but no money.  

Handsome Lawyer Remodel Fail!-I remember this one.   Lawyer hires unqualified designer to do expensive remodel to his office.    (By the way, lawyer was OK, but not as handsome as he thinks.   I believe he was a personal injury lawyer).   They met while defendant worked at coffee shop, and furniture retail.    There's a lot that was unsaid in this case too.   Lawyer was paying $39 an hour for design services, and paid $3000 plus.   

$2750 is a deposit for a wood feature wall (materials), defendant claims he bought materials,   Wood was never delivered or installed, and lawyer claims the invoice is phony, and JJ is going to call.     The invoice has the company name misspelled on the stationary, so it's obviously a total fake.    JJ's call results in a fictitious company, (Demiter v. Demeter), with no record of his transaction.   $2750 for lawyer.

[AngelaHunter]

On 5/21/2019 at 6:06 AM, nora1992 said:

Watching the girlfriend, I don't think it was a physical therapy appointment she was rushing home for.  And the more I watched her speak, the more I wanted to put her behind the 20 foot walls.  She seemed much more certain of her privilege than he did; "affluenza" describes him perfectly, but she seems downright sinister.

Oh, my. Just watched this and as usual, you peeps didn't let me down. Mom is paying for therapy for this girl? Sorry, mom. Therapy is not working. Silly coin-throwing Bevis x Ichabod was idiotic (I just wish he'd pull this stunt on some big biker dude) and silly, but I agree the skimpily-dressed, sociopathic g/f with the staring, glazed eyes was scary - at sixteen! Where were the parents of these two weirdos? Maybe they've already suffered enough shame brought to them by their progeny to last them their whole lives.  Creepy baby boy weeping in the hall was entertaining. What was his countersuit anyway? Plaintiff said mean things about him on his little FB page? Oh, the horror! I guess he refrained from pitching a hissy fit and throwing things in the hall because he knew Byrd was probably itching for the chance to break that beanpole in half. Messed-up girl says about plainitff, "I think she saw this as an opportunity for insurance."  Like, what? Is the girl deranged or merely very stupid?

[Reality police]

8 hours ago, PennyPie18 said:

Did anyone else wonder if she was a male  cross-dresser?? The way she carried on made me think she was trying too hard to act like an hysterical woman. I went from "she's a he"  to "she's a she" with huge butt implants and a truly abominably wig!  Still not sure🤔!

When she went out of the courtroom I noticed her right back pocket. It was either a bad implant or she had a large phone in there. She was already bumpy, she sure didn't need that!

[4Sibes Redux]

4 hours ago, AngelaHunter said:

Messed-up girl says about plainitff, "I think she saw this as an opportunity for insurance."  Like, what? Is the girl deranged or merely very stupid?

When I heard her say this, I thought that she really has no clue as to what insurance is, but she sure thought this was a damnable statement. 

[CrazyInAlabama]

3 p.m., both reruns-

Baseball Bat Rage!-Two cousins leased an apartment together, until the big fight over rent non-payment for one month, and finding out plaintiff was cheating with the defendant's girlfriend.    During the fight, the defendant  picked up a baseball bat, and whacked the dining room set, two TVs, and other stuff.   Plaintiff gets $4k, for back rent, and damaged property.  

Suspicious Sublease?-Plaintiff suing former tenant defendant for non-payment of rent.   Plaintiff was friendly with defendant's wife, when couple separated the man moved into the home.   Man didn't pay last two months rent, moved out, sublet to someone else.   $2400 for plaintiff.  What a nothing case.  

President Obama Dancing!?-Plaintiff suing former roommate for unpaid rent and damages, defendant claims she never signed the roommate addendum (there is a signed addendum from litigants).   Defendant moved out in end of November, but left her stuff behind through the end of December, so she owes rent for three months, plus part of another month.  Plaintiff claims defendant trashed the apartment, but the picture is the Obama's dancing.   $538 for rent to plaintiff, Obama's get photo credit, and that's all.  

Tree Root Ruckus!-Plaintiff suing defendant for driveway cracks from tree roots, but defendant removed tree right after he was notified.  (I remember this, the driveway was very old, and looks like the neighbors cracked driveways due to settling and age, just like my forehead).    Plaintiff claims when she moved into her house in 2001, there was no driveway damage, but by the time the defendants moved in the driveway cracked.    However, the drive way is not cracked from the side towards the tree, but from street to house, and that's not from root damage.   I wonder if there are drainage or water lines under the driveway?   Because the line is very straight front to back on the driveway, and the driveway is buckling, so I don't think it's the tree damaging the driveway next door.     

Defendants have pictures showing the other driveways on the street cracked from the street up the middle of the driveways too.    The plaintiff is a pain in the butt neighbor, and thinks she's getting a totally new driveway out of the neighbors.   Plaintiff has a huge tree in her front yard that has raised her front sidewalk too.   If there are roots from a tree affecting the driveway, it's probably from her tree.  Plaintiff thinks she's RBG, and she's not.   I feel sorry for the defendants living next to that woman, and probably not able to escape her by moving.   Nothing for the plaintiff.

Too Drunk to Remember!?-Plaintiff suing former roommate defendant for unpaid rent.  As usual, defendant wants property back, (she didn't move suddenly, but still left a lot of stuff), and moved out leaving her junk behind.  Plaintiff gets $500, and defendant gets nothing (if she wanted her 'valuable junk', then she would have to pay 3 months rent, $1500).

Edited May 24, 2019 by CrazyInAlabama

[khyber]

On 5/23/2019 at 1:51 PM, CrazyInAlabama said:

Casanova Stallion, Heated Horses on the Loose!-  (Very few boarding barns will accept a stallion, they are great animals if you know how to handle and train them properly, but there are too many intact stallions that should never be bred. )

23 hours ago, AngelaHunter said:

Very dangerous. The people in a house near me had a stallion out in the front paddock. They must have had a mare in heat because the stallion was bucking, kicking, rearing and screaming. I was walking my dog along the public street in front and the owners yelled at me to cross the street, lest the horse busts the fence down. 

The stable I boarded at also never allowed stallions. I know someone who bought a gelding & when the mares were in heat he kept displaying stallion behavior. It got so bad that she had him checked out & it turned out that he had an undescended testicle. She had to sent him off for expensive surgery to have it removed. After that he was fine around the mares.

[CrazyInAlabama]

5 p.m., both reruns-

House Flipping Scam Artist?!-Plaintiff, prospective house flipper, suing defendant who finds houses for house flippers.    Plaintiff signed contract with defendant for house, for $75k.  Plaintiff says down payment was $5k, to defendant's company for the house, there is no contract listing the plaintiff's name.    Defendant didn't own the house, but found houses for flippers, and then got a finder's fee.   The contract from the defendant says he buys houses, sort of, from the owner, but can also assign the rights to buy the house to people like plaintiff.  If proposed buyer sucker doesn't get financing or changes their mind, then there has to be someone else who pays the defendant to buy the house, and then plaintiff would get his money back.  The house isn't currently on the market.   I wonder if the defendant is one of those who advertise we pay cash for houses, in those signs by the side of the road?  $5k to plaintiff.    

Pit Bull Mix Goes for Woman's Throat?!-Plaintiff suing defendant dog owner for damages from attack by his dogs.    It happened on a plaintiff's friend's property, where the defendant is a tenant and handyman.    One dog is a Pit/Rottweiler mix, and another is a Great Dane/Pit mix, and the third is the puppy from the other two dogs.  All three dogs were roaming on the property, but not confined to the tenant's area that is also fenced.   Photos are bad, woman's arm needed extensive stitches, bruising, etc.  Woman is lucky the fall didn't hurt her, and the dog went for her throat, and I'm guessing she had the arm injuries from blocking the dog from her throat.   Bet the other dog was in heat, and attacking dog is still intact.   $5k to plaintiff. 

Unfair Child Support!-Plaintiff woman suing defendant man for bail (arrested for back child support).   Defendant claims he owes nothing, and was falsely arrested.   Bail was $760, and paid back child support, plaintiff gets that.  

Dog Uses Bathroom in Shared Hallway?!-Plaintiff former tenant is suing landlord for place where a Mastiff relieved himself in the hallway at her back stairs for a year.   Defendant's brother now owns the property, and is the loser that owns the dog.      Defendant thinks it's fine for animals to do their business indoors, because he scattered kitty litter down.   Plaintiff was evicted, claims defendant stole her property, but defendants claim tenant and son took all of her stuff out.     

Defendants want damages to apartment.   Hardwood floor in part of plaintiff's apartment have some black paint, or stain on it, and will have to be sanded and restained.   My guess is that there was existing finish, and I bet plaintiff or some friend poured stain on top without sanding, and it dried like that.   This was a subsidized apartment, and there is no way it was approved looking like the move out pictures, the defendant brother is a jerk, but plaintiff trashed the apartment.   $2500 to defendants for repair, and cleaning, but because of the dog, plaintiff gets $2500, nothing to anyone.  

Edited May 25, 2019 by CrazyInAlabama

[zillabreeze]

8 hours ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

Dog Uses Bathroom in Shared Hallway?!

And nasty dude was waving papers around to apparently explain that "stink don't travel".  I wanted to see that!  

Seriously, JJ wastes time on boring cell phone nonsense and dude has PROOF that his dogs shit don't stink?  This required all 30 minutes and maybe next day.

Inquiring minds want to know!!!!

One of my girls can have an oops three rooms and two hallways over and I'm out of a dead sleep.

JJ was a selfish bitch for not letting us hear that "evidence"

[Oldcrone]

I totally get where the plantiff's were mad about the dog peeing/pooping in their yard. Years ago, I lived in a very nice neighborhood, but every day some small dog would poop in front of my mailbox. Every. Damn. Day! So, I put some poop bags on my mailbox. Never used. Then put a note that said "Poop happens...for your convenience in picking up after your pet" with an arrow pointing to the bags. Still, Poop. Every. Damn. Day. Finally, I was home from work and saw a man walking his small dog and watched as this dog pooped in front of my mailbox! Oh, hell no! I grabbed my dog's leash and said "lets go for a walk, Grimm!" I followed the Poop Offender to his house, and as he was walking up his walkway, I loudly said to my dog, "Go potties!!! Go Potties!!" I should mention that Grimm was my first Mastiff, and weighed about 190 lbs! The man was furious. I politely said, your dog poops in my yard, my dog will poop in your yard.  Oddly enough, I never had poop in my front yard again! Still laughing 25 years later!

[CrazyInAlabama]

In the dog damaging the plaintiff's lawn, I think the fact that the neighbor next door, that the plaintiffs had a restraining order against, was the witness for the defendant, showed that it was all part of retaliation in the neighborhood fight.   The defendant acting like the entire case was a joke made me think it was deliberate too.

Old rerun for Saturday-Bash or Crash?-Plaintiff suing defendant neighbor and girlfriend.   This is a he said / she said case.   Plaintiff claims defendant slammed his body into her car causing damage.   The defendant's girlfriend filed for a restraining order against plaintiff, and the order was denied.   Defendant man claims plaintiff tried to run over him with her car.  

Defendant claims everything started with his dog getting out, and triggering a verbal arguments with neighbors (no, I don't see why this is relevant).    Defendant claims plaintiff sped up, aimed at her driveway, and grazed him with her car, and hit him when he was in his front yard.  Damage was to the back of the plaintiff's car, not the front where the man claimed he was hit.         

The trailer park sounds like the kind an interesting place to live.     I don't believe a word of the defendant's feeble old lady defense, or the plaintiff's overly dramatic stories.     Plaintiff claims defendant is preparing for another personal injury lawsuit, from another hit by a car a month later.     Plaintiff also is on Worker's Comp. for a work accident two years ago.   Case dismissed.            

[configdotsys]

For my NYC peeps: I notice that they are airing a single classic episode in NYC again on channel 2 at 5 a.m. on Saturday mornings. 

[CrazyInAlabama]

3 p.m. reruns-

Grandmother Glam Shots Scam?!-Plaintiff suing son's ex, and her new boyfriend, over ex using grandmother's credit for photo shoot with the grand kids, soon to be ex-daughter-in-law, and boyfriend.     It's a photo 'contest' where the granddaughters go to a photo shop, and the photo shoot is free for the sitting, but photo packages are expensive, and then one kid wins a cheap trophy.    Grandma/plaintiff paid for the initial package of photos, then the studio wanted to do a wall photo of the grand daughter for a huge price, and then a month or two later the parent gets the wall portrait (almost $150 for each granddaughter), and the grandma paid.    The original package was almost $1000 total.     

However, this morphed into almost $5k on grandma's credit.  This was by ex-daughter in law for a huge Christmas package with the boyfriend included in the pictures.    Christmas pictures were not included in the money the grandmother authorized.       There are bills for almost $4,000 over the $1000 the grandma paid for.      $433 for plaintiff, because there is no proof for the other $4k in picture costs, and who was in them. 

My guess is grandma really thought she was going to get the other grandkids, and her adult kids pictures free from Byrd, and I bet that's exactly what happened.    

Stepsister Nightmare!-Plaintiff house owner bought a house for stepsister to rent, for her, grandmother, etc. to live in, is suing defendant stepsister for unpaid rent, eviction fees, and new locks.    Plaintiff was upset when she found out that it wouldn't just be grandma, stepsister, stepsister's boyfriend too.   Stepsister was supposed to paint a little, fix some other small things, and never paid rent.    Stepsister says she did pay utilities, but plaintiff says defendant didn't pay the utilities.   Stepsister was also unemployed from the a month or so after moving in.     Plaintiff had to evict stepsister, and boyfriend, and now has paying tenants.    $5000 to plaintiff.  (Sadly, I bet plaintiff gets frozen out for this by stepmom, and her family)

$50,000 Custody Battle!-Plaintiff suing defendant for loan for custody fight with late wife's family for their kids.   First loan was repaid, for $2500.    Plaintiff eventually lost, and grandparents have custody of the children.   Defendant isn't even sure how old the kids were when the grandparents took custody.    Defendant wants his cut of mother's house sale, but and mother is still alive, lives with the plaintiffs,  and may need her money.    Plaintiff loaned $6k to defendant, and he repaid nothing.   $5k to plaintiffs. 

[CrazyInAlabama]

5 p.m. first one new, second is rerun-

Children Trapped in a Skirmish-Plaintiff Mother suing defendant daughter for assaulting her two younger siblings, return of property, and property damage.  Daughter/defendant was renting rooms in a rental property where grandmother, and her own child lives, owned by her mother.    Defendant came to mother's house, and found her ex working there for mother, and went ballistic.    Assault charges are thrown out because no police or medical reports.    Plaintiff claims for stolen property thrown out, no receipts.     

Move out pictures are all the mother has.     Mother has receipt for clean out by estranged husband's company, so daughter looks like she swallowed a lemon.    Locks were changed by mother, but after the last day daughter paid rent for.   Defendant gets her dryer back.   Plaintiff gets nothing. 

Collision He Said, She Said-Plaintiff car owner suing defendant for car damage from an accident.    Plaintiff's mother was driving the car, she was going straight across intersection, and defendant was turning left and hit plaintiff.   Defendant had insurance and it covered the plaintiff's damage.    Defendant's insurance dropped coverage for reasons that will never be known to us.    Defendant just gave up on getting his brand new Jeep back (No, it makes no sense to anyone).   Plaintiff suing for deductible, and gets that $500.  

Vicious Pit Bull Kills Again-Plaintiff Yorkie owner suing defendant Pit Bull owner for dog attack.   Plaintiff brought the surviving dog, a Chi-mix I think, and the Yorkie's ashes to court.   She also left the Yorkies in the back yard for hours.   Except, Yorkie owner had found the pits in her yard before, and didn't fix her side of the fence to keep the pits out of her yard.       Plaintiff claims the defendants were supposed to fix the fence from their side.    Defendant claims the plaintiff dogs came in their yard, and were attacked.    Plaintiff's witness, claims she saw defendant beating their own pit with a big board, the dogs were hollering, witness claims the pits were on the plaintiff's property fighting.      

The pictures of the fence are huge chunks missing, the pits in the plaintiff's yard, and the fence belongs to the plaintiff, but she thought it was defendant's job to fix the fence.   Niece is only adult at defendant's house, and claims she saw the little dogs in her back yard, and the dogs ran back in their own yard.    Niece is so full of it.     Defendants also had a litter of puppies too.   Landlady was told about the fence, and the dog issues.    (JJ does her usual "Pit owners don't bother me about this).     It was irresponsible for the plaintiff to leave her two small dogs unattended in the yard.     Defendant has renter's insurance, and was fostering the dogs for months, but claims they weren't covered by it.    Defendant claims she re-homed the dogs.   Normally, JJ would have just given the vet bills, because the little dog owner was careless.   However, the neighbors and their lies were so disgusting, JJ went with the purchase price of the little dog.    

Plaintiff gets $2450  for vet bills, and to replace the dog.

Edited May 28, 2019 by CrazyInAlabama

[parrotfeathers]

Any idea why he would leave his virtually new vehicle at the impound lot and just let it be repossessed???   The "drop the insurance" thing sounds odd.  He either had it at the time of the accident or he didn't.

[zillabreeze]

In the new accident case.  JJ rightfully called it defendant's fault.  But then, she nastily craps on plaintiff asking for help to pay for transportation while their car was in shop.  To GET TO WORK!!!

What a bitch.  Couple had jobs!  Couple had insurance!  Perhaps the working stiffs had to forgo the extra premium bucks for rental car coverage.  They should have just walked out to the driveway and picked their OTHER Limo to get to work.

HRH Sheindlin may have decided the claim was inflated.  So, how bout a "little rough justice" and give them something?  

It's that haughty F-U  "you just shouldn't be poor" attitude that sends working people to title loans and other lending predators.  Eventually, they get in so deep, just scraping by and then they finally say "F-It.  I'll just go on the Byrd Financial Plan.

The mega wealthy just don't get it.  HRH probably spent more on last night's appetizer than that couple spent on a weeks worth of groceries.

Keep it up HRH.  Ask Marie Antoinette how that shit plays out.

[khyber]

9 hours ago, zillabreeze said:

IWhat a bitch.  Couple had jobs!  Couple had insurance!  Perhaps the working stiffs had to forgo the extra premium bucks for rental car coverage.  They should have just walked out to the driveway and picked their OTHER Limo to get to work.

It's that haughty F-U  "you just shouldn't be poor" attitude that sends working people to title loans and other lending predators.  Eventually, they get in so deep, just scraping by and then they finally say "F-It.  I'll just go on the Byrd Financial Plan.

Yes, I think Judy just has no idea how it is for people who are just getting by. You choose the basic insurance because its all you can afford. You can't get your car out of impound until you get some extra money, its easy to get far behind.

[funky-rat]

13 hours ago, parrotfeathers said:

Any idea why he would leave his virtually new vehicle at the impound lot and just let it be repossessed???   The "drop the insurance" thing sounds odd.  He either had it at the time of the accident or he didn't.

I think it MIGHT be this (because this just happened to my cousin): Defendant had 100% financing on the vehicle (paid no down payment or had no trade-in), and/or might have been underwater on it (rolled another loan from another car in to this one - made that mistake myself once and only once).  He didn't have gap insurance, and the accident left him with a deficit that he couldn't pay, so he just said "Screw it".  The first year of payments on a car are interest and fees, so on a brand new car, he would have a deficit that the insurance wouldn't cover (because it only covers the car itself).  My cousin pulled out on a blind corner and got creamed, and they didn't buy gap insurance.  They also rolled another car's loan in to that car (I warned them not to do it).  They owed way more money than they could pay back (like $7000).  I'm not sure what they're doing about it.

As for him getting dropped, he could have crappy insurance, or could have a history of tickets and/or accidents.  State Farm dropped my mom when she was in her 20's for getting 2 speeding tickets in a certain amount of time.

[CrazyInAlabama]

My guess is that the 'just let the Jeep go guy' did exactly what you guessed.    My understanding is that with some finance companies if you have outstanding payments, or any other excuse, than gap insurance doesn't come with your lease or financing.     I'm also wondering if the defendant, we can call him Car Smasher, actually was the owner of the Jeep?   Maybe it was another case that he was driving it, and the insurance, and everything else was in someone else's name.  

[SRTouch]

1 hour ago, funky-rat said:

I think it MIGHT be this (because this just happened to my cousin): Defendant had 100% financing on the vehicle (paid no down payment or had no trade-in), and/or might have been underwater on it (rolled another loan from another car in to this one - made that mistake myself once and only once).  He didn't have gap insurance, and the accident left him with a deficit that he couldn't pay, so he just said "Screw it".  The first year of payments on a car are interest and fees, so on a brand new car, he would have a deficit that the insurance wouldn't cover (because it only covers the car itself).  My cousin pulled out on a blind corner and got creamed, and they didn't buy gap insurance.  They also rolled another car's loan in to that car (I warned them not to do it).  They owed way more money than they could pay back (like $7000).  I'm not sure what they're doing about it.

As for him getting dropped, he could have crappy insurance, or could have a history of tickets and/or accidents.  State Farm dropped my mom when she was in her 20's for getting 2 speeding tickets in a certain amount of time.

Probably correct. Along with same thinking as 'needing' the latest and greatest cell phone or that 90 inch monster smart tv. Just trade in the old phone and pay an extra $10 a month until the next even better phone or bigger tv comes along. Never mind fact that you never actually OWN anything - just keep piling up the debt until you're overwhelmed and declare bankruptcy.

[parrotfeathers]

Yes I think ya'll are correct about Smasher and why he just let the car go.

[funky-rat]

41 minutes ago, SRTouch said:

Probably correct. Along with same thinking as 'needing' the latest and greatest cell phone or that 90 inch monster smart tv. Just trade in the old phone and pay an extra $10 a month until the next even better phone or bigger tv comes along. Never mind fact that you never actually OWN anything - just keep piling up the debt until you're overwhelmed and declare bankruptcy.

I found the car I wanted and in the color I wanted, and I had one more year left on a 3 year/ $3500 loan for a pick-up my husband bought (my car was paid off).  I let the dealership talk me in to taking that last year worth of payments and roll it in to my new loan.  I did (this was 2001 - I'm now older and wiser).  Bad mistake.  Thankfully I took out an extended warranty, because I needed it.  I'd have been up the creek otherwise.

I never bought new cars, so I never did gap insurance.  About 5 months before I bought my first brand new car, a friend's daughter also bought one, and our friend insisted she take out gap insurance, even though it upped her payment.  Three months after she bought the car, she was in an accident.  Accident wasn't her fault, but there was still a deficit, even after the other insurance paid for it (car was totaled).  And that was enough to get me to buy it, because I would have never thought of something like that.

Edited May 28, 2019 by funky-rat

[poeticlicensed]

1 hour ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

My guess is that the 'just let the Jeep go guy' did exactly what you guessed.    My understanding is that with some finance companies if you have outstanding payments, or any other excuse, than gap insurance doesn't come with your lease or financing.     I'm also wondering if the defendant, we can call him Car Smasher, actually was the owner of the Jeep?   Maybe it was another case that he was driving it, and the insurance, and everything else was in someone else's name.  

My guess is that the car got towed and rather than call his insurance (which I speculate he hadn't been making payments on) and arrange to have the car moved to a body shop, he let it sit in the tow yard, where the fees accrue exponentially. Once he figured out there would be no coverage, and he was paying $600+/month on the note, he figured, screw it. He's the reason I pay so much for insurance. 

[CrazyInAlabama]

3 p.m. reruns-

Sleep Number Mattress Thief-Plaintiff (SSMO? Sainted Single Mother of Who Knows How Many kids) suing father of one of her kids over a sleep number mattress.    SSMO? lost custody, because there is an ongoing CPS investigation against plaintiff.     SSMO? also has a newborn with new boyfriend, and seems to be pregnant again.     Defendant has mattress, and he's paid all of the mattress payments.   $1028 to plaintiff for the mattress.   

Caregiver Rip-Off-Plaintiff care giver suing defendant care company owner for unpaid wages.    Defendant is paid by private clients, not by government sources.   Defendant makes $24 an hour, and pays others $8 or less to do the actual care giving.   When there is an overnight scheduled, there's a flat fee instead of hourly.    24 hours rate defendant paid $170 to the plaintiff.   $1,000 to plaintiff.

Dueling Couples-Plaintiffs suing defendants for unpaid rent, etc.    The two couples shared an apartment, and the split was as rotten as it usually is.     Defendants owe $119 to plaintiffs, and that's all they get.       

Drug Addict Beats Boyfriend-Plaintiff ex-boyfriend is suing defendant ex-girlfriend for assault, while she was on drugs, and girlfriend made false police report that he hit her, and tried to throw her from the car.    Sadly, defendant doesn't seem to be well, and I wonder if she'll make it through the case.   Plaintiff says defendant called him for help, and a ride, and plaintiff claims she started a drug binge, and assaulted him.    Then plaintiff says he was arrested from defendant claiming he assaulted her, and charges were later dropped.    Woman claims man pushed her out of car, she was dragged on a gravel road, and defendant has zero medical records, police report, or proof of anything.  $5k to plaintiff. 

Uninsured Menace-Plaintiff with right of way is suing defendant for running a stop sign, hitting plaintiff's car, and defendant was. as usual. uninsured.   Defendant car is owned by one sister, driven by other sister, and insured by owner/sister, but not at the time of the accident.  Plaintiff has proof the defendant's car was not insured, with the usual lame excuses.    Defendants tried to get plaintiff's insurance to pay for their damages.      Plaintiff gets $2975.     

Edited May 29, 2019 by CrazyInAlabama

[CrazyInAlabama]

5 p.m. first episode is new, second is a rerun-

Don't Pee on My Leg and Tell Me It's Raining-Plaintiff marina owner is  suing defendant for hitting his pontoon boat.    Accident happened in May, and police report wasn't filed until July.  Plaintiff is totally unprepared for court, and seems to think this is all a joke.   This is when JJ utters the immortal words "Don't Pee on My Leg and Tell Me It's Raining".      

Plaintiff witness is much more prepared, and coherent, heard a loud noise, and saw the plaintiff's parked pontoon boat sitting with defendant's boat rammed into it.   Defendant was only asked to pay the insurance deductible, but refused.   Defendant is a fool, and admits he didn't like the plaintiff parking his boat by the seawall.    Case is dismissed, no one in the entire case is credible.   

Hair Stylist Left in the Dark-Plaintiff hair stylist renter suing defendant building landlord (renter) for lost salon property, damage, and security deposit after an illegal eviction.   Salon is part of a huge building, and it's sublet by the defendant.  Lease says building is only to be used for a single family residence.    Building was sold, and new owner of building hasn't turned on the utilities yet.    Plaintiff came to work to find the utilities off, so that makes it constructive eviction (nothing for former landlord).     Plaintiff was locked out, and two days later landlord called her and said all of her property in the salon was gone.   There was no forced entry to the building, so the burglars must have used keys, only accessed by another renter.    Sadly, since the place was opened with a key to only one door, then it's not the landlady's responsibility.   $125 for plaintiff.   Plaintiff should sue the other tenant.  

Solar Tree Trimming Disaster-Plaintiff homeowners are suing solar panel installer for tree trimming damages.    Solar panel installer/salesman chopped the top of trees off to allow sun access for the solar panels.   Salesman/installer is not licensed, bonded or insured to trim trees, but charged $500 to trim the trees.    Defendant didn't trim the tree, he chopped the top of it off, and damaged a fence.     Some trees that were savaged belonged to the HOA, not the home owners, but the HOA fined the homeowners, damaged a sprinkler line, and other items.      Plaintiff gets $1450 for the HOA fines, and $1650 total with other damages.        

[Brattinella]

1 hour ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

Don't Pee on My Leg and Tell Me It's Raining

This line FILLED my little heart with joy!  JJ actually said it!

[CrazyInAlabama]

3 p.m. reruns-

Dog Mauling Caught on Tape-Plaintiff small dog owner, suing defendant neighbors for vet bills, pain and suffering, and harassment after plaintiff dog escaped their fence, and defendant's dog  mauled plaintiff little dog.   There is video of the attack.    Video shows plaintiff's dog escaping the fence, wandering on the road, around the defendant's trailer, back onto the road, where the attacking dog attacked the plaintiff's dog.      This is the trailer park case where the plaintiffs had eight security cameras.   Plaintiff's dog was euthanized from injuries the same day.    Defendant dog was going to be quarantined for 14 days, and was put down later, because the defendant's couldn't afford the fines, and bills.      Case dismissed.   

Cruising Online Crush-Plaintiff and defendant met on Plenty of Fish, and booked a cruise together.    Plaintiff is suing for cruise expenses, because after the refund/cancellation period, they broke up, and defendant never paid for the cruise.       I'm not sure what happened, but my air conditioner guy was more vital right then.     

No Job, No Car-Plaintiff suing defendant car dealer for her car back     Defendants will keep car and sell it to get their money back.     Plaintiff stopped paying when she was fired, after she became pregnant.  $600 for plaintiffs, and defendants will resale car.  

Roommate Retaliation Party-Plaintiff suing ex-roommate defendant for unpaid rent.    Third day after move-in text was sent to defendant about living conditions, noise, and she wanted to move out.     Plaintiff complained about other roommates, and fighting, and nasty words, and being loud, including sexy noises apparently.      Defendant gives back everything, since she already had a tenant that wanted that room back.  

[CrazyInAlabama]

5 p.m. both are reruns-

Kid Carnival Fail-Plaintiff did a huge carnival for her kid's birthday, including a train ride, ferris wheel, and bouncy houses.   She rented bouncy house from defendant, and defendant claims outrageous amount for bouncy house damage.   Replacement tarps are $99 each, but plaintiff's card was charged $2353.    Plaintiff at first said bouncy house, and other things would be in her back yard, but aisle between houses is too narrow, so it had to be in the front yard, and street.     Rental price was carousel jumper, pop corn machine, soda machine, and bouncy house, it was $590.   For three tarps the plaintiff wants a lot more than the $297 the receipt shows, plus he wants money for damages that he can't prove.       Defendant gets her $2353 back minus $297. 

Attempted Murder and Million Dollar Bail-Plaintiff suing younger brother defendant for bail and attorney fees, for attempted murder, bail was $1.2 million, down to $300k, and downgraded to $250k, with $7,000 bail cost to bondsman.    Charges were eventually dropped, and no one was ever arrested for case.    Defendant was in jail for a week, until bail came through.     Plaintiff wants his $4k ($3k for bail, $1k for attorney).   Plaintiff gets $4,000.

Get Out--You're a Squatter-Plaintiff tenant suing defendant landlord for moving expenses, threats, breach of contract, and harassment, so they can afford to move.   However,  plaintiff, five kids, and wife don't pay rent, $1375 a month, and did pay security deposit.   Paid through July, part of August, and nothing after that.   $4975 is unpaid for rent, and tenant stopped paying rent because promised pool wasn't in back yard.     Plaintiff claims defendant threatened his children's lives, said landlord cut off utilities, and was going to burn house down after locking it.   Woman besides wife lived there for three months, then wife moved in, with the five kids.     Case dismissed, plaintiff told to move out using the unpaid rent (apparently house has major deficiencies).          

Maserati Madness-Plaintiff suing defendant for bad chrome matte wrapping job on car.   Wrapping job does look bad from the photos.    The job is absolutely awful, and looks totally amateur.    I would be a happy camper if the defendant brushed his messy hair, he looks like he just rolled out of bed, and ran to court.    Plaintiff gets $ 2500 (he actually wanted both doors replaced)

Edited May 29, 2019 by CrazyInAlabama

[AlleC17]

On 5/23/2019 at 10:51 AM, CrazyInAlabama said:

3 p.m. reruns-

Bike Buyer's Remorse-Plaintiffs suing defendant motorcycle shop owner and mechanic over repairs on an old bike.   Plaintiffs want all of their payments back, even though defendant claims he fixed the bike as requested.     Nothing for the litigants, and they deserve nothing.

Cash Cow House?-Plaintiff landlord suing defendant /former tenant that was rented by woman, husband, and three kids.   Plaintiff alleges damages, but the place was owned by someone else for many years, a student rental for a year, and property was never improved except for an outside paint job.    This case illustrates why you take pictures before move in, and on move out for a rental property.   Before pictures from craigslist look good, but former renter denies the house looked that good when she moved in.  Plaintiff gets nothing, and defendant gets her security deposit back. 

Casanova Stallion, Heated Horses on the Loose!- The plaintiff is a retired veterinarian.      Stallion from neighbors property ran her mares through the fence, and severely injured them.    The plaintiff's witness is right, stallions need special fencing, and can be dangerous.  Defendant thinks the injury to the horses is funny.   The existing fence is five strand barb wire.    Plaintiff wants boarding for a year, because she couldn't leave her horses on the property.    There is a criminal case for the vet bills, that had to be heard before the case was heard by JJ.    Criminal case was defendant allowing horse to run at large, $2400 fine, community service, probation, $273 restitution.    

Plaintiff wants boarding fees because she couldn't leave the horses next to the marauding stallion.    JJ doesn't have a clue how major a surgery spaying a horse is, instead of gelding the stallion.     JJ should leave horse cases to people who actually know about horses.   Nothing for the plaintiff, and defendant is still a huge jerk. (Very few boarding barns will accept a stallion, they are great animals if you know how to handle and train them properly, but there are too many intact stallions that should never be bred. )

I am sooooo glad I deleted this one.  I thought I had heard that the horse (or one horse) had died and so I erased this unwatched. 

[CrazyInAlabama]

3 p.m. reruns-

Payback Break-In-Plaintiff suing ex-boyfriend defendant for property from their joint rental house.    She's claiming a refrigerator, dryer, bed, dining set, TV, and other property from their joint house, that they split bills on.      Now the truth comes out, plaintiff is angry that man now lives with another woman.  Plaintiff also broke into the house after they split up.    Defendant will pay a little to keep the property he wants, woman gets the bed back.        

Grandmother's Meddling- This is the rerun where Grandmother plaintiff spent a lot for clothes for the grandchildren, and sues the children's father when the clothes aren't used, or returned.  I guess the grand kids didn't want to look like grandmother's idea of school attire.    Grandmother also brags about ironing everything for the poor kids too.     Apparently, Grandmother rules the roost, because children's mother lives with her, and says nothing  while Grandmother whines.    Grandmother gets nothing.   

Fairytale Pit Bull Story-Plaintiff suing after man with nine pit bulls is accused of allowing two to attacking plaintiff's dog.   Plaintiff was walking her leashed German Shepherd on the street in front of a cul de sac, when two dogs from the middle of the cul de sac attacked her dog, and latched on to it's throat.    The defendant, and another man came out when the attack started.    (Defendant breeds pits, including the stud that is not even two yet, so he has nine dogs, and multiple litters).    Defendant finally pulled his male pit off the German Shepherd.   

Defendant says he was walking his dog on leash, and claims the German Shepherd attacked his dog, and he wants vet and medical bills.   Animal control visits that day, quarantines his dog for 10 days, and man was fined for something too (never find out what happened).   Plaintiff has animal control report, and police reports.     Neighbors told police that both of man's dogs were off leash, and attacked the other dog.    $3900 for vet bills for plaintiff. 

30-Year Friendship Fail-Plaintiff suing defendant ex-girlfriend for loan to pay for car, instead plaintiff is alleged to use the money for other things.  Defendant needed $800 for the car, borrowed from the plaintiff, and he gave the money to his witness (defendant's sister) to give to her.    Strangely, the sister / witness lives with her own child, and the defendant sister still lives with them too.   (Defendant needs emergency hair conditioning now, her hair looks so dry and frizzy it could break off).    $710 to plaintiff, which is minus the $90 that defendant actually repaid.

Edited May 31, 2019 by CrazyInAlabama

[CrazyInAlabama]

5 p.m., first is new, second is rerun-

Ice Cream Parlor Owner No so Sweet- Plaintiff contractor hired by Ice Cream Parlor owner to supervise shop remodel, for design services, and engineering fees.    Defendant claims plaintiff sent her hateful texts, and other messages, but his messages to her aren't threatening or hateful.   However, hers are awful.  Then defendant started an on-going campaign of harassment and threats, and on-line bullying of the plaintiff, and Better Business Bureau.      Plaintiff gets $2500. 

Trucking Venture Disaster-(Men are cousins) Plaintiff suing defendant for costs from a trucking business they co-owned.   Defendant financed this, and plaintiff was to drive and do deliveries.  With the initial trip they were supposed to clear $6400, and split it evenly.   Company was not paid $2800 of the deliveries, because of damages, late deliveries, etc.   I missed the end, so I hope plaintiff received nothing. 

Waffle Whammy-Plaintiff bride suing defendant caterer for an engagement party that went badly.    Caterer was almost two hours late arriving, without set up or anything ready to go.  The omelet, and waffle bar were delayed.      Two friends had to go out and get food at a local drive in.   (I love the plaintiffs outfit and hair, so court appropriate, and lovely too)  $450 for plaintiff.   (I gather from the defendants rant in the hall that the plaintiff was on TV before?  So what does that have to do with him being two hours late?)

Edited May 30, 2019 by CrazyInAlabama

[Toaster Strudel]

I found the ice cream parlor narrative hard to follow, but it seems to me like the plaintiff was a raging douche.

[CrazyInAlabama]

3 p.m. reruns (most seem to be from 2015)-

Nice Guy or Nasty Drunk-Plaintiff suing defendant for bar fight, plaintiff lost.   Bar owner says plaintiff deserved what happened, since he's a nasty drunk.   Case dismissed. 

Car Rental Racket-Plaintiff car renter (rented car while his regular car was being worked on) suing defendant  for stealing car keys, and wrecking rental car.   Plaintiff claims friend never drove a rental car in his name before, but girlfriend told JJ the truth.   Defendant claims plaintiff rented the car for her to drive, and he had rented cars for her to drive before.  Defendant needed car when she came to town, to visit her children.    JJ says that defendant wasn't named on the insurance for the rental car, so plaintiff is on the hook for damages.  Case dismissed.   

Lovers or Roommates?-Plaintiff suing defendant (former live in girlfriend) over belongings left when he moved out of the joint rental house.    Plaintiff claims they were romantic, but defendant says they were only roommates.    Defendant claims plaintiff stripped the house to the bare walls when he left.   Plaintiff paid everything, and defendant paid very little.   Plaintiff gets his stuff back if he picks it up in the next five days.     Defendant claims he assaulted her, JJ isn't believing it. (JJ looks at the text messages on the defendant's phone, and declines to scroll through them, because they're nasty).     $100 to plaintiff, plus his property back.  

Case dismissed, except plaintiff gets his property back. 

Dangerous Biker Boy-Plaintiff claims a 7 year old boy ran into her parked car with a bicycle.  Plaintiff's witness saw child hit car with bicycle.  $1500 for plaintiff, for deductible, and rims. 

[configdotsys]

I was confused in the ice cream parlor case but had the defendant pegged as a shrew who would drive any service personnel crazy.

Not familiar with how contractors work but it sounded to me as though the defendant wanted to renovate the shop for the cheapest price possible. The plaintiff, a GC, told her that she could hire him as the GC and then hire her own subcontractors to do the actual work, I guess instead of using the more expensive people he would contract with?

But for some reason, the GC, after receiving $1925 from the defendant (was that just a fee of some kind?) went to the city and told them that ice cream lady was using or planning to use an unlicensed plumber? Is that what happened? I got lost with what was going on there. If ice cream lady was going to hire plumbers, carpenters and whatever else they needed herself on the cheap, what did she need the plaintiff for?

[CrazyInAlabama]

5 p.m. reruns-

Vandalism Excuse at Its Finest-Plaintiff suing defendant, former friend and current neighbor for damaging her property, stolen items, surveillance system costs, and harassment.    Defendant doesn't deny the property damage.    It all started with a kerfuffle over gift cards they gave for Christmas, escalated over a purse purchase, then the mobiles were cut down, and defendant claims she replaced the old mobiles with new ones.  .  Defendant seems totally out of control.    JJ tells defendant to stop harassing plaintiff, but I see no hope for this relationship getting better.  Case is dismissed.  

Amazing Townhouse Profit-Plaintiff suing defendant former tenant for junk removal, Plaintiff sold property, made a profit on townhouse, and has no cause of action.   Security deposit was $1897, and tenant wants it back.  Plaintiff already had arbitration over this with the property manager, and tenant, and tenant gets his security back.   Plaintiff claims there were over $50k in damages-what a crock.  

Great Pyrenees Attacks Delivery Boy-I remember this.        Plaintiff was going to pick up a check taped to the door, leave the prescription, and a little kid opened the door, and the dog bit the plaintiff.    After the bite, plaintiff's friend called 911.   Bite mark on hand is pretty ugly.    After the doctor, the plaintiff called a lawyer, and lawyer refused case, because there is no home owner's insurance.     $1,800 is the doctor bill, plaintiff gets the bill paid.  Defendant dog owner claims the attack never happened.  

The Judge's Nail Appointment-Plaintiff suing defendant cousin for car plaintiff for a car she claims defendant stole from her.  Car wasn't running, cousin wanted to fix it, and buy it.  Cousin/defendant took the car, repaired it, and title is now in defendant and her daughter's name.   Plaintiff wants $3500 for car.  Defendant says she agree to pay $500, actually paid $300, and owes $200.   Plaintiff receives $200 more, and that's it.  

[Byrd is the Word]

On 5/29/2019 at 5:59 PM, CrazyInAlabama said:

Kid Carnival Fail-Plaintiff did a huge carnival for her kid's birthday, including a train ride, ferris wheel, and bouncy houses.   She rented bouncy house from defendant, and defendant claims outrageous amount for bouncy house damage.   Replacement tarps are $99 each, but plaintiff's card was charged $2353. 

This is another case of people with limited resources spending huge sums of money of parties. I will never understand that. 

On 5/29/2019 at 5:59 PM, CrazyInAlabama said:

Attempted Murder and Million Dollar Bail

As an older brother who has literally and figuratively bailed younger siblings out of trouble I completely empathized with the plaintiff and have a ton of respect for him. I hope the little brother gets his shit together as he seems like a hard working decent sort with the potential to do well, in spite of some anger and entitlement issues. And boy did he get handed a bag of trouble trouble by the authorities.   

Edited June 1, 2019 by Byrd is the Word

[AZChristian]

15 minutes ago, Byrd is the Word said:

This is another case of people with limited resources spending huge sums of money of parties. I will never understand that. 

I was trying to pay attention . . . did they ever say how old the birthday kid was?

[Byrd is the Word]

21 minutes ago, AZChristian said:

I was trying to pay attention . . . did they ever say how old the birthday kid was?

Not that I heard. But judging by the attractions my guess would be < 10. 

[AZChristian]

4 hours ago, Byrd is the Word said:

Not that I heard. But judging by the attractions my guess would be < 10. 

My guess would have been 3 or 4 . . . and the party was more for the statement made by Mom and Dad than the enjoyment of the kids.

[Florinaldo]

On 5/31/2019 at 6:58 PM, CrazyInAlabama said:

Plaintiff sold property, made a profit on townhouse, and has no cause of action.

Doesn't she? I know she did not come across as a very pleasant person, but I am not sure that the fact she made a profit selling the house magically erases the defendant's liability for the work and repairs she had to do to make the place presentable again. I know JJ looks askance at people making money, except for her, but in this case shouldn't the sale of the house and the damage done by the tenant have been treated as two distinct issues? Because of JJ's rush and interruptions, it was not made clear what the outcome and scope of the previous arbitration were or if it covered the exact same ground as this case.

On 5/31/2019 at 6:58 PM, CrazyInAlabama said:

The Judge's Nail Appointment-

I snickered when the defendant held up her nails to show JJ she understood her situation. The poor deluded fool probably thought she had made a personal connection with the judge, completely oblivious to how JJ really feels about just all of the litigants who appear in her playroom.

[CrazyInAlabama]

I think the reason JJ ruled that way for the townhouse case is, that the woman sold it already.   She had already litigated the case against the property manager, and the tenant at binding arbitration (I guess she lost there too).     The landlord didn't really seem to have much proof (my understanding is that many times proof is submitted with the filing documents), and her main complaint that she kept harping on was about carpet.     I really didn't like either litigant in the case.  

 If there was really $50k plus in house damages, then how could she lose in housing court?   I can't imagine what the tenant could do to the townhouse to amass that much damage, unless he burned it to the ground.     

Edited June 2, 2019 by CrazyInAlabama

[Florinaldo]

12 hours ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

She had already litigated the case against the property manager, and the tenant at binding arbitration (I guess she lost there too). 

But was it really the same facts and allegations as in JJ's court? That was not made clear enough, for me at least. If the substance and precise object of the claim were different, then JJ rushed her decision. If the plaintiff had already had her bite at the exact same apple, then she did derserve to have her claim dismissed.

JJ's argument boiled down to "you made ample money on the sale, then you get nothing".

Edited June 2, 2019 by Florinaldo

[Byrd is the Word]

10 hours ago, Florinaldo said:

I know JJ looks askance at people making money, except for her, but in this case shouldn't the sale of the house and the damage done by the tenant have been treated as two distinct issues? 

This is probably my number one problem with her. She has my blessing when she shames the “disabled” layabouts, deadbeat dads and SSI profiteers. But when she does the same to honest, sometimes successful and sometimes not, entrepreneurs and speculators she loses some of my respect. It begs the question: exactly how should the rest of us serfs endeavor to become even modestly wealthy?

[configdotsys]

1 hour ago, Byrd is the Word said:

This is probably my number one problem with her. She has my blessing when she shames the “disabled” layabouts, deadbeat dads and SSI profiteers. But when she does the same to honest, sometimes successful and sometimes not, entrepreneurs and speculators she loses some of my respect. It begs the question: exactly how should the rest of us serfs endeavor to become even modestly wealthy?

There have been so many times that she will say to a landlord, "Over the course of the tenancy, you made $80k in rent off this person," or is gives a lecture when someone sells a car to someone else for higher than book value. Maybe the car has a $1k sound system, or an added navigation system but she won't hear it. She just presumes that the person is ripping the other off. I have no doubt that happens on occasion but even under those circumstances, the buyer needs to know the value before they commit to buying something or it's on them. She makes it seem like it's a crime for a person to make money. 

What's even more upsetting to me though is the arrogance she displays when someone says that their video game or dvd collection has been taken, or some other item that she deems unworthy. A new video game is about $60. If it's a popular game, a used copy two years later might be $45. That is NOT chump change to working people. If someone had 10 games broken, stolen, lost, discarded, etc. by a vindictive ex, that is $450 if you use the used price. Hell, even if the person could replace all the games for $200, JJ acts like that is nothing and doesn't take that into account at all. It's not nothing. To many, that is a lot of money.

I just hate when she decides that someone's dishes, towels, food processor, etc. are taking up her time because "I din't go to law school to hear about a toaster." These things cost REAL money to people, especially when it is a roommate or relationship situation in which one of the people gets rid of or sells of the other's property. Not everyone can run out and replace their clothing and household goods at the drop of a hat.

[Florinaldo]

2 hours ago, Byrd is the Word said:

when she does the same to honest, sometimes successful and sometimes not, entrepreneurs and speculators she loses some of my respect. It begs the question: exactly how should the rest of us serfs endeavor to become even modestly wealthy?

1 hour ago, configdotsys said:

There have been so many times that she will say to a landlord, "Over the course of the tenancy, you made $80k in rent off this person,"

It is a frequent argument from her: you made money, the problem tenant is gone, so be content and forget about getting reimbursement from the damages (and sometimes even back rent). As if those facts erase the reality of damages done and the tenant's liability for them. A landlord has a reasonable expectation to both make money from the rent and to receive his property back in good condition or get compensated if it is not. Perhaps she thinks the plaintiff's half share of the award kitty is already more than generous.

I also agree that she is often disconnected when it comes to the replacement value of items like CDs and DVDs, as well as collectibles. Some items do increase (or decrease) in value over time. If you found a rare book or vase at a bargain price and then it gets stolen or destroyed, from her past rulings she would award only what you paid, not what it would actually cost to replace them if you were lucky enough to find another copy on the market. Same with out-of-print discs that sometimes fetch very high prices.

Is the principle of "making the plaintiff whole" to be read as applying only to the money disbursed and not to the actual market value of the property?

As for her "I do not go to law school for this" spiel, as I have often said this is small claims court; these small-value items and debts are exactly what those courts were created for and this is the US-wide pool from which they glean the cases which make it onto the show. If she wanted to decide on precedent-making cases she should have tried to pursue a career in the higher criminal courts for example or in constitutional law. At present, her job does at times require her to consider pots, pans, dishes, etc., all items she considers piffling and beneath her concerns; we common folk have to perform all tasks required by our jobs, but she apparently can pick and choose. She probably has no money problem with replacing one her fine Sèvres porcelain plates that gets dropped on the floor, but for many people, including some I know, being faced with the sudden loss of all of those "ordinary" household items would present a real financial hardship.

[DoctorK]

19 minutes ago, Florinaldo said:

I also agree that she is often disconnected when it comes to the replacement value of items like CDs and DVDs, as well as collectibles.

She is also pretty bad with computers and other electronic equipment. What irks me the most is with a stolen or destroyed computer, she is fast to depreciate the computer but won't listen to software costs which even for a moderate user may well be over $500 (Msoft Office plus a few other packages for example). In theory you can reload it to the new computer but the first time you open it while online, you are likely to be informed that this not a legal installation. If you have a lot of patience, you may be able to eventually talk them into acknowledging the software. God forbid you have AutoCAD!

I just take JJ these days as entertainment and a guilty pleasure, sort of like the Three Stooges (with Byrd as Moe, JJ as Larry, and litigants as Curly)

Edited June 2, 2019 by DoctorK
After thoughts

[funky-rat]

On 5/31/2019 at 6:49 PM, configdotsys said:

I was confused in the ice cream parlor case but had the defendant pegged as a shrew who would drive any service personnel crazy.

Not familiar with how contractors work but it sounded to me as though the defendant wanted to renovate the shop for the cheapest price possible. The plaintiff, a GC, told her that she could hire him as the GC and then hire her own subcontractors to do the actual work, I guess instead of using the more expensive people he would contract with?

But for some reason, the GC, after receiving $1925 from the defendant (was that just a fee of some kind?) went to the city and told them that ice cream lady was using or planning to use an unlicensed plumber? Is that what happened? I got lost with what was going on there. If ice cream lady was going to hire plumbers, carpenters and whatever else they needed herself on the cheap, what did she need the plaintiff for?

What I got from it, and I could be wrong: things were OK for a while, until the Defendant was told that Plaintiff wanted to go as cheaply as possible, and do some things that weren't up to code, and use unlicensed sub contractors.  She also then told the Defendant that she was in over her head and just wanted out of the lease, so she was going to pull something to get them out of their lease (what exactly, I was unclear on).  Defendant became concerned his name was tied up in this, and reported her.  And if that's what it was and I got it right, then I don't blame him.

She wanted someone to draw up plans, and things like that, and my thought is that her el-cheapo people couldn't do that, OR she was hoping Defendant would screw up, and that would give her an out with her lease.  One of the things he did mention was that the way she wanted to lay the business out wouldn't work (something to do with plumbing or electrical, I think), and he kept telling her that.

Edited June 3, 2019 by funky-rat

[CrazyInAlabama]

3 p.m. reruns-

Shocking Teen Assault Video-Defendant teen shows no remorse at brutally assaulting a female classmate.    The video is very graphic, and shows the defendant beating the stuffing out of the teen plaintiff, including throwing her to the ground.   Since kicking her.   Westchester County did not prosecute because he' was 14, and JJ says business as usual for that county, in spite of the video evidence, and witness statements.   Police report, and photos of injuries are submitted.    $5k to plaintiffs.   

Native American Reunion Fail-Plaintiff suing defendant (cousin-in-law)over a genealogy search, that led to plaintiff and defendant going into a business together.     Plaintiff loaned $5k, and $2k was returned, so plaintiff wants $3k.   Defendant is suing for $5k for database, and server.  The plaintiff claims the defendants are scammers.   $3k to plaintiff.   

Chihuahua Amputee-Plaintiff Chi owner sues defendant neighbor dog owner (Rottweiler/Mastiff), over an alleged biting accident under a fence resulting in the loss of the Chi's paw.  Plaintiff's daughter thought their Pit Bull attacked the dog.   Vet bills were $1400+ to plaintiff.   There is a graphic police report, and a photo of the hole, showing the hole was on plaintiff's yard, and there is no way a Mastiff's head fit through.  My guess, the little dog dug under, stuck it's paw under, and lost it to the big dog.  $1480 to plaintiff.   

[CrazyInAlabama]

5 p.m. episodes, first one new, second one rerun-

Blind Chef Scammed by Employer-Legally blind chef plaintiff claims that defendant who runs a non-profit cheated him out of wages.    The non-profit trains, and provides transportation for those with disabilities, to work in his restaurant.     The state of Arkansas pays thousands to the defendant to train, and employ people, he admits to $8,000 payment, and $4,000 for transportation for that year.    Plaintiff made $8.00 and change an hour.    Plaintiff earned $1326 the first year, while the defendant made $10,000 profit on the deal.   Defendant stopped paying him in January, even though he's still running the restaurant.    Plaintiff gets money, but I still don't trust the defendant.    How does anyone keep a restaurant going with volunteers?   And why keep it going?   

All Aboard Excuse Central-Plaintiffs suing defendant who lived with them for a while, and borrowed $3500 for a vehicle.   Defendant was making payments, but plaintiff has paid nothing on the loan, even though she borrowed another $1,000 also.   Plaintiff claims the $1,000 was her payment from defendant, for getting the loan.   Defendant paid $2406, owing $1,094 on loan, and plaintiff gets $1094.   

When Faulty Drivers Collide-Plaintiff driver suing bicycle riding defendant for damage to plaintiff's car, while she was turning right, and claims bicycle severely damaged her car.   Defendant counter suing for bicycle damage.   Plaintiff tried to go through after stopping for red light, and then she went, and hit the bicycle.  Both litigants are trying to blame the other, I think this is just an accident, and both should pay their own damages.    I also think the driver blew the stop light.   $842 for plaintiff.    I think they should have paid for their own damages.  

Kitty Litter Misstep-Plaintiff consigned items, mostly doll clothing and children's clothes,  at  defendant's shop.    Plaintiff is suing for full retail on the items, over $1900, that she claims were ruined by cats.   Plaintiff consigned two bins of clothing.   Defendant claims the clothes were misrepresented, and were left overs from when plaintiff closed her own shop.   Plaintiff gets $1,000.   

Edited June 4, 2019 by CrazyInAlabama