All Episodes Talk: All Rise

[CrazyInAlabama]

3 p.m. reruns-

My Child is a Nightmare...-Plaintiff suing defendant for non-payment of baby sitting fees.   Defendant mother says her child is a nightmare, so she never takes the baby with her.  Defendant says the county should have paid plaintiff, and she didn't want to pay the baby sitter.    $200 for plaintiff

DUI Feud-Plaintiff suing defendant for money she borrowed to pay for his DUI fees and attorney.  Plaintiff claims she took out a loan for $3,000, and borrowed $1,000 from her sister, to give cash to the defendant for $3,000.   Plaintiff has zero proof, so she was dismissed without prejudice, and sent back to her local court.  

Females, Filth and Liquor-Plaintiffs/former tenants suing former landlord/defendant for their security deposit back, and landlord actually wants over $3,000 more for damages.    Defendant rented only to college students, since 2009, and a month later house was for sale.      Defendant rented for five years to college students in groups, and had to renovate for sale.     Landlady has zero proof of when damage happened, and when yard was trashed.   The only receipt is one with number written in later.   $2000 for plaintiffs.  Plaintiff's mother took photos on move in, but landlady has no photos of move in condition, or move out.  

Trucker's Sin of Omission-Plaintiff suing ex-boyfriend (married to someone else) for repayment of the loan that sent him to trucking school.  Plus man was supposed to be living with a cousin, and apparently that was actually his wife.   Man borrowed $1600, and repaid very little.   Money came from defendant'student loans, and later a title loan on her car.   

Defendant claims they were only friends, not romantic, and the loans were gifts.  Case dismissed, because plaintiff had no expectation of being repaid. 

Edited June 25, 2019 by CrazyInAlabama

[CrazyInAlabama]

5 p.m. both reruns-

Sneaky Kickback Party-Plaintiff claims homeless friend threw a party in her house when plaintiff was out of town.  Property damage includes a stolen stripper pole.   Defendant is suing for illegal eviction, but she never paid rent, so that's out.      Defendant has huge party while plaintiff was out of town, and claims it was actually the plaintiff's party.    $279 for plaintiff (I agree most people don't leave a laptop at home to disappear)

Fraud and the Smelly Cat-Plaintiff suing former landlord/defendant for security deposit, and last months rent pro rated.    Defendant says deposit was kept because of damages, cat damage, and one month of unpaid rent.    Plaintiff claims it wasn't her cat, but was in her house, and plaintiff abandoned the cat in the house when she moved out.   New tenants and landlord found cat in basement of house, and tenant adopted cat.   

Landlady gave tenant a false statement that she paid October's rent to give to some subsidy, or charity group so they would help her pay rent, so that's thrown out (unclean hands, and party to fraud).    Plaintiff moved on the 11th of October, and new tenant started moving in on 15 October, so she gets rent back for half of the month.     $1200, plus 380 = $1580 to the plaintiff. 

Dad's Therapy Dog Scam-Plaintiff suing defendant for his 8 year old son's service dog back, except it's more of a therapy dog, or emotional support dog.    Plaintiff was traveling overseas, defendant had the dog during the travel period, and for months before, over half of the dog's life since two years ago when he bought the puppy.    Defendant's ex-husband agreed to watch the dog for a week or so.   Then husband and defendant divorced, and she kept the dogs, and the kids, and unloaded approximately 200 lbs. of idiot.      

Plaintiff claims basic obedience training is 'specialized service dog training', but it was basic dog obedience at a park.     The defendant had the dog for months before the plaintiff left the country, and had possession for almost a year.   

Plaintiff left the dog with defendant and ex-husband when he was living in a dog free apartment building, and needed a certified service dog to qualify to move into the next apartment.  Plaintiff paid nothing for dog boarding, just one bag of dog food, and a container of pet treats.    Plaintiff get the boot, and defendant keeps the dog.  

The First Lady of Hats-Plaintiff suing defendant for $735 refund for custom hats for his grandmother for church, and the hat that he received is not pretty, or worth what he was charged.   One hat needed to be resized, and was mailed back to defendant, and was resized.   Plaintiff also ordered another hat, both were shipped back by defendant in one box, and only insured for $100, and plaintiff never received them.   It would have costs $7.00 to insure the hats.    $735 to plaintiff (he already received $100 in insurance from the Post Office).  

Edited June 25, 2019 by CrazyInAlabama

[Byrd is the Word]

2 hours ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

Dad's Therapy Dog Scam

This case is only remarkable from the standpoint that the defendant is one of the top 5 most likable litigants ever. 

As an aside (and risking rebuke from the forum) I’ve about had it with the fake “emotional support” animal scam. I get that our animals provide emotional support but that doesn’t entitle us to the type of extraordinary treatment that certain types of people demand. 

Edited June 26, 2019 by Byrd is the Word

[Florinaldo]

54 minutes ago, Byrd is the Word said:

As an aside (and risking rebuke from the forum) I’ve about had it with the fake “emotional support” animal scam.

I quite agree with you. I have said before that so many people abuse the "support animal" label, it throws legitimate claims into disrepute. They use it to get around pet restrictions in rentals, condos or controlled communities, or to get their vicious pitbull on board the plane with them because they can't bear the stress of being parted with the sweet animal. They can always count on some doctor somewhere indulgent enough to deliver an accommodating certificate to justify the need for the animal's presence where it does not belong.

[stephinmn]

The defendant from the repeat, "My child is a nightmare" died a few years ago in a car accident. She had four daughters. The JJ boyfriend is listed in the obit.

Also, she was from Minnesota, in the small city my husband grew up in. 

ETA: She was driving too fast on a four lane highway, and crashed into a  pole. Fortunately, no one else was injured. 

https://www.legacy.com/obituaries/sctimes/obituary.aspx?n=sheena-n-grimstad&pid=182406159&fhid=12817

Edited June 26, 2019 by stephinmn

[AngelaHunter]

I don't remember the nightmare child case, not even after seeing the obit, but I see the family is following the new trend of automatically begging strangers for money.

Quote

A GoFundMe page has been set up for Sheena's four daughters.

The children have three different last names, so I'm assuming three fathers, grandparents, many aunts, and uncles, and had a mother who should have had life insurance, what with all those kids,  yet they have their hands out. What did people do when someone died before the advent of "GoGimme"?

[stephinmn]

16 minutes ago, AngelaHunter said:

I don't remember the nightmare child case, not even after seeing the obit, but I see the family is following the new trend of automatically begging strangers for money.

The children have three different last names, so I'm assuming three fathers, grandparents, many aunts, and uncles, and had a mother who should have had life insurance, what with all those kids,  yet they have their hands out. What did people do when someone died before the advent of "GoGimme"?

She didn't work, so that's why she likely didn't have life insurance. The good thing is that Minnesota liability insurance includes medical/death benefits. It would be enough to cover a very small funeral, but better than nothing. (Assuming she had valid insurance)

[khyber]

On 6/24/2019 at 3:25 PM, Toaster Strudel said:

Today's German Shepherd owner made me feel homicidal.  The combination of her easy gaslighting, faux-innocent batting of eyelashes, pearl clutching and reaching for smelling salts when things didn't go her way was infuriating.  This is someone with decades of experience in the art of deception and manipulation. JJ exposed her multiple times but it rolled off her back and she just kept going with her act. She was really good, even JJ couldn't trip her up.

She did the only thing left for her to do, which was to award the plaintiff 3K.

Defendant was biting her lips in frustration when JJ shouted that it wasn't about whether she'd lose, but how much money she'd lose... did she think she'd win this?

She reminded me of "Curl Dr" who parked in someone's driveway and invaded their house after her car was hemmed in.

I don't know when I have hated a defendant as much as this one. I just wanted to throttle her.

[AngelaHunter]

1 hour ago, funky-rat said:

I only do GFM if I personally know the people asking, and if I know for sure the need is legit

I still wouldn't do it through GFM. If my friends or family were in dire need, I would give the money personally, so they would get it all. GFM takes a chunk of it and I certainly don't want to financially support that site.

On 6/24/2019 at 6:25 PM, Toaster Strudel said:

She reminded me of "Curl Dr" who parked in someone's driveway and invaded their house after her car was hemmed in.

(RE: German Shepherd witch) Yes! Both of them looked nice and spoke well, and both could enrage a person to the point of homicide. Neither was capable of feeling shame as they stood there with dopey smirks while getting reamed out by JJ in front of millions of people  - something which would have me curled in a fetal position. I think the giggles and smiles were the worst part - worse than their actions - as they acted as though what they had done was cute or praiseworthy. Nothing short of a baseball bat could get anything through to their skulls and into their empty heads. 

[CrazyInAlabama]

3 p.m. reruns (probably 2015 or so)-

Moldy Daycare-Plaintiff was renting the garden apartment in defendant/day care owner/landlady's downstairs, which was supposed to have a day care on the bottom floor.    Plaintiff was supposed to be an employee of the day care.    Plaintiff claims her property was ruined by mold in the apartment, but didn't tell landlady for months.    Plaintiff moved at the first week of July, and left items behind until the end of the month.   

This gets stranger by the second.   Plaintiff rented unit, son was gone for the summer, and she really didn't live there for the summer, but paid rent, $1,000 a month.   Defendant gets $250 for one week's rent, and plaintiff gets nothing.  

How to Live to Be 100- (According to JJ, a gerontologist told her the secret to living to be 100 is "Don't Fall").   Plaintiff, an elderly woman is swarmed by a herd of raging Chihuahuas, she fell, and was injured.  Plaintiff, and her 4 year old great granddaughter were assaulted by the defendant's seven Chihuahuas, on the sidewalk.   As usual, the defendant claims her dogs weren't outside the fence, her dogs didn't do it, and the plaintiff is lying.   A neighbor helped the lady up, and the defendants never came out of their house to see if the plaintiff was all right. Defendant was issued a citation for animals at large, had too many animals, and claims she now has four dogs.    Defendant claims plaintiff never contacted her, and plaintiff called and talked to defendant at length, and can't remember her homeowner's insurance company.     Plaintiff gets $2,000   for medical bills, and her broken glasses. 

Collision Caught on Tape-Plaintiff suing defendant for car accident.  Plaintiff  was making a left turn, and defendant was going straight, but getting ready to go into the right turn land.   when plaintiff made a left turn and hit her car.       Insurance companies said it was 50% fault by both sides.    There is a video of the accident, that shows the impact.    (Plaintiff's pony tail is fluffier than JJ's).    JJ says the plaintiff was more at fault, than defendant. because he didn't make sure his way was clear before he turned.    

Show Car Craziness-(the hall-terview with plaintiff is hysterical, with lots of Back to the Future comments)-Defendant was drunk on a motorized scooter, and hit plaintiff's DeLorean at a car show.  Plaintiff gets $813 in damages. 

[CrazyInAlabama]

5 p.m. episodes-

New-

$10,000 Doggy Day Care Bill-Plaintiff dog boarding kennel owner suing plaintiff for non payment of dog boarding bills for three dogs, and didn't come back for six months.  Six months later defendant came to get dogs, and didn't pay, and got the police to pick up her dogs.   Defendant has a lot of reasons why she didn't want to pay, but she's still a deadbeat.

Kennel owner gave woman a deal, and charged $30 a day  per dog, instead of the usual $40.  Ex-husband of defendant paid $7400, but defendant still owes $8,600.    Defendant wanted a payment plan, but instead she called the police to get her dogs back.  Plaintiff gets $5k, but is still screwed out of $3,600.    

Damaged Memorabilia-Plaintiff landlord suing defendant / Section 8 former tenant for damaged, and stolen property.   Plaintiff had property in the basement, and it was not rented to the defendant.    Defendant put some of her property in the basement.   Then, her son needed to store his stuff, and moved out landlord's memorability, and her son's stuff in.   Landlord's property was dumped outside in the yard.      

Defendant claims plaintiff told her move his stuff outside, and plaintiff denies this.  Defendant hasn't paid her portion of Section 8 rent in 9 months, Section 8 still pays it's part though.    Defendant has a lot of lame excuses, such as, the electric and gas bills are too high to pay rent, and other stuff.    Coming on this show is the only way the poor landlord will get anything out of this.    Plaintiff gets his money for the rent, but not the memorabilia, and I hope the dead beat plaintiff's move out.   

Rerun-

Sex, Drugs and Surveillance-Plaintiff suing next door sleazy jerk neighbor for putting up surveillance cameras, one of which is aimed directly at her back yard pool, and virtually none of his property.    So plaintiff put up a floodlight to interfere with defendant's spy camera.   I'm so glad I don't live near these trashy people.    Defendant claims a daughter of plaintiff and her boyfriend were throwing used condoms on his property, and they were selling drugs in the street, but there is no police report.     I loathe both sides of this case.    $1,000 to plaintiff, and defendant told to move the back camera.  

Barn Wedding Fail-Plaintiff entitled bridezilla snow flake and daddy suing barn owner for a barn wedding gone wrong.    Plaintiff bride wanted a dream wedding at a bargain price, and venue/barn owners had no permit, did a bad job, and are going to get yelled at by JJ.   Plaintiff gets $1350, but nothing for the changed invitations, because they didn't bring any to show the change.  

Edited June 26, 2019 by CrazyInAlabama

[Florinaldo]

15 minutes ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

Plaintiff gets his money,

Not all of it, because JJ unfortunately did not award him the money for his property , just for the rent as I understood it. Because of that, she gave the deadbeat freeloader of a defendant a higher portion of the awards kitty.

18 minutes ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

Plaintiff gets $5k, but is still screwed out of $3,600.    

And the defendant was still playing the victim in the hallterview, whereas she was the one who defaulted on the debt because of her "circumstances". I agree though that holding the dogs as hostages was not a correct move on the part of the plaintiff.

Comparing the two cases, JJ made the argument in the apartment one that the tenant did not have two nickels to rub together to pay the landlord for his property. But the same could be said for the defendant in the dog case and yet she awarded the maximum to the plaintiff.

I know, I know; looking for consistency in her rulings is a surefire shortcut to madness.

[CrazyInAlabama]

I think JJ is hoping the defendants in the memorabilia case will take their cut of the money, and move.    My guess is that no landlord on earth that saw the case will let her move in.  

I suspect the dog boarding also was doggy day care, where the dogs have activities.   Actually, $30 a day is a bargain for most boarding.  (plaintiff says usual price is $40 a day per dog, so the total would have been over $20k).

I'm so clueless about the driving around, and hit the windshield case that a neighbor's grandson explained it to me.   He said people buy those little cigars (Swisher Sweet or something like that), take out the tobacco, and put in pot, and hope the horribly sweet flavoring will cover the pot smell.  

Edited June 27, 2019 by CrazyInAlabama

[AuntiePam]

23 hours ago, Florinaldo said:

I quite agree with you. I have said before that so many people abuse the "support animal" label, it throws legitimate claims into disrepute. They use it to get around pet restrictions in rentals, condos or controlled communities, or to get their vicious pitbull on board the plane with them because they can't bear the stress of being parted with the sweet animal. They can always count on some doctor somewhere indulgent enough to deliver an accommodating certificate to justify the need for the animal's presence where it does not belong.

Yep.  Someone posted on a local board that they were having trouble finding a rental because so many landlords don't allow pets.  I couldn't believe the number of people who suggested asking a doctor to certify the pet as a therapy animal. 

Watching today's case on the pet boarding fees and wondering if that isn't a good business to be in.  $30 a day to feed and water a dog?  Jeebus, most of them sleep all day.

[AngelaHunter]

1 hour ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

I think JJ is hoping the defendants in the memorabilia case will take their cut of the money, and move.    My guess is that no landlord on earth that saw the case will let her move in.

I bet Mr. Benson will think long and hard about who he rents his house to in the future. The aura of entitlement just glowed around the def. She has a pay a light bill! (1000$/month?) so he can whistle for his 288$ rent. She has the chutzpah to throw out his stuff, which she called a "bunch of junk" in the hall. What really burns is that they had their grown lazy son, who "wasn't doing nothing" living there too, also leeching off the public. And they're so self-righteous about it all. 

Couldn't stand the monstrous toad-beast in the dog case.

54 minutes ago, AuntiePam said:

$30 a day to feed and water a dog?  Jeebus, most of them sleep all day.

Yes, but they have to pay employees to care for the dogs and clean up after them and have to pay rent and probably hefty insurance too. It's not a business I would want to be in. Too much liability and probably too many deadbeats who give fake names, come and take their dogs and never pay.

2 hours ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

Barn Wedding Fail-Plaintiff entitled bridezilla snow flake and daddy suing barn owner for a barn wedding gone wrong.

Have we ever seen four people in the same case as dumb as these litigants? Painful, it was. 

2 hours ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

Sex, Drugs and Surveillance

Imagine living near Hard-Rode Hannah and Gollum? I believe the drunkenness, foul language, and used condoms. However, Gollum is still a jerk-off asshole.  They all deserve each other.

6 hours ago, funky-rat said:

This guy was fairly well-known in a certain fandom area,

Is he an actor? Can we play Twenty Questions??

[PopTart16]

On 6/24/2019 at 4:41 PM, AZChristian said:

Right up there with Mrs. Bean in unforgettable cases.

ETA:  I'm old and a lot of stuff goes over my head, but did anyone else suspect that the cigar "wrappers" the plaintiff's friend was buying on their way to the park was for marijuana?

That's totally what they were for!

[PennyPie18]

I have had 8 dogs, loved them all. But, if one of them had attacked another person, I would never blame the victim and defend my dog like some of these idiots do. Dogs bite, period. It's clear that some of these dog owners value their dog's life over the human that has been bitten in an unprovoked attack. There have been so  many Go Fund Me scams that you need to carefully watch how and where your donation is being spent. JJ usually has a least one case per week of women who have given money to someone they recently met on the internet, and want it back. Please, ladies, don't get scammed! 

[Toaster Strudel]

Motorcycle obsession:

Judge Judy can no longer say "I was wrong... once."

It's been upgraded to "I was wrong... twice."

Other than that, the plaintiff's wife left him 6 months ago and he hasn't noticed yet.

[Byrd is the Word]

Racing Motorcycle Rip-Off?!

As I watched this the plaintiff desperately trying to plead his case all I kept thinking was either I’m the same sort of dense as Mr. Cano or her highness is failing to grasp simple debits and credits. She was actually kinda cute when she admitted her mistake and granted the man a very well earned glass of water. 

[Brattinella]

Gee, everyone knows Factory Parts > After-market Parts.  WAY more money.  I'm sure herhighness would never deign to visit a junkyard for a replacement part.  (No shame in that!)

[Byrd is the Word]

1 hour ago, Brattinella said:

Gee, everyone knows Factory Parts > After-market Parts.  WAY more money.  I'm sure herhighness would never deign to visit a junkyard for a replacement part.  (No shame in that!)

Frankly, I’m surprised she didn’t dismiss that case as soon as she learned there was another case pending. The plaintiff probably got hosed by the defendant and it’s possible that he could take an award from JJ to wipe out the money he probably wasted with the defendant and have the bike repaired properly for a second time. But it’s also very possible that he could take and award from JJ, plus and award from the second case, and spend money to improve his motorcycle thus moving past being made whole to the area of profiting. I’m also surprised that for a repair job worth $5,000 there wasn’t a written estimate/contract specifying the OEM parts the job required. Too many moving parts and too much hair on this case.

[CrazyInAlabama]

5 p.m. all reruns-

Illegal Power Rip-Off-Plaintiff claims former tenants/defendants owe over $5k for electricity that the plaintiff (landlady) grown son hooked up illegally.     Former tenant before defendants was the plaintiff's son, who she evicted.    Defendants say they never paid for electricity for the two years, because they never got a bill.  Tenants paid other bills, and had everything set up.    Defendants want to be reimbursed for having to stay in a motel, and three freezers full of food that spoiled when electric company found out about the illegal hookup, and turned of the power.     The tenants/defendants also have a signed lease that says utilities are included in the rent, but plaintiff claims the signature is forged.   Tenant claims landlady wanted them to sign another lease that says they'll pay the past electric bill, and give her their tax refund.  Case dismissed.    (Landlady's son is lucky, someone around here tried to hook their electricity back up a few months ago, they died)

Wage Garnishment Travesty-Plaintiff claims ex-business partner failed to pay rent, for a place they both rented for a photography studio.    Plaintiff also had his wages garnished for the unpaid rent.    The two litigants were business partners, and the plaintiff dropped out of the business after two months, then he was notified of the judgment.    His wages were garnished after a default judgment was entered by the court.   Loser defendant paid nothing on the rent either, and he was actually in the photography business with plaintiff.    Plaintiff claims the garnishment ruined him, but actually trusting his ex-friend and partner did.     

Defendant stayed in the studio for four years, and he paid nothing, so the garnishment is his.   $5,000 to plaintiff.   

Thanks to soccer analysis, that's it for today.   

[AngelaHunter]

2 hours ago, Byrd is the Word said:

But it’s also very possible that he could take and award from JJ, plus and award from the second case, and spend money to improve his motorcycle thus moving past being made whole to the area of profiting.

Didn't he say he already got compensated by insurance, something that came out only came out later? Even if he doesn't win his other court case, he's not out any money, is he? 

[Blissfool]

Omygosh this motorcycle case has me all confused. I did not understand the goings-on. Part of the problem is that i wanted to believe the plaintiff. I agree that he was fast-talking, but I attributed that to the fact that he knew what he was talking about and felt sure about his claim. Like, JJ always says, if you're telling the truth you dont have to stop to think about it. This guy was confident in what he was saying, but he was getting frustrated that JJ didn't understand. Mind you, his frustration was not coming across negatively. As a matter of fact, he seemed to be charming JJ (or was it just me?)

Lemme see if i got this right.

He bought a motorcycle.

He crashed it.

He didn't want to wait for the insurance settlement so he used $ from personal savings to pay the defendant to fix the bike.

He sued the person he that caused the crash. Case is pending and he might get an insurance settlement in the near future.

This settlement should reimburse the $ he had taken out of his personal savings to pay the defendant.

It should end there. HOWEVER... 

The defendant didn't fix the motorcycle accordingly so plaintiff has to pay someone else to fix it correctly. 

So the $ he gets from the insurance settlement is gong to have to be used to "re-fix" the bike.

So plaintiff is still out the $ he paid from his bank savings.

Did I get it right or was my judgement clouded by my crush on the plaintiff?

Edited June 29, 2019 by Blissfool

[AngelaHunter]

3 hours ago, LucindaWalsh said:

He got an inflated estimate (which I think he wanted, again for the paper trail), then shopped it around to get someone to pick and choose how to fix it cheaper. Then spent money on those shops that check other people's work (paper trail) so he could go after the person who fixed the bike exactly like he wink wink really wanted it fixed ie cheaper but with a higher paper trail. Plaintiff was a fast talking double talk scammer.

That's how I saw it, although all the numbers made my head go all fuzzy since I'm someone who can't do a simple subtraction without a calculator. He paid the repairs out of his pocket, but then we find out insurance paid it too, so how is he out anything? Then if he wins his lawsuit, he may get paid again so he'll have a windfall of 5K or so? Who knows if he'll get the bike fixed again? I could get 20 estimates but that doesn't mean I'm going to go ahead with any work. We see people here all the time who take insurance settlements, spend it on other crap then want more money. Am I wrong? I very well could be.

Edited June 29, 2019 by AngelaHunter

[AngelaHunter]

On 6/28/2019 at 6:29 PM, CrazyInAlabama said:

Defendants want to be reimbursed for having to stay in a motel, and three freezers full of food that spoiled when electric company found out about the illegal hookup

Yeah, I'm pretty sure insurance companies are really familiar with the freezers filled with filet mignon, lobsters and standing rib roasts. 😁

[AZChristian]

34 minutes ago, AngelaHunter said:

Yeah, I'm pretty sure insurance companies are really familiar with the freezers filled with filet mignon, lobsters and standing rib roasts. 😁

I used to work in a customer complaint area of a large electric company.  It was amazing how power surges ONLY affected the refrigerator/freezers of people who had just gotten back from Sam's Club.  There was that whole requirement of receipts that was annoying to the shysters, though.

[AngelaHunter]

The King and Queen of fast food, no longer lovers are here fighting tooth and nail. Mr. Martin was sporting a conspicuous, honking big cross draped on his vast frontage, and his erstwhile ladylove, with a dumb, cow-like expression, is wearing a tight red dress that is not doing her any favours. Both of them sic the CPS on each other, he asks her to commit perjury or something, she gets arrested and charged with obstruction of justice. He bails her out. Her mugshot is a hoot. She either cannot understand English (although it appears to her native language) or thinks she can bamboozle JJ and keeps giving her crap that has nothing to do with what she said. She needs a pen. Byrd gives it to her and I'm pretty sure by his expression that was not his favorite Chore of the Day. All that was funny, but not funny at all is that both of them have bred and have kids at their mercy.

Then we had plaintiff, a very annoying woman, who decides two years after the fact she's not happy with the paint job def did in her home. He is also extremely annoying. Neither of them know how to shut up. He freely admits he agreed with her to commit tax fraud by claiming the job was done later than it was. She shows pics of a mess - painted door handles, "melting" paint etc. He says those messes were already there when he started and that plaintiff told him she and her family had painted the house previously. Her goose is cooked when he shows an email from her right after he finished working, telling him it was "gorgeous." Shut up and GTFO, both of you clowns. 

[Byrd is the Word]

10 hours ago, AngelaHunter said:

Then we had plaintiff, a very annoying woman, who decides two years after the fact she's not happy with the paint job def did in her home. He is also extremely annoying. Neither of them know how to shut up. He freely admits he agreed with her to commit tax fraud by claiming the job was done later than it was. She shows pics of a mess - painted door handles, "melting" paint etc. He says those messes were already there when he started and that plaintiff told him she and her family had painted the house previously. Her goose is cooked when he shows an email from her right after he finished working, telling him it was "gorgeous." Shut up and GTFO, both of you clowns. 

By the looks of the plaintiff’s pictures there are many, many coats of paint on those old doors. It was impossible for me to tell the difference between the job that Mr. Way Too Old and Fat to Wear That Earring and the messy paint jobs from years and years ago.

[ItsHelloPattiagain]

11 hours ago, AngelaHunter said:

The King and Queen of fast food, no longer lovers are here fighting tooth and nail. Mr. Martin was sporting a conspicuous, honking big cross draped on his vast frontage, and his erstwhile ladylove, with a dumb, cow-like expression, is wearing a tight red dress that is not doing her any favours.

I was watching this at about 11:30 PM last night and immediately thought "hmm, Ms. Queen looks like she's straight out of a mug shot with her whack-ass nasty hair (does the JJ staff not book them rooms with showers and those free bottles of shampoo?)".  Then her arrest history pops up and I thought "now THAAAATTT'S why she looks so mug-shot worthy!" 

And you missed the exquisitely sculpted  boy-band facial hair on King Martin there. Hello, AJ from the Backstreet Boys circa 1999 is calling and wants his look back. 

[zillabreeze]

12 hours ago, AngelaHunter said:

Mr. Martin was sporting a conspicuous, honking big cross draped on his vast frontage

The universal sign of trustworthiness.

[Byrd is the Word]

6 minutes ago, zillabreeze said:

The universal sign of trustworthiness.

Like the guy who begins his tale with the words “I’ll be honest with you.”

[AngelaHunter]

19 minutes ago, zillabreeze said:

The universal sign of trustworthiness.

Do these clowns think a crucifix  - the bigger the better - is going to so impress JJ she'll rule in their favour ? Do these asshats not know she is Jewish? Do they know anything at all, except how to beat the system, breed, and get restraining orders?

38 minutes ago, ItsHelloPattiagain said:

(does the JJ staff not book them rooms with showers and those free bottles of shampoo?)". 

Well, the rooms obviously don't have mirrors.

36 minutes ago, ItsHelloPattiagain said:

And you missed the exquisitely sculpted  boy-band facial hair on King Martin there.

OH, god - so hot! Or maybe he thinks the weird zig-zag patterns confuse the eye and disguise the fact that his face is 2 feet wide.

[PennyPie18]

16 hours ago, AngelaHunter said:

but not funny at all is that both of them have bred and have kids at their mercy.

Yes, those are the ones whom I feel sorry for. What kind of future do these poor kids have when their parents are so worried about their own needs, they seem to ignore the needs of the children? No wonder JJ gets so annoyed during these cases.....she has always said how many years she was in the family court system. Perhaps these cases bring back unpleasant memories of some of those she presided on years ago? Poor kids.

[PopTart16]

I hated Mr. Martin's GF, I don't know how these people are able to lie with such conviction. First she said she had the CPS reports that showed he had called in the "false" claims, but it turns out she did not, then she said she had texts were he admitted to calling CPS but it turns out she did not. 

I totally believe that her kids have scabies. 

[CrazyInAlabama]

5 p.m. episodes-

New-

Bakersfield Boyfriend Trouble-Plaintiff is landlord who purchased 4 acre property, with two houses on property, and defendant and daughter (three daughters, and son too) were current tenants, month-by-month.  Then defendant mother's boyfriend moved in, and the trouble started.   Sadly, for the three years before boyfriend moved in, the police were only there for several suicide attempt by one daughter.     The 70's mobile home the defendants lived in was trashed.     Defendant, and her daughter moved to another house on another rental property.    Defendants didn't pay rent the last month, and have no security deposit.  

Defendant tenant claims sexual harassment, she also claims plaintiff runs outside naked, and made advances towards a daughter.  Plaintiff gets back rent, but no damages.   I can't believe that trailer is still habitable.

Double Lane-Change for a Donut-Plaintiff is suing fellow driver who he claims forced him off the road.  Plaintiff turned right onto a multi-lane road, and says defendant crossed two full lanes, to the far right lane where plaintiff was, and drove plaintiff into curb and off the road.  Plaintiff was going to get a donut.   Defendant witness just got told to sit back down, by JJ.  $1320 for plaintiff.     

Rerun-

Divorcees Fight Over Son's Assault-I disagree, I think if private lawyer wasn't agreed to by both parents, then the father isn't committed to paying for the attorney fees, however, JJ disagreed with me.    JJ called attorney fees necessary.   However, if the son wasn't assaulting other people, then he wouldn't have needed an attorney.     Plaintiff gets $2500.   

House Flipping Flop-Plaintiff contractor/first time house flipper suing defendant for $5k, for damaging a work truck, and extra work he had to perform after defendant performed bad work.      Real estate broker/flipper paid for supplies, and defendant was paid $1500 for labor only.   Defendant claims the bad 'paint' was actually bad drywall by plaintiff.   Plaintiff pays everyone in cash, no benefits.    Case dismissed, no proof.  

Edited July 6, 2019 by CrazyInAlabama

[DoctorK]

17 minutes ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

 Defendant witness just got told to sit back dow

Yep, JJ was really annoyed by that point. The witness really looked stunned and angry when he sat down.

[Byrd is the Word]

38 minutes ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

Defendant tenant claims sexual harassment, she also claims plaintiff runs outside naked, and made advances towards a daughter.  Plaintiff gets back rent, but no damages.   I can't believe that trailer is still habitable.

I can’t imagine awarding anything to the plaintiff for that hovel of a mobile home. I’d sooner live in a dumpster.  Like JJ I take allegations of sexual harassment seriously. But it’s hard to take those of the mother and daughter seriously given the 4 years they lived on the same property and the timing of alleged harassment. That said, the landlord plaintiff is creepy as hell and seems perfectly capable of being a groper. He should also have those lesions on his lip biopsied. They look like trouble. 

38 minutes ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

defendant crossed two full lanes, to the far right lane where plaintiff was, and drove plaintiff into curb and off the road.  Plaintiff was going to get a donut.

Defendant’s own testimony was all anyone needed to rule against him. The obstinate fool forced the plaintiff off the road when he failed to yield the right of way while changing lanes. Defendant claims plaintiff was aggressive at the crash site. Probably. That jerk would bring out the worst in anybody. 

Edited July 2, 2019 by Byrd is the Word

[Cobalt Stargazer]

What the hell is that on the plaintiff's lower lip in the landlord case where the defendant is claiming sexual harassment? Is he chewing a toothpick or.....?

[Florinaldo]

Had JJ taken crazy pills in today's first new case? If not, then how to explain her constant approving remarks to the defendant and even giving her thumbs up at least once? Perhaps she was toying with her, knowing she was a lying slug, and wanted her to feel overconfident.  She also let go the matter of exactly when they moved out of the place; where was her usual "you are there one minute of one day, then you are there the whole month!" after the plaintiff said they left a few days into December, not in November?

2 hours ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

I can't believe that trailer is still habitable.

After that horde of hags-in-training and that spawner they derive from lived in it for a few years, I would agree.

[CrazyInAlabama]

If I heard it correctly, I think the tenants in the trailer case lived there for four years after the plaintiff bought the land, and were tenants  for the previous landlord, and owner.      I can't imagine how crowded it is in that trailer with the mother, her boyfriend, and three daughters, and for a while the son.

Six people in that trailer, plus who knows how many others short term, or long term is so crowded.    Since it was California (at least I think it was) the eviction rules are apparently so slanted for tenants, that getting those tenants out was a major win.      The only cure for that trailer is to rip the old one out, and replace it with a much newer model.  

Edited July 3, 2019 by CrazyInAlabama

[Toaster Strudel]

10 hours ago, Cobalt Stargazer said:

What the hell is that on the plaintiff's lower lip in the landlord case where the defendant is claiming sexual harassment? Is he chewing a toothpick or.....?

It looked like part of a longer scar.

Did you all see the lumbering witness the defendant had brought with him get up in slow motion with an angry facial expression? I thought, OMG, what the hell is he on, does he know where he is?

Then JJ shouted down the most epic "SIT DOWN" in all the show's history.

It was. So. Satisfying.

[Byrd is the Word]

1 hour ago, Toaster Strudel said:

Then JJ shouted down the most epic "SIT DOWN" in all the show's history.

I’ll bet even Byrd flinched and dropped his crossword puzzle when he heard that.

[AngelaHunter]

2 hours ago, Toaster Strudel said:

Then JJ shouted down the most epic "SIT DOWN" in all the show's history.

I actually had a social engagement yesterday (and no, no one punched me in my face, dumped a drink on my head, took me to the floor or started a drunken brawl) so missed the show. I was going to just skip it all, but now? Not for the world!

1 minute ago, AngelaHunter said:

 

Edited July 3, 2019 by AngelaHunter

[Byrd is the Word]

14 hours ago, Cobalt Stargazer said:

What the hell is that on the plaintiff's lower lip in the landlord case where the defendant is claiming sexual harassment? Is he chewing a toothpick or.....?

Beats me, but if it were my lip I wouldn't sleep until a pathologist told me it's not melanoma.

[funky-rat]

15 hours ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

 I can't believe that trailer is still habitable.

It may be a situation like one my dad's friend was in.  He bought some vacant land to build a nice home on - about 10 acres worth.  The downside is there was an older single-wide sitting on the one corner that was being lived in by a man in his 60's.  It came with the property.  My dad's friend charged him somewhat cheap rent in exchange for an agreement that he wasn't responsible for any repairs needed on the house, and the renter paid property taxes on the structure.  The guy stayed for like 20 years.  Once he finally left, my dad's friend waffled on whether he wanted it gone or wanted to rent to someone else (we were looking for a place at that point) but it was so old and run down inside that he opted to let someone come and tear it down, and reclaim that last little corner of his land.  I have the feeling Melanoma Head Plaintiff will likely do the same thing.  Scrappers will tear down mobile homes in exchange for the pipes and wiring and siding.

Edited July 3, 2019 by funky-rat
Continuity

[khyber]

On 7/2/2019 at 7:18 AM, ItsHelloPattiagain said:

 And you missed the exquisitely sculpted  boy-band facial hair on King Martin there. Hello, AJ from the Backstreet Boys circa 1999 is calling and wants his look back. 

Except no one would ever look at him and think "I want it that way".

[AngelaHunter]

1 hour ago, khyber said:

Except no one would ever look at him and think "I want it that way".

Except the def. and she who bore the fruit of his loins.

[SRTouch]

Ok, case was same old story, but I enjoyed the landlord suing tenant of 70's junky trailer since I grew up in the area. Did raise a few questions in my mind. First, where was the actual location of this 4 acres - when asked, P told JJ it was in Bakersfield Ca, but later I heard it was on Weedpatch Highway. For those not in the know, Weedpatch Highway is 10 miles SSE of Bakersfield and one of the poorest areas in the county - which may explain the dirt cheap rent on what sounded like barely habitable trailer. (Little trivia tidbit - Steinbeck dedicated The Grapes of Wrath to a camp administrator at Weedpatch Camp and 3 of the buildings remain and are listed on National Register of Historic Places.) Watching and listening to P,  I was reminded that this part of California has more of the stereotypical "Okie" than Oklahoma - Merle Haggard sang about being an "Okie from Muskogee," but, nah, he was a Bakersfield Okie. Remember, I was raised in Bakersfield and have lived in Oklahoma since the 80s, so have first hand knowledge - oh, and met Merle a time or two back in the day.

Anyway, getting back to the case - good old boy tells us there are two dwellings on his 4 acre plot, but later tells JJ he would have been arrested if he had really been walking get around nude "in the middle of town" while on the property. Not that I really buy the defendants' sexual harrassment claims, but that defense doesn't fly with me. Rest of the case - nope, nothing much to say. Place was a dump and wasn't being maintained - bad for any structure,  but disastrous in a trailer. Looking at the pix, my guess is that 2 of the 3 80 yo buildings at the Weedpatch Camp are in better condition than this trailer - for sure they look better as they were painted more recently. Counterclaim for harrassment sounds like afterthought to get out of paying what they admit owing. They owed the rent, but unless JJ was shown a receipt I wouldn't have given P anything goes for cleanup because I suspect it's still a dump. Wouldn't give him anything for repairs - ought to be scrapped not have bandaids applied.

Edited July 3, 2019 by SRTouch

[Byrd is the Word]

47 minutes ago, SRTouch said:

Rest of the case - nope, nothing much to say. Place was a dump and wasn't being maintained - bad for any structure,  but disastrous in a trailer.

Thanks for the background information.  The migration of Americans is such an interesting part of our history.

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

Edited July 3, 2019 by Byrd is the Word