All Episodes Talk: All Rise

[Byrd is the Word]

12 hours ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

Ice Cream Parlor Owner Not So Sweet-Plaintiff contractor/defendant suing defendant for slandering him online.   Plaintiff was contracted to supervise an ice cream parlor renovation, then defendant  decided to sub-contract herself, hired unlicensed subs, and wanted the design fee back from former contractor. 

The defendant is an unreasonable fool with no idea how to get a job like that done.  It’s also pretty clear that while he may be in the right, the plaintiff is a nasty asshole.

12 hours ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

Don't Pee on my Leg and Tell Me It's Raining-Two sides are fighting over a pontoon boat hitting another parked pontoon boat.

Ug, nothing but a bunch of creepy liars here on all sides. 

[AngelaHunter]

2 hours ago, Byrd is the Word said:

The defendant is an unreasonable fool with no idea how to get a job like that done.

Not only unreasonable but annoying in every way possible. "I have to talk to my husband" x 5.  Sure. Hubby looked like he'd have to ask HER permission to go take a leak.  Plaintiff was nasty, but in this case, he had every reason to be after she lied and accused him of being a con artist and a thief.

[funky-rat]

RE the student loans:  I'm not understanding why she couldn't get Federal student loans, simply because her dad had bad credit.  Granted I left for college in the fall of 1991, but I qualified for some smaller loans to cover my room and board and some other costs, mainly because my parents both worked and we were above the income guidelines for the most part.  When I changed schools, I became a commuter, and didn't qualify for anything.

If she was looking to take out a private loan, then I could see it - she wouldn't have enough credit herself, and her dad's credit matters.  But I just find it mind-boggling.  If her dad is drawing disability, she should have qualified for grants.  Unless her mother (who was never mentioned) made too much money, and refused to help. 

I worked with a woman who had absolutely terrible credit, and she qualified for student loans for herself, to attend a for profit school.  The girl on TV said she was attending a community college.

Very weird.

Edited September 3, 2019 by funky-rat

[CrazyInAlabama]

3 p.m. both reruns, probably 2016-

First-

Test Drive Mishap-Plaintiff puts a down payment ($2400) on a motorcycle, damages it on a test drive.  The seller keeps the down payment and sells the motorcycle to someone else.    They have a notarized agreement.   There was a payment agreement for the rest, and defendant kept the bike until the next payment $250. ($2650 total).   Within four days, the seller wanted the last $1,000.  However, there is a bunch of garbage by the seller that the plaintiff didn't know how to ride, so instead of taking the last payment and giving the bike to buyer, he resold it on craigslist for $3500 or something.  Seller ended up with $5,000+ from both buyers.  

Plaintiff gets $2650, and defendant is such a crook. 

Tail Light Takes the Heat-Plaintiff suing daughter's ex for impound fees, after van was driven without a license.    Defendant was pulled over for broken tail light, and he had no license or registration, and van was impounded.  If defendant had a legal license, he would have received a fix-it ticket for the light, not an impound.   $1600 to plaintiff.    

Second-

Gardner Attacked by Tree Owner-Plaintiff is suing neighbors and their gardener for illegally trimming his Chinese Elm tree.   Plaintiff claims gardener attacked him.     Plaintiff's tree branches overhang the defendant's swimming pool, and drops leaves.       In photo tree looks absolutely dead.   

Gardener was standing on shed on defendant's property (houses are backyard to backyard neighbors), trimming offending, trespassing branches.   Plaintiff claims when he went to defendant's property, gardener attacked him.  Plaintiff claims gardener was using a leaf blower, and using a rake, and hit plaintiff with the rake.  There is no police report, or medical records, and no charges were filed.      Plaintiff was also trespassing on defendant's property.   Gardener says plaintiff pushed him three times, but plaintiff claims to be a black belt in Karate, and says the gardener wouldn't be alive to be in court if he had attacked him.   Defendant wife was home, came outside, and plaintiff left their property, and he called the police.     

I feel sorry for the defendants living next to this man, who thinks he has the right to trespass on their property, and get mad at them when they trim the branches, which is their right on their side of the property line.   Nothing to the plaintiff, and it's exactly what he deserves. 

[AuntiePam]

The little girls who scratched the cars -- Judy couldn't have been more clear to their mom.  The kids will follow your example.  You're not only lying, you're telling them that it's okay to lie.

I don't get it, especially since it cost mom nothing (except a little bit of embarrassment) to tell the truth. 

That little girl didn't bat an eye after being caught "fibbing".  Mom needs to watch out for that one.

The damaged floor/vacuum cleaner demonstration -- plaintiff's voice was so annoying, I couldn't finish watching.  Did she get some money?

[CrazyInAlabama]

5 p.m. episodes, both New!-

First-

Nine-Year-Old Vandal and Liar-Plaintiff suing defendant parent when their nine-year old daughter, and another child were filmed on surveillance video vandalizing two cars (three cars were damaged, but plaintiff is only suing for two).     Defendant at first agreed to pay damaged, but didn't.   Plaintiff's witness saw the vandalism, and says there were three little girls playing, and one was leaning on the car.     The video was a 24 hour loop, and no way to download it, so it's gone.    Defendant mother signed a letter saying she would pay for damages, because the older daughter said the 9 year old did it.  Another defendant mother that will never believe her kids did anything wrong.     The photos of the damage to the car are terrible.   9 year old keeps lying in court.    

Defendant mother only signed the letter to pay for damages, because she thought there was a video.  Since the video is gone, defendant mother is taking the promise to pay back.  Defendant claims she had eyes on her daughter at all times, and they never left her yard, and she's a total liar.  The children are just learning what their mother has shown them, which is lying is acceptable.     Plaintiff receives $2000 deductible. 

Vacuum Demo Disaster-Plaintiff suing defendants for a vacuum cleaner demo that made a hole in her floor.   Rainbow vacuum company, I didn't know that company was still around.   The demonstrator had a heat lamp to dry the floor, and it malfunctioned, overheated, and burned the hardwood floor.      Plaintiff wants entire floor replaced for $2700, because the repair didn't color match properly.  I can't believe people still fall for the free demo because you won a contest routine.    $2500 to plaintiff.   

Second-

Teens Trash Ski Chalet-Plaintiff went into his rental ski chalet, and he found lots of young people, including one hiding in the rafters, some hopping the back fence, some passed out in the house.     The Airbnb is one bedroom, one bath, in Kellogg, Idaho (defendant lives in the same town, so I bet her parents won't let her have parties in their place).   What idiot rents a ski chalet to an 18 year old, and is surprised when it gets trashed, and is full of drunken partiers?      This was his second AIrbnb rental, and claimed it was only for her and her boyfriend, for their one year anniversary, and skiing.     There are texts confirming defendant lied about the rental purpose.     There was a social media invitation by the defendant's sister with the party invitation.   

Defendant booked it for herself, and boyfriend, and invited a bunch of friends.   They came in on Friday, and neighbors called plaintiff and told him about the party, so he went to the house.   He found four cars, beer cans all over, renter, her boyfriend, two people sleeping on floor, two more in the bed, numerous people going over the back fence, and a kid up in the rafters.   The local sheriff texted the property owner about the party at the ski chalet, sheriff lives next door or on the same street.   Defendant still doesn't get it, and it's too bad the sheriff didn't bust them.    The big police report was made on Saturday night when a party guest threw a brick through a neighbor's window.   Defendant seems to think that sounding pathetic, and teary will get her out of this, and she's very wrong.   $799 for plaintiff.   Defendant still thinks she did nothing wrong.   (I wish the Sheriff had come to the chalet, and busted all of the underage boozers.   I love the plaintiff managed to tell who called him about the party in the hall-terview). 

Car Flipping Fail-Plaintiff suing former friend for car he bought at auction, car parts, etc.   Plaintiff claims they were flipping the car, and defendant got drunk and vandalized the car.  Plaintiff wants $4k, for a car he paid less than $1000 for with repair work.    $0 to plaintiff.

Edited September 4, 2019 by CrazyInAlabama

[NYCFree]

1 hour ago, AuntiePam said:

The damaged floor/vacuum cleaner demonstration -- plaintiff's voice was so annoying, I couldn't finish watching.  Did she get some money?

Plaintiff didn’t just get some money, she got the full ride to redo the whole wood floor for $2,700, claiming they couldn’t color match the repair if they just did a patch. At first JJ was heading in the “you’ll find somebody who can color match a patch” route, then after listening to the defendant deny there was any problem at all, she announced “I’ve changed my mind, full judgement.”

[Cobalt Stargazer]

Quote of the day: "You're asking me if Jenna is your sister?"

[littlebennysmom]

2 hours ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

Teens Trash Ski Chalet-Plaintiff went into his rental ski chalet, and he found lots of young people, including one hiding in the rafters, some hopping the back fence, some passed out in the house.     The Airbnb is one bedroom, one bath, in Kellogg, Idaho (defendant lives in the same town, so I bet her parents won't let her have parties in their place).   What idiot rents a ski chalet to an 18 year old, and is surprised when it gets trashed, and is full of drunken partiers?      This was his second AIrbnb rental, and claimed it was only for her and her boyfriend, for their one year anniversary, and skiing.     There are texts confirming defendant lied about the rental purpose.     There was a social media invitation by the defendant's sister with the party invitation.   

Defendant booked it for herself, and boyfriend, and invited a bunch of friends.   They came in on Friday, and neighbors called plaintiff and told him about the party, so he went to the house.   He found four cars, beer cans all over, renter, her boyfriend, two people sleeping on floor, two more in the bed, numerous people going over the back fence, and a kid up in the rafters.   The local sheriff texted the property owner about the party at the ski chalet, sheriff lives next door or on the same street.   Defendant still doesn't get it, and it's too bad the sheriff didn't bust them.    The big police report was made on Saturday night when a party guest threw a brick through a neighbor's window.   Defendant seems to think that sounding pathetic, and teary will get her out of this, and she's very wrong.   $799 for plaintiff.   Defendant still thinks she did nothing wrong.   (I wish the Sheriff had come to the chalet, and busted all of the underage boozers). 

What a whiny, morose piece of garbage that 18 year old was!  Sobbing in the hallway, "But it wasn't my FAULT!!"  Gawd, I wanted to slap her.  So dim that she didn't even realize how ridiculous she sounded.  Yes, it was your fault, you lying, moronic, excuse making piece of moldy cheese!

[DoctorK]

4 hours ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

 Defendant seems to think that sounding pathetic, and teary will get her out of this, and she's very wrong. 

It's amazing on Live PD and Cops how many suspects think that sobbing and crying (even sometimes male suspects) will convince the cops to let them go free.

ETA: I really despised the sobbing little twit and her histrionics. She is a spoiled little brat who doesn't think she is responsible for anything, including her choice of that bizarre little boyfriend from Lord of the Rings.

Edited September 4, 2019 by DoctorK

[AuntiePam]

21 minutes ago, DoctorK said:

ETA: I really despised the sobbing little twit and her histrionics. She is a spoiled little brat who doesn't think she is responsible for anything, including her choice of that bizarre little boyfriend from Lord of the Rings.

He was tall, for a Hobbit.  

"But I didn't do anything wrong!" -- that stops working when you're three. 

I shouldn't be too judgey though.  I was still embarrassing myself well into my 60's.  My daughter is 53, and her mantra is still "It's not my fault!"  She says it even when she's not being blamed for anything.  Something bad on the news.  Not her fault.  It's automatic.  Family thinks it's cute now, but not so much when she was 15. [smile]

[DoctorK]

2 minutes ago, AuntiePam said:

Family thinks it's cute now, but not so much when she was 15. [smile]

I would have expected it to be the other way around, youngsters can be stupidly cute but when they get to be grown ups, we expect more from them.

[Byrd is the Word]

12 hours ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

Defendant seems to think that sounding pathetic, and teary will get her out of this, and she's very wrong.   $799 for plaintiff.

“The dishwasher was broken when I got there.” Sure, because the first thing an 18 year old liar does when she shows up in a rented property to throw an underage drinking party is run the dishwasher.

PS, in spite of the foolishness of renting to a teenager, I liked the plaintiff. He answered the questions asked without embellishment and he had excellent evidence. Well prepared, truthful and void of emotion. A rare breed for sure.

[Florinaldo]

I think we have here the beginnings of a cult for people who absolutely despised the defendant in the chalet rental case.

I am sure that her fake routine of playing the spineless-weepy-helpless-innocent little girl has helped her wiggle out of sticky situations before; happily, it did not work this time. She is also probably a habitual liar, a skill she displayed in providing the barest response to questions regarding who wrote the messages; it took a few attempts to finally wrest out of her that it was her sister. Her habit of going through other people to make arrangements through their phones is also very suspect.

In contrast, the plaintiff was well prepared, very methodical and he did not exaggerate his demands as so many others do. As he said, this is his livelihood and he was very business-like about the whole matter, with no unwelcome resentment or aggressivity. A refreshing change.

[AuntiePam]

12 hours ago, DoctorK said:

I would have expected it to be the other way around, youngsters can be stupidly cute but when they get to be grown ups, we expect more from them.

I know, right?  Now she says "It's not my fault!" for things like hurricanes and earthquakes.  That's why it's cute. 

As a teenager, she'd say it for breaking curfew and sneaking boys into her room.  Not cute. 

[funky-rat]

1 hour ago, Florinaldo said:

I am sure that her fake routine of playing the spineless-weepy-helpless-innocent little girl has helped her wiggle out of sticky situations before; happily, it did not work this time. She is also probably a habitual liar, a skill she displayed in providing the barest response to questions regarding who wrote the messages; it took a few attempts to finally wrest out of her that it was her sister. Her habit of going through other people to make arrangements through their phones is also very suspect.

I have a feeling her sister had a lot more to do with this than she let on, and could be one reason why she was so incredibly weepy (she may be covering for the sister, and/or is stuck with the damages because the rental was in her name).  I also suspect she has bee in trouble before, because the Plaintiff said the Defendant's cell phone is Wi-Fi only, and the Defendant said she used the friend's phone because she doesn't have one.  That tells me that she's likely been punished for something and had her phone shut off.  She could call 911 on Wi-Fi only, and not much else.

I'm confused about the brick.  It went through the back windshield of the Defendant's sister's car.  Not sure if it was while it was parked at the party or not.  That was never really touched upon.  I am in agreement that the sheriff should have hauled off everyone to jail.

[AngelaHunter]

15 hours ago, littlebennysmom said:

What a whiny, morose piece of garbage that 18 year old was! 

Aww, poor sad-eyed, weepy little moppet. Too bad there was no video of those idiots acting up in that house. I'm pretty sure we would have seen a different side of little Miss "I'm so pitiful!" *snuffle, sniff*

13 hours ago, AuntiePam said:

"But I didn't do anything wrong!" -- that stops working when you're three. 

She'll still be saying that when she's 40. I loved her little monkey boyfriend, sitting there sucking on his scraggly whiskers.

18 hours ago, AuntiePam said:

The little girls who scratched the cars -- Judy couldn't have been more clear to their mom.  The kids will follow your example.

And they're following her example perfectly - little liars who will say anything to weasel their way out of responsibility. Good job, mom!

[SRTouch]

1 hour ago, funky-rat said:

I'm confused about the brick.  It went through the back windshield of the Defendant's sister's car.  Not sure if it was while it was parked at the party or not.  That was never really touched upon.  I am in agreement that the sheriff should have hauled off everyone to jail.

My understanding was that a neighbor called in a complaint after hearing the sound of brick smashing sister's car window sometime Saturday night/early morning. Plaintiff made a comment that car was in front of his property and defendant whines that car was actually in alley behind the rental.

[SRTouch]

18 hours ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

Nine-Year-Old Vandal and Liar-Plaintiff suing defendant parent when their nine-year old daughter, and another child were filmed on surveillance video vandalizing two cars (three cars were damaged, but plaintiff is only suing for two).     Defendant at first agreed to pay damaged, but didn't.   Plaintiff's witness saw the vandalism, and says there were three little girls playing, and one was leaning on the car.     The video was a 24 hour loop, and no way to download it, so it's gone.    Defendant mother signed a letter saying she would pay for damages, because the older daughter said the 9 year old did it.  Another defendant mother that will never believe her kids did anything wrong.     The photos of the damage to the car are terrible.   9 year old keeps lying in court.    Defendant mother only signed the letter to pay for damages, because she thought there was a video.  Since the video is gone, defendant mother is taking the promise to pay back.  Defendant claims she had eyes on her daughter at all times, and they never left her yard, and she's a total liar.  The children are just learning what their mother has shown them, which is lying is acceptable.     Plaintiff receives $2000 deductible. 

yep, right after JJ praises Mommy for telling the truth despite it not matching daughter's rehearsed story, Mommy switches gears and goes into spin mode. Most telling is Mommy trying to back peddle when she learns the video has been lost.

My question would be whether we even needed the witness testimony and discussion of whether daughters did the damage. Seems to me the signed settlement agreement where Mommy promised to pay was enough.

[NYGirl]

Wow those girls in today's episode that attacked the other girl and took her phone.  What pieces of crap the defendants were...and liars to boot.  I feel sorry for their mother.  The older sister kept saying she wasn't there and talking around and around..trying not to incriminate herself.

Judge Judy didn't like them at all and never once let up on them.

Edited September 4, 2019 by NYGirl

[CrazyInAlabama]

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

First-

Diamond Disaster-Plaintiff suing ex-fiance for ring, and rebate, however defendant says it was her diamond in his setting.   Plaintiff gave her a ring with a cubic zirconia, and defendant put her own diamond in it, and he wants the setting back without the diamond.   JJ tells plaintiff to get over the ring.    The second part is sod installation (it's where he works).    Plaintiff paid $8k for the sod, she paid $2k, and woman kept the entire rebate, so he should receive 80% of the rebate.    They also bought a car together, he claims he wanted to buy it from her, and she never answered.   Instead he dropped the car off at her house.    $3300 for plaintiff, and I'm so glad this is over.  

BMW vs. Ford Focus-Plaintiff suing other driver for hitting his car when defendant was merging into his lane.   Plaintiff has no idea of the date or time of the accident.   Plaintiff had a 1997 BMW, she was driving a Ford Focus.   Both cars were insured, she had full coverage, and BMW was only liability.   From the drawing it looks like man cut defendant off when they merged(according to defendant), plaintiff claims she moved into his lane and hit him.    There are conflicting stories to the insurance companies, each blaming the other.  At first I thought he was at fault, but defendant's allegations are ridiculous, so I think it was defendant's fault.  $935 to plaintiff, defendant's claim dismissed. 

Second-

Woman Shot by BB Gun-Plaintiffs suing defendant for shooting defendant wife with a BB gun, and is sweating bullets (he's also been arrested twice by 19 years old, sad).   Defendants were walking down the street, when she was hit with a BB pellet in the leg.   Police and ambulance arrived, and arrested two young men, including the defendant for shooting the BB gun from an upstairs window.    Defendant was arrested for BB assault, and previously for conspiracy of some kind.   Police report says both men were shooting from the upstairs balcony, and defendant was shooting when woman was hit, and claims it must have been a ricochet.  Defendant owns 2 BB guns, a pistol with a silencer, and a rifle with a scope.    (Defendant is sweating bullets in court).   Girlfriend of defendant is the one with the apartment lease, and JJ points out the damages that have happened to the apartment by boyfriend, and his buddies, that will be her responsibility.   $2600 for plaintiff's medical bills. 

C*** Hound Chaos-Plaintiff suing ex for damage to their apartment.   Plaintiff has a Chihuahua, and defendant has a c*** hound, so we know who did the damage.  Litigants were dating, and defendant brought the c*** hound over to plaintiff's house, and said he would come over and pick it up after his trip (over the road truck driver).    Defendant has six others dogs already, and wanted to keep c*** hound at plaintiff's house for a while.   When plaintiff told defendant that the c*** hound was destroying his house, defendant said to dump the dog at the pound, so plaintiff did.  Now defendant wants money for the dog.    Defendant only had dog for a few days before it was dumped on the plaintiff.  

So plaintiff took the dog to the pound, the way the defendant said to do.   $2543 to plaintiff.

It looks like a Yeti shredded the apartment.  

[CrazyInAlabama]

5 p.m. episodes, both new-

First-

Mean Girls' Vicious Beat Down-An innocent 15 year old girl is punched and kicked repeatedly by two sisters who are caught on camera bragging about the assault.   The defendants' mother witnesses this, and did nothing.     Defendants are 16, and 23.  (The 16 year old defendant is the oldest 16 year old I've seen, and 23 year old looks more like 43).  Plaintiff got off the bus, and 16 year old said she wanted to fight her, and plaintiff walked away, over an iPhone theft.  Defendant claims plaintiff said she stole plaintiff's iPhone.   Defendant lies about cause of fight, and police report about the phone theft was the same day as the fight, not two weeks earlier the way defendant says.   

Rubi (16) punched girl in face, and Rubi and sister beat the stuffing out of plaintiff.   Photographs are horrible of the injuries.    Defendant mother says older criminal doesn't live with her.   Mother witnessed every thing, and did nothing, and Bertha (23) does live at mother's house, and fled the home before police came, and mother lied to the police.  16 year old says mother's lying about older daughter too, and older daughter says mother's a liar also.    JJ says police should arrest older daughter, and send her kids to foster care, not the mother's (grandmother's) custody.     When plaintiff's mother reached the assault site, she took daughter for medical care, and police report talks about theft of phone.   Plaintiff says phone was stolen during the fight by older sister.   

Defendant 16 year old says she was accused of theft of different phone by police, not plaintiff's.    There is a video of the sister bragging about the fight and the beating of the plaintiff.   16 year old is bragging she hurt her hand beating and robbing the girl.   Older sister is on video bragging too.    Both sisters seem to think beating someone, and robbing them is a joke.   Someone who saw the tape on Instagram sent it to the sister of plaintiff.  Video will be given to the police, since investigation is still open, and I hope everyone involved is arrested and prosecuted for robbery, assault, and anything else the police can get a conviction on.  

$4300 to plaintiff.

(I think if parent of plaintiff are smart, they'll move unless defendants' do, and change schools, for the girl's safety). 

Second-

Bed and Breakfast Fraud-Plaintiff rented a room out for B 'n B (I suspect Airbnb), short term rentals to defendant.    Defendant wants a refund for his four nights.    Plaintiff says defendant damaged his garage door by closing the garage door on his trailer.    Plaintiff had a truck, trailer, and another vehicle, and was supposed to have one bedroom/one tenant.   Defendant claims he rented the entire townhouse, and garage, for four days for $200+.     Defendant was told he couldn't park the trailer, and truck on plaintiff's property.   Defendant was catering an event, and wanted to use the townhouse kitchen to prepare food for a commercial job.   Defendant parked his truck and trailer in the townhouse garage, and damaged the garage door.        Defendant says house owner said to park trailer in garage, but park truck on the street.  Defendant claims it was too far away to park the truck.  Then defendant waited until plaintiff left, and parked truck partially in the garage.   Then another  long term tenant uses bedroom, and garage, and she pushed the garage door button, so door went down (it's always left up, because it's the home entrance).     When door went down it hit truck, and damaged the door.  At first defendant said he would fix door, but lied.    $800 to plaintiff

10K Custody Battle-(The litigants hair dye is so wild)  Defendant borrowed money from plaintiff for her eventually unsuccessful custody battle.   She lost in mediation, because children picked the other mother.   Defendant borrowed $4k from plaintiff, and paid back about $500 (still owes $1500).   Plaintiff's witness is the ex-wife, and defendant says the other $2,000 should be the ex-wife's responsibility.     Ex-wife can't find bank records since it was two years ago.   Case dismissed for lack of evidence. 

In the custody case, I thought the ex-wife was the defendant's witness, but I could be totally wrong.   I believe I was distracted by all of the interesting hair coloring jobs, and by the sadness of the case.    I hate custody disputes, for the sake of the children.  

Edited September 5, 2019 by CrazyInAlabama

[Brattinella]

I was falling off my chair watching Judge Judy clean these two hooligan's clocks!  The 23-yr old in particular.  Why is she getting in on pummeling a 15-yr old?  That's a felony on a minor, kiddo.  I wish I had caught hometown name or defendants' names, darn it.  I'd love to follow up on this one.

[AuntiePam]

7 minutes ago, Brattinella said:

I was falling off my chair watching Judge Judy clean these two hooligan's clocks!  The 23-yr old in particular.  Why is she getting in on pummeling a 15-yr old?  That's a felony on a minor, kiddo.  I wish I had caught hometown name or defendants' names, darn it.  I'd love to follow up on this one.

The defendants were Ruby and Bertha Ramirez.  I didn't catch a location.

JJ has zero patience for physical assaults -- especially when it's teenagers.  These kids don't seem to realize how serious it is.  Kick someone in the wrong place and they're dead, and you're a murderer.

[khyber]

56 minutes ago, Brattinella said:

I was falling off my chair watching Judge Judy clean these two hooligan's clocks!  The 23-yr old in particular.  Why is she getting in on pummeling a 15-yr old?  That's a felony on a minor, kiddo.  I wish I had caught hometown name or defendants' names, darn it.  I'd love to follow up on this one.

Adelanto , Ca.

[CrazyInAlabama]

In the two sisters beat up the 15 year old case, I guess they don't realize that because of the phone they can be charged with multiple felonies, because of stealing the iPhone during the beating.    I hope the local authorities charge both sisters with robbery, and felony assault and battery, and the their idiot mother gets charged with lying to the authorities.     

In the funky hair/custody case, didn't the plaintiff, and defendant's ex both work together, at a hair salon?    If so, someone get me the name so I can avoid it.   My guess is the ex (plaintiff witness) wanted full custody, received it, and defendant has to pay child support, so now can't afford to repay the plaintiff.    I thought the entire case was very sad. 

Edited September 5, 2019 by CrazyInAlabama

[Brattinella]

Thank you, @AuntiePam and @khyber !

[Kbg]

On 3/7/2019 at 8:19 PM, AngelaHunter said:

Silly, dweeby-looking dork has been arrested "5 or 6 times" (who's counting?) and goes crashing in on his neighbours while clad only in his panties, seems to find something funny rather than horrific and shameful about that - and he has a girlfriend who wants to live with him. The desperation of women truly knows no bounds.

Those two, Dyer and Lick,  were just sad. Plaintiff thinks his great musical composition is worth fighting for. He lives in his van and can't afford to get his gray roots touched up with some more apricot dye. Def. looks like he spends too much time indoors watching Harry Potter movies. Boring. 

Good ol' Kim Bihm wanted some of what the oily, sleazy, freshly-douchebagged hair dude had and was willing to pay big bucks for it. He has his daddy buy him a house where he pays no rent, he drives a Mercedes. lies about his income on his tax returns and has a ridiculous cougar like you to buy him whatever he wanted at Home Depot, while he grieves over his daughter because he hasn't seen her for two weeks. Oh, and someone broke his head and he had to get it stitched up. Looking for sympathy, Allahverdi? You came to the wrong venue. There is a woman out there who wanted to breed with him. Doesn't even surprise me anymore.

🤣🤣

This is good ol’ Kim Bihm responding to your post.  First of all.... ewwww.   No.... I did not want what he had.  Ugh.

Secondly, if I was a cougar, I would not have sued him or filed a police report THE DAY after I found out about the charges.  

I was doing a favor to someone I thought was a friend.  Turns out he is a douchebag, as you so eloquently phrased it.  

[Kbg]

On 10/24/2018 at 4:13 PM, patty1h said:

I was watching the case of Kathleen Bihm and (first name?) Allahverdi when my power went out - the case of him misusing her Home Depot card.  It was just at the time JJ was grilling her about their past relationship - Bihm said there was no intimacy but the younger Allahverdi had been asking her out. JJ warned her that she may be making it worse by pursuing that line of the case, that's when my screen went black.  Was there any good dirt?  Allahverdi seemed like a loose cannon who couldn't control his rambling while the judge was talking, so I wonder if he was also a nightmare to date.   Thanks. 

On 10/24/2018 at 7:55 PM, augmentedfourth said:

Home Depot credit card case:

JJ (repeatedly): IT IS A VERY BAD IDEA FOR YOU TO GO INTO DETAIL ABOUT WHATEVER RELATIONSHIP YOU HAD WITH THE DEFENDANT. VERY BAD.

Plaintiff: Okay. (proceeds to go into detail)

I'm glad JJ finally put her out of her misery and just gave her the money for the amount on the credit card before kicking them both out.

For yesterday, I agree there was something weird going on with the doves. Whatever happened, I'm fairly confident the defendant was in on it, because who steals doves? And if they're as well-trained as the plaintiff said, wouldn't they eventually just fly back to one of their houses? Unless the dove thief decided to pick up dove training as a hobby?

This is the plaintiff for that case.... you have no idea the amount of editing that case had.   Can you say ratings?  There was a LOT edited out to fit in the time slot.  

[Kbg]

On 10/24/2018 at 4:13 PM, patty1h said:

I was watching the case of Kathleen Bihm and (first name?) Allahverdi when my power went out - the case of him misusing her Home Depot card.  It was just at the time JJ was grilling her about their past relationship - Bihm said there was no intimacy but the younger Allahverdi had been asking her out. JJ warned her that she may be making it worse by pursuing that line of the case, that's when my screen went black.  Was there any good dirt?  Allahverdi seemed like a loose cannon who couldn't control his rambling while the judge was talking, so I wonder if he was also a nightmare to date.   Thanks. 

On 10/25/2018 at 1:30 PM, CrazyInAlabama said:

The entire misuse of the Home Depot credit card was strange.     I think there may have not been a physical relationship, but I think the woman wanted one, and let herself be taken advantage of by the younger man.     It was despicable if the young man actually said any of the things the plaintiff said he did, especially about the son's death.     I don't think you can ever find out who made the allegations to CPS, and it could easily have been someone else that disliked the woman, from an angry client's parent, to some ex of the young man, or someone who blamed her for the son's death.     I don't know her, and I didn't like her either, and I'm not sure I believe everything she said was exactly the truth.    I also thought the slimy defendant was a total jerk, cheating the IRS (which I hope has now caught up to him), and was a scammer.  If the plaintiff has proof, she should file police charges about him using the card after the charges she was paid for, and since everyone knows her dirty business, she shouldn't have to worry about the defendant trying to blackmail her.  

OK, after rethinking this, the mechanic and the HD card lady were definitely an item, and I really want to know if they were together at the hotel, but I guess I never will know.   The Urban Dictionary cinches that suspicion for me.  

First of all.... No.  we Definitely did not have a relationship.  He asked me out again, an I said yes, but that was after I loaned him the card   He saw what he thought was a distraught, sad woman who he could take advantage of.   When he realized I wasn’t a weak woman, willing to “buy” affection, and who filed charges within a couple of days of the incident, he tried to bully and intimidate me into giving in.

What you didn’t see because of editing, was the proof  that the defendant admitted to filing the charges

We were definitely NOT an item, and he definitely did say deplorable things about my son (who did NOT die from a a drug overdose).  He further said I should also commit suicide, and other things to try to bully me into not pursuing charges against him.

so, armchair quarterback all you’d like.  It doesn’t change the facts of the case, only proves that people are willing to judge others based on partial evidence

[Kbg]

On 10/24/2018 at 5:59 PM, CrazyInAlabama said:

Misuse of Home Depot Credit Card-Young mechanic, who is in business with his younger brother, and probably does all kinds of all cash transactions, calls his friend's mother, and borrows her Home Depot credit card, and charges over $3,200, and won't pay for it.   Plaintiff also found out about another $500 or so later, but after she filed the case, so JJ only gives the woman $3,200 +.  

JJ claims the IRS will love giving attention to the family business, and I hope they do, and the state tax people also, wherever they were from. 

The young man claims the plaintiff was hot for him, but both say they never hooked up.    However, after the credit card kerfuffle, when the plaintiff wanted to make a police report about the $3,200 +, plaintiff claims the defendant told people that she was on drugs, gave her late son drugs (he died of an OD), and all kinds of stories to the day care licensing authority.   The p. runs a day care, and was worried about the fallout from filing a police report about the younger man.  

Rerun-Kid ran into street, hit woman's mirror, and crossing guard testifies for plaintiff.     I totally blame the kid and her idiot mother for this.  Kid was jaywalking, and I bet it happens a lot.   However, I wonder if there's a police report that says something different than the d. or p.'s stories, such as speed was much more, or something about driving records?      I bet this kid has had a lot of close calls, and Mommy backs her every time.     P. doesn't get money for the mirror, and I suspect it's under her insurance deductible.      I dislike both sides in this case.   The little girl never looks at her mother, and is just standing there staring, and that seems really odd to me. 

My personal suspicion is not only is JJ usually pro-rug rat v. vehicle, but I think that if the d. lost a penny, even though it wasn't her money, that the girl would have been in real trouble with mom.    The mother didn't seem all that upset about the kid's injuries either, but just trying to get money for what was probably covered by either her insurance, or the p.'s insurance already, and my guess is there was some pain and suffering to get the insurance case to go away too.    Or else the police said the kid was at fault, and the insurance company told the d. to pound sand.           My guess is that kid is used to being the scapegoat for everything that goes wrong with mommy's life.      

I disagree with the decision, but I wonder if there's something else that wasn't brought up in court?    I wonder about mommy's boyfriend, who claimed to be the stepfather?     Something strange going on with this case.    D. has counterclaim, and gets nothing, and still doesn't even seem to notice her daughter.    .     

Rerun #2-p. suing d. for unpaid bail money, and hardship.    Another desperate woman, who just can't wait to pay for things for her law breaking boyfriend.   I love how the p. is trying to say he was arrested for warrants, and as we all know that doesn't equal an arrest.    Arrested for domestic violence, and failure to appear, and it wasn't the defendant, but a girl friend with some of his kids, who he was boinking at the same time.   And the village idiot defendant calls p. and Miss Desperate does bail for the woman-beating loser.   He was on $50,000 bail, she had to put down 4%, and $2k cash.        He has to go to classes for the DV charge, I guess to teach him not to leave witnesses?     

He hasn't paid a penny for his $2k bail, because "he doesn't agree with it".    They broke up when the other woman (his long term gf, apparently the DV victim, called the plaintiff and told her that he was still seeing her), and defendant says that the p. paid for his viagra.    I could have done without that last tidbit. 

When Byrd heard the charge he gave his full attention to the defendant, and I think wanted to show him what violence really is.     

I hate both sides in this case.          

Another thought on the kid running into the side of the van case-Isn't the damage to the kid, and the mirror a lot for a very low speed crash that the p. testified about?      I think she was going a lot faster to cause that much damage to the mirror.    And there was something off about the accident itself with the direction the kid went, and where the accident happened to cause that much damage.   Something was really wrong with the evidence.      Many vehicles have mirrors that fold in, so I wonder why the mirror didn't just fold up?    

My son DID NOT die from a drug overdose.  That wasn’t even hinted at.   So, if you’re going to put your opinions out there, maybe watch the episode more closely

[AngelaHunter]

2 hours ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

In the two sisters beat up the 15 year old case, I guess they don't realize that because of the phone they can be charged with multiple felonies, because of stealing the iPhone during the beating.

What a change, to finally get a serious case instead of more phone bill crap and apartment deposits and foolish women shelling out the big bucks for their POS online losers.

Those girls - especially the 23-year-old - are just vile, rough, ignorant gutter rats and both stand there and say, "My mother is a liar". Imagine, that vicious"Bertha" has children *sad/mad face* who haven't a chance in hell. JJ was so right that she should go to jail and the kids be put in foster care. Rubi just might soon join her the cell. She casually mentions that she knows the phones can fall out of the sweat pants because hers fell out in a previous fight - another of many, I'm sure.  Incorrigible, both of them.

Speaking of losers: BB guns. Ariel proudly says her parents are very happy she's living with Christopher, who has been arrested three times at the age of 19. Yes, I'm sure mom and dad threw a congratulatory dinner when their daughter hooked up him and his pistol with a silencer. Christopher in the hall: "There are thousands of kids on that block with BB guns."  Could have been any of those thousands who shot the plaintiff,  so he has no remorse. Imagine if they put him in the same cell as Bertha? That would be a punishment that might make him straighten up, but I doubt it.  His next crime will put him in the "Three-time loser" category. 

[PrincessPurrsALot]

Jurists,

1) Transgender women are women.  Transgender men are men.  There is no debate.  Do not misgender people in an attempt at humor.  We follow the GLAAD guidelines.

2) Even plaintiffs need to follow the rules.  We snark people on TV, not fellow posters. Confused? read the SITE FAQs or PM @PrincessPurrsALot.

[funky-rat]

RE: Iphone Beat-down

Jail won't do anything for those girls.  They remind me so much of Mr. Funky's cousins, and jail is a badge of honor for them.  They should be sentenced to live and work (unpaid) in a shelter for violence victims, or similar.  It may not "get through" to them, but there's no cred to be added to your reputation for that.

Edited September 5, 2019 by funky-rat

[bad things are bad]

15 hours ago, Kbg said:

This is good ol’ Kim Bihm responding to your post.  

Hey Kim, welcome! hope you can dish a little about the behind-the-scenes stuff

I did miss the episode so I don't know the details of your case, but would be interested in your take on the show

[VartanFan]

Quote

My guess is the ex (plaintiff witness) wanted full custody, received it, and defendant has to pay child support, so now can't afford to repay the plaintiff.    I thought the entire case was very sad. 

Oh and I thought that the mother of the children was someone else completely (not at the show at all) and that the D was basically saying that the P witness (and her ex wife) owes the money back TOGETHER with her because as a couple they requested it of the P.  Otherwise, why would a both sides of a couple request a loan together if it was for a custody case?  I might be missing some pertinent details, however.

In the case of the AirBnB rental, I thought the point was that the D was either in the process of hooking up or unhooking the trailer from the garage when the other roommate came home and, without looking, closed the garage door.  Either way, I frankly think that the P witness lady was at least 1/2 responsible.  

[augmentedfourth]

3 minutes ago, VartanFan said:

Oh and I thought that the mother of the children was someone else completely (not at the show at all) and that the D was basically saying that the P witness (and her ex wife) owes the money back TOGETHER with her because as a couple they requested it of the P.  Otherwise, why would a both sides of a couple request a loan together if it was for a custody case?  I might be missing some pertinent details, however.

I'm still catching up on my huge backlog, but yes, this was my interpretation of the case, that the mother who won custody was a different person from the ex-wife witness (and wasn't present).

[funky-rat]

17 minutes ago, augmentedfourth said:

I'm still catching up on my huge backlog, but yes, this was my interpretation of the case, that the mother who won custody was a different person from the ex-wife witness (and wasn't present).

That's how I took it too.  That there is a 3rd person involved, and the D and the P's witness were a couple at the time, and trying to get custody of D's kids, but they subsequently split up.

[Byrd is the Word]

18 hours ago, Kbg said:

This is good ol’ Kim Bihm responding to your post.

Welcome Kim.  Thanks for stepping out from inside the looking glass. Maybe you'll enlighten us on the inner workings of the Judge Judy show.

I vaguely remember your case. There was an insinuation of a romantic component. 
But as a grown man with a job, I had 0 respect for a guy who takes money from a woman. Just the whiff of something like that was enough to sour me on a defendant.

[CrazyInAlabama]

Sorry, Kim.  I thought the sleazy defendant was hinting about the 'romance', and other things.   I think defendant is one of those that's his own one and only fan.   I think he's one of those sleazy people who try to move in on people during times of grief, and are looking for whatever they can get.  

Edited September 5, 2019 by CrazyInAlabama

[CrazyInAlabama]

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

First-

Home Improvement Thief-Plaintiff accuses cousins of stealing his rebate card ($627 originally, and was worth $504 after using some for purchases) from a home improvement store.   Defendant claims he bought it the rebate card from the a man in the parking lot for $250, and witness/cousin spent $400+.   However, the only way to find out what's on the card is inside the store.   The two defendants are on video at the store using the card, for $481.   $481 to plaintiff

Ill-Fated Roommates-Plaintiff is suing her sister's ex-boyfriend, and plaintiff, her husband (lease was in plaintiff and husband's name only), sister, and now ex moved in together.   Defendant claims he paid a lot of security deposit, and rent.   Plaintiff claims she loaned defendant $1,041 for tires, and alignment.   Defendant claims it was a barter/exchange for car use, not a loan.    Plaintiff kicked defendant out of the apartment, without paperwork for eviction, because he was irritating, and defendant and sister were constantly fighting.   Police showed up at the door, and sister was saying "don't open the door".   Defendant was on probation for DUI, and was cited for battery on a spouse (I think that's the sister that's the defendant's witness).    Defendant gets rent for last month back, and doesn't have to pay utility bills.    Plaintiff gets loan amount, minus rent, equals $711

Second-

Move Back In With Mom-Plaintiff (21 yrs. old) suing ex-boyfriend for breaking lease (only plaintiff's name was on lease), and unpaid loan.   However, defendant claims plaintiff never paid rent (they lived there for 20 months).   However, plaintiff was paying groceries all of the time.  There was a third roommate that was unfortunately incarcerated.   Plaintiff signed a second lease, with only her name on it, and still wasn't paying rent.  Landlord wants $2850 for lease breaking fee.    The litigants had non-paying tenants, and utilities were shut off, so they all moved home with their respective parents.  $2420 to apartment complex from defendant, and plaintiff will have to pay her half (she just said 'conversate') 

Unwed Parents and the Stolen Guitar-Plaintiff and dad are suing ex-boyfriend for negligent handling of personal belongings.   Litigants have a 6 year old together, and defendant has full custody of child, with visitation for plaintiff.    Then litigants have a verbal fight in court about custody, and other things.    Plaintiff claims defendant disposed of her father's vintage guitar, and she was living in his apartment for a while (defendant lives with his mother, and a couple of other relatives).    There was an argument, and he put plaintiff's belongings outside, including the guitar.   If guitar was so precious, why was it left at defendant's place? 

Defendant says he put items out on enclosed patio, and all was gone the next day.   Case dismissed.    

Edited September 5, 2019 by CrazyInAlabama

[CrazyInAlabama]

5 p.m., both new episodes-

First-

$137,000 Fire Insurance Windfall-Plaintiff suing niece for unpaid loan, attorneys fees, and tools that weren't returned.  Niece's home with mother burned enough to be uninhabitable, they relocated to motels, and later a rental property.   Plaintiff is a beginning contractor, and worked on his sister and niece's home.    Niece says uncle started working on home, received $137,000 to general contractor the job,   Before rebuilding house had to be rescued from foreclosure.   Plaintiff loaned money ($3100) to niece to catch up on bills, and rental car for sister's medical appointment transportation.  No proof of the loan.         

House has been in foreclosure since 2014!  There was a modification, because of mother's illness.    I am sick of the defendant's muttering, nodding, giggling, and interrupting.    I'm hoping niece gets the Byrd boot soon.  Litigants had an argument, and she alleges uncle pushed her, and irritated an old injury, no medical or police report.      "It is what it is" comes out of niece's mouth, so I don't believe her either.   Case dismissed.  (I believe JJ's guess, that it's all to get money from the show).   Didn't the niece babble something about the uncle not finishing too?   I'm actually shocked that a house that was that far behind on mortgage payments wasn't actually foreclosed on.    And I believe the uncle's guess that the niece is going to try to keep the house after her mother's gone is true.   

Second-

If It's Too Good to Be True...RUN!-Teenager buys two used dirt-bikes, and one turned out to be stolen property.    The bikes turned out to be a great deal, but with a deal if you buy both.   Plaintiff bought the two bikes, and listed one for sale for $2250, and it turned out the prospective buyer was the real owner who proved it was his stolen bike.    Defendant bought bike six years ago, and never had a title for it, and only paid $2,000 for a bike that should have sold for $4-6,000.       Case dismissed, both got great deals, and were fools.     

Termination Blues-Plaintiff apartment manager, suing neighbor for causing him to be fired.  Neither side have witnesses.   Both litigants still live in the same apartment complex.   Plaintiff was manager for 16 years, and he claims he was fired because of complaints from defendant to management.    Defendant is self-employed, lives off of investments, hasn't filed tax returns in years, and has been replacing ex-wife as roommate by renting rooms (Please tell me an IRS person is watching this).     Plaintiff has no proof or witnesses, but is pursuing wrongful termination locally.    Defendant told to stuff it.   

Edited September 8, 2019 by CrazyInAlabama

[AuntiePam]

Judy Judy Judy.  Just because plaintiff made some profit from rehabbing his sister's house doesn't mean the niece should be off the hook for a loan.  And it was a loan -- she said the word twice. 

JJ doesn't like family making money off of family.  I get that, but if they did the work, they earned the money. 

Defendant niece was way too smirky and pleased with herself.  I feel sorry for her mom. 

[Florinaldo]

1 hour ago, AuntiePam said:

udy Judy Judy.  Just because plaintiff made some profit from rehabbing his sister's house doesn't mean the niece should be off the hook for a loan.  And it was a loan -- she said the word twice.  

JJ doesn't like family making money off of family.  I get that, but if they did the work, they earned the money.

I totally agree. I think her parting words were something like " you have received enough money already".

Imagine if someone on the production team was foolish enough to tell her that if she asked for a bonus in her contract.

[VartanFan]

14 hours ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

f It's Too Good to Be True...RUN!-Teenager buys two used dirt-bikes, and one turned out to be stolen property. 

I feel like Judes showed, yet again, how little she knows about normal folk in this case.  It's not uncommon for people to be selling stuff way below 'market' or 'retail' value on Craigslist.  My husband does it all the time with snowmobiles.  Frankly he finds a lot of deals because people are divorcing (or financial morons want to go riding NOW and don't price shop or look for good financing).  Then...he know a LOT mechanically, he spruces them up, and then sells them and makes a profit.  ANother thing is if he buys a snowmobile and it comes with the trailer...he might immediately sell the trailer (he already has one) to defray the cost of the actual machine.  It truly is not uncommon.  That's similar to what this kid did.  I mean - they were both idiots and I don't feel like either deserved anything but her dressing down was what I found her out of touch about. 

[patty1h]

So much f.a.k.e h.a.i.r in the case with the vandalized car - I didn't even pay attention to the details, I was so mesmerized by the amount of hairdo foolishness on the screen.  I have natural hair and I find it fascinating what women will put on their heads and go out in public. This case had me very entertained.

Plaintiff Cassandra Young had the dumbest style, with the swirled donut on top and white stripes on the sides.  Her daughter Natereanna looked tragic with an inch-wide center part, so tacky that you could see the weave tracks.  The other daughters hair was not quite as horrific.

Dajja Pierce had strange black eyes and a dollar store blue wig glued to her head.  Yeesh to the lot of them.

[SRTouch]

7 hours ago, VartanFan said:

I feel like Judes showed, yet again, how little she knows about normal folk in this case.  It's not uncommon for people to be selling stuff way below 'market' or 'retail' value on Craigslist. 

Absolutely..... you can find amazing bargains on CL (you can also find stuff WAY overpriced)

[CrazyInAlabama]

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

First-

Bloody Break-In-Plaintiff woman is suing ex for unpaid rent, and apartment damages.   Plaintiff says defendant ex moved out suddenly, breaking the lease, and not paying the rest of the rent.   Defendant says they had a fight, she walked home, and plaintiff broke into the apartment, bled everywhere, and plaintiff denies this.  Plaintiff says their apartment lease automatically renewed.    (Anita Leach, plaintiff has a huge, cute flower on her lapel).      $1295 was charged between for damage in the apartment (not including the broken window that was repaired).    Defendant said he would pay his half of the rent for the final month after he moved out.  Defendant says plaintiff hit his parked car, and called him to tell him she did it.     Cases dismissed.  

Don't Block My Number-Plaintiff suing ex girlfriend for unpaid loan, rent, etc., with her 17 year old son, and split the bills,  and accuses defendant  of cheating on him, and blocking his calls.    Then defendant was going to have daughter and husband will move into the apartment, and help with the rent, how ever the daughter never moved in, and defendant kept lying to plaintiff.    $1200+ to plaintiff. 

Second-

Teen Basketball Player Vs. Tough Coach-Plaintiff Grandmother, and daughter are suing former basketball coach, and travel basketball league owner, because coach was picking on the daughter.       Daughter had played in the same league 4 years ago, and other leagues in the years between.    During the previous period, the grandmother wasn't charged anything, it's usually very expensive.    Granddaughter was in a school league also, and still played in the travel league.   Granddaughter didn't go to some practices, and quit between two tournament games, because she was yanked out of the first game.   Daughter quit, and Grandmother didn't want to pay the rest of the season fees, even though granddaughter was getting playing time.   Grandmother wants a refund of the $1400 total she was supposed to pay for the season in the travel league.    Granddaughter wanted to play in the travel league for exposure at tournaments, and have a future professional career.    Plaintiff gets $1,000 back.    

[CrazyInAlabama]

5 p.m. episodes, both new-

First-

Don't You Ever Watch This Show?-Plaintiff suing her daughter's former friend for car damages ($4600), punitive damages for ruining her daughter's birthday.   (Is the defendant's hair green?  Or is it my TV?).    Defendant and friends were in Walmart's parking lot, and one or all of the three vandalized the defendant's car.  Plaintiff daughter says defendant broke auto glass, and another girl ruined other parts of the car.   Plaintiff didn't give the defendant's name to the police.   $3500 to plaintiff for car damages, nothing for the birthday party ruining.   (I think plaintiff should have received zero, for not telling the police who did the damage.  However, she was fine at taking her on national TV instead?)

Ill-Prepared Baby Daddy-Plaintiff suing defendant for unpaid loan to reinstate his driver's license.  Defendant had a suspended license, and was caught driving suspended (since 2015-2016).   Defendant had to take classes, and pay for the license, and pay the back tickets, and it cost over $741, and he repaid $216. Defendant claims he picked her child up from school for seven months, but plaintiff says she takes her kids to school.  $525 to plaintiff.   

Second-

Your Mother Would Roll Over in Her Grave-Plaintiff sues late mother's boyfriend over a $250 used car.   Defendant took care of mother when she was ill (through surgery, and three chemo rounds), not plaintiff.   Woman went to visit only when her children had therapy in the same town.   Plaintiff's wife also didn't take care of the mother.    Defendant had an 18 year old Honda, and eventually junked for $250.   They didn't have a celebration of life for mother for months, and didn't even invite the defendant.   Defendant claims plaintiff was mean to mother, and a month after mother died, she came to the home with the police.   He gave clothes to plaintiff, and that's all.   They sound very poor financially.  

Case dismissed.

The Cat That Could Have Killed Me-Plaintiff had defendant pet sitting his dog, for free for over a month.    When plaintiff came to visit dog, dog chased cat, and he went to rescue cat, and cat bit him.   Plaintiff wants $481 for medical bills from infection from cat bite.  Case dismissed.  

Imprisoned Mom Sues Daughter-Plaintiff mother suing her daughter for stealing her belongings (in a storage unit) during her unfortunate incarceration.    Defendant alleges plaintiff used defendant's two children as a deduction on her taxes(this happened several years ago).    Plaintiff claims that defendant forged her name on a letter to storage unit to get access.    IRS letter says that they are auditing plaintiff's taxes.   Defendant's case dismissed.    Plaintiff was in jail for 15 days for not finishing her community work project, not her first incarceration.      Plaintiff has no receipts for her storage unit items, including 10 comforters, brand new 2 man tent, etc.  Laptop, 2 leather jackets, 11 fishing poles.      Case dismissed.    Defendant claims she cleaned out storage unit, and it was stolen property, and she returned it to the rightful owners. 

Edited September 8, 2019 by CrazyInAlabama

[augmentedfourth]

I rewound just to be sure - the plaintiff in the dead mother's ancient car case was introduced as being 21 years old, and then later says her three kids are ages 7, 6, and 5. Either some of those kids are biologically the wife's, or damn, she got started early. Guess there really isn't much else to do in certain parts of Indiana.