All Episodes Talk: All Rise

[CrazyInAlabama]

5 p.m. episodes, both new-

First (New)-

Father Reports Suspected Child Abuse-Plaintiffs (child's father, and grandmother) suing one year old child's mother /defendant for threatening plaintiff over a CPS report.   Plaintiff, and defendant have a little child together, and defendant has two other children of her own.    Plaintiff grandmother claims she made loans to defendant for home repairs, after litigants were never in a relationship, this is dismissed.    Loans are dismissed.    

Plaintiff filed a CPS report over little son's injuries, he had abrasions, marks on face, scratches, a bad mark next to child's eye.   The photos are sad to look at, even through the blur they show put on them.   Defendant claims all injuries were from plaintiff, and not her and current boyfriend.   Doctor's report says bruises are not consist with a fall, the bruises and scratches are on the child's chest, back, face, and other places.    Unfortunately, CPS gave the child back to the mother full time.   So defendant's CPS false claim report is dismissed.     Everything dismissed, and JJ suggests that plaintiff father keep his eye on baby.   Defendant claims plaintiff did all of the injuries.  

Pit Bull Bites Man in Behind-Plaintiff suing fellow dog owner/defendant Pit Bull owner for her Pit Bull biting his behind.   Plaintiff brought his Corgi to a dog park, defendant claims bite on plaintiff's behind was plaintiff's fault.   Defendant claims plaintiff tried to kick and punch her dog.     

Plaintiff said defendant's dog was being aggressive, and when he went to rescue his 10 month old Corgi, defendant's dog bit him in the fanny.    How refreshing, plaintiff has medical bills, and just wants out of pocket medical expenses.    He also wants lost wages, and isn't getting that.    Defendant took Cujo, after the attack, and left without leaving her name or any contact information.   Animal control had to track her down to find out animal's rabies status, and I hope they charged defendant too.   Plus, I hope her homeowner's or renter's insurance will be contacted too.    It took months to find the defendant.        (Defendant is such a jerk.    She doesn't care that her dog bit someone, and had to have a full rabies series).   $3,000 to plaintiff.   (Hall-terview by defendant is delusional). 

Second (New)-

Burning Man Bad Vibes-Plaintiff (blue haired) and defendant were at Burning Man, and plaintiff is suing defendant over breaching their agreement for accommodations at Burning Man.    Plaintiff was staying in defendant's RV at Burning Man.  Defendant claims the RV sleeps five.  Plaintiff was getting a ticket for $500 for defendant,   Only the plaintiff was staying in the RV, with defendant, his witness, and then he added two other people to the RV.   Because RV had five people in it, plaintiff wants her $500 back.   They were supposed to go for 10 days, and plaintiff claims defendant left the same day he arrived,    Defendant claims the next morning after he arrived, plaintiff saw his girlfriend in the RV, and blew her top.   So defendant left that spot and moved the RV to another spot, after the plaintiff was so ugly.      Plaintiff was upset about defendant's girlfriend being there, and not paying dues, that didn't involve the plaintiff.   Plaintiff's ridiculous case is dismissed.    Defendant's stupid case also dismissed.  

Meth Users Age Rapidly-Plaintiff suing former roommate for return of rent, lease breaking costs, and utility bills.   The litigants have known each other since elementary school.   Poor Byrd will have to explain what "Molly" drugs are.    Plaintiff claims legal roommate defendant was inviting underage people, 16 and 17,  (one in court is 17, and one brought her baby), over to use drugs, including Molly/Ecstasy  (hope I'm spelling that right).   Plaintiff claimed they threw a firecracker at her, and were also using Meth (Byrd claims Molly and Meth are the same thing?).     JJ tells them what Meth users look like, which of course goes in one ear, and out the other on defendant and her 17 year old buddy.   

After plaintiff moved out, she paid the next month's rent, and defendant will only get one month's rent, and plaintiff will get her name off of the lease.   

(I don't catch Hot Bench, it's on at 2:30 here, and I usually don't remember it's on).   

Edited February 13, 2020 by CrazyInAlabama

[4Sibes Redux]

On 2/10/2020 at 6:00 PM, CrazyInAlabama said:

  (Since when are Huskies a solid color?) 

The AKC Standard allows all colors of Siberian Huskies. I have seen many colors over the years, but have only seen a picture of an all black one once. From what I could observe on TV, the dog was a poor representative of the breed standard. For one thing, the coat looked wrong to me. I wondered if he had some Finnish Lapphund in him (only an instinctive guess). 
 

Here’s an old reference that I frequented back in my novice Sibe days: 

https://www.huskycolors.com/colors.html

[maggiemae]

The husky did look like a very nice dog.....however the muzzle on the seat next to her witness was concerning.

[CrazyInAlabama]

I bet the producers wanted a muzzle on the dog, until they saw if the dog was freaked out by the lights, and audience.      However, the part of the episode I liked was seeing how happy the dog was to see the defendants.     

[stephinmn]

On 2/1/2020 at 9:01 PM, parrotfeathers said:

Can money be deposited in a closed account?

No. It goes back to the account it was sent from UNLESS the account is charged off. In that case, the bank keeps what is owed and sends out a check for the rest.

[parrotfeathers]

13 hours ago, stephinmn said:

No. It goes back to the account it was sent from UNLESS the account is charged off. In that case, the bank keeps what is owed and sends out a check for the rest.

Well if the account was closed (as defendant said) why didn't it go back to the plaintiff?

[CrazyInAlabama]

My guess is in the scammer case, that the account wasn't closed, and the lying defendant kept her cut, and sent the rest to her fellow scammer.  

[KittyMom4]

16 hours ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

Burning Man Bad Vibes-Plaintiff (blue haired) and defendant were at Burning Man, and plaintiff is suing defendant over breaching their agreement for accommodations at Burning Man.

Did the plaintiff ever explain why she was upset that the girlfriend was there? Mr. Keps' thought was she thought she and the defendant were going to be 'together' while there. And I am a novice when it comes to Burning Man, but everything I've read makes it sound like a week of free love, music, drugs and alcohol, so I'm not sure why she was worried about the girlfriend being there if it's all supposed to be 'do whatever you want', but maybe I'm wrong about the purpose of the festival?

[Ilovecomputers]

24 minutes ago, BexKeps said:

Did the plaintiff ever explain why she was upset that the girlfriend was there? Mr. Keps' thought was she thought she and the defendant were going to be 'together' while there. And I am a novice when it comes to Burning Man, but everything I've read makes it sound like a week of free love, music, drugs and alcohol, so I'm not sure why she was worried about the girlfriend being there if it's all supposed to be 'do whatever you want', but maybe I'm wrong about the purpose of the festival?

JJ asked her a couple of times and Smurfette's response was always something to the effect of "[Defendant] wouldn't pay his girlfriend's dues so it was affecting my Burning Man experience."  Your husband's theory makes much more sense. 

Yeah, I'll sign up for a road trip with five random strangers in an RV.  What could possibly go wrong?

[KittyMom4]

2 hours ago, Ilovecomputers said:

Yeah, I'll sign up for a road trip with five random strangers in an RV.  What could possibly go wrong?

Right??? Neither one of those two seemed to have a brain cell between them, I'm glad no one got anything.

[CrazyInAlabama]

3 p.m. rerun episodes, probably 2016-

First-

Bookkeeper Caught Stealing-Plaintiff suing former bookkeeper, who was convicted of stealing from plaintiff's business.   Plaintiff says he loaned $2800 to defendant, but thieving defendant says it was only $1200.     Defendant wrote plaintiff a check for $2000, that says 'partial payment'.     Defendant claims plaintiff made frequent loans to employees.    Defendant was supposed to make restitution as a part of her sentence, and claims restitution covers the amount of her loan.   Criminal court restitution was either $1200, or 658.00, not sure which.   Defendant's husband is makes a lot of excuses.   Plaintiff says they still owe him $1300.    

(The worst part of embezzlement, is that they virtually never get jail time, and restitution is a total joke).

Plaintiff receives $1300.    

Friend Bailout Bummer-Plaintiff suing defendant for an unpaid loan to pay legal fees ($5,000).   Plaintiff claims defendant wanted money for legal fees, and defendant says he hasn't needed legal fees for many years.    A year after the loan, defendant paid plaintiff with two checks totaling $5,000, but defendant put a stop payment on one check.  Defendant's checking account statement does not show any account balance.  Defendant is sent out to get proof that he has $5,000 in the checking account.   The day defendant wrote check, defendant had a balance of less than $500, and the replacement check was written when account had about $300.   $5,000 to plaintiff. 

Second-

Good Samaritan or Stalking Friend-Plaintiff suing defendant/ former friend for the return of a TV(5 years old), a broken phone, and gas money ($550).    Defendant claims plaintiff stalked her. (Defendant's beige underlay material on her lace dress makes it look like she's not wearing anything under it).   Plaintiff loaned defendant a TV.  Defendant says TV wasn't a loan, but a gift.    TV is still at defendant's former home, when she moved out to avoid an abusive ex.      Plaintiff gets nothing for TV.   

Plaintiff claims defendant broke her phone, while defendant was pushing plaintiff out of the apartment she was in then.   Plaintiff claims they were in a relationship, but defendant says they were just drinking buddies.  Plaintiff came to defendant's new apartment, defendant told plaintiff to leave, and pushed her outside.    Plaintiff claims defendant threw her phone out.     Case dismissed.  

Blindside Collision-Plaintiff suing motorist for car damages from a car accident.    Defendant was driving her witness' car, which was insured.    Plaintiff loaned her witness her car, (her live in boyfriend).   Plaintiff was in left lane, driving straight, and a truck was in right lane, Defendant was waved out from a side street to make a left in front of plaintiff.   Defendant pulled out to make left turn, and plaintiff hit her.      Defendant swears the plaintiff was behind the truck, swerved around it, and hit her.   Either way plaintiff had right of way.   Both cars were insured.       $1250 to plaintiff

 

Edited February 16, 2020 by CrazyInAlabama

[CrazyInAlabama]

5 p.m. episodes, both new-

First (New)-

Truck Takes a Horse-Kicking-Plaintiff suing defendant/horse owner for defendant's horse getting stuck between two trucks, and kicking plaintiff's truck.   Suing for damages, harassment, and threats.     Litigants live on 12 acre property, in separate homes, each have 3 horses.    Property is fenced to separate horses.    Defendant boards other people's horses, and one of the boarder horses got loose, and attacked the plaintiff's truck.    (Defendant has colorful, pink, blue and purple hair, and it coordinates with her tattoos).   Defendant locks driveway perimeter gate (to the main road), and then she opens the gate to the pasture, so they can graze.    Plaintiff looked out, saw defendant's boarder horses out, and getting into plaintiff's horse feed.   The defendant's boyfriend's broken down truck (truck has been there for 8 months) was parked on the main parking area, and was close by the plaintiff's truck, and one horse was wedged between the two trucks, panicked, and kicked the snot out of plaintiff's truck/car.    Sorry defendant has cancerous kidney issues, but that has nothing to do with her horses getting out, stealing feed (that can cause choke, or colic), or leaving the horses unattended.     (Plaintiff claims the kickstarter, bake sales, Gofundme, etc. money was used by defendant for saddle purchases, tattoos, etc).  (I was naughty, and looked at defendant's Go gimmie account, and the donations certainly dropped off quite a few months ago?    Bet it's not the only begging account she's had). 

Plaintiff gets $1,000 to fix and paint his car. 

Dead Ants in Resort Freezer-Plaintiff suing rental property owner for money he spent renting her condo at Buena Pointe, because it had ants in the freezer, neighboring condo was being painted, and four weeks of rental $5276 was the total cost.     Plaintiff is complaining a neighbor condo is being painted.   Plaintiff complains that because of the danger of paint getting on the patio furniture, that the furniture was covered up, and unusable for two weeks.   Plaintiff arrived on the 9th, and left eight days early, the 23rd.  The last two weeks were only $1,000 a week.     

Plaintiff complained about amenities, ants in the bedroom and kitchen, freezer (no pictures), condo didn't have a blender (oh, the humanity!), couldn't use the patio furniture because the neighboring condo was being painted (for two weeks?).    The condo was redoing the outside paint, so they had to cover the patio furniture because of pressure washing, and painting, and were there for 1 1/2 weeks.     Painting was over (by the 23rd) before plaintiff left on the 28th, and he wants $5,000 back.    Case is dismissed.   What a whiny jerk.  

Second (New)-

KISS Costume Missing Bat Wings-Plaintiff commissioned a KISS costume, complete with bat wings he wanted to wear to a KISS concert, he want the costume cost returned ($850), and attorney fees.    Plaintiff commissioned the costume in December 2018, for delivery in  April 2019, eight weeks later than when plaintiff wanted the costume.  Plaintiff wanted costume by 1 February.    Plaintiff wanted a specific version of the costume, complete with big bat wings.    No bat wings were included, and costume was eight weeks late.  There is no "time is of the essence" or due date on the contract, but it's in text messages (outside the four corners of the contract).   Defendant says order is non-cancellable or refundable.   However, plaintiff still wanted the costume, even though it was late.   The wings were $100, and defendant claims the bat wings were in the same box as the plaintiff's costume. 

 Box was opened by plaintiff at his attorney's office, but can anyone prove box wasn't opened, and reclosed by plaintiff first after wings were removed?     Plaintiff didn't return the costume since received in April, and October when the case was filmed.     Defendant counter claims for harassment, and many nasty texts from plaintiff.   Unfortunately, slander doesn't apply when there is truth in the allegations.  Defendant and witness claim the bat wings were packed in the same bubble wrap, and box as the  Plaintiff will get $100 for the wings.       

Drug Test Fail and Bail-Plaintiff suing defendant/step brother over a car sale. on payments.   A 2003 GMC Envoy, $2700-$4300, but car was $6,000 to step-brother, because plaintiff had put in a brand new transmission and motor.    Defendant is counter suing for stolen property.  Defendant claims sale was for $2800, and still owed $940 or so.   

There was a fight between the brothers, claiming defendant was on drugs, so he was told to get out of plaintiff's house.   Defendant failed drug test too.    Plaintiff says property he's being sued for is still at his house.   Plaintiff will carefully pack the property, and with an escort the defendant will meet at the father's shop and exchange items.    Plaintiff says defendant had a gun at his house too.     I guess defendant never heard of felon in possession charges?     The step brother will never get it together, but at least the plaintiff tried.   Hopefully plaintiff will never trust the step brother again.  

$945 for plaintiff.  

 

Edited February 17, 2020 by CrazyInAlabama

[7EasyPayments]

1 minute ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

KISS Costume Missing Bat Wings-Plaintiff commissioned a KISS costume, complete with bat wings he wanted to wear to a KISS costume, he want the costume cost returned ($850), and attorney fees.    Plaintiff commissioned the costume in December 2018, for delivery in  April 2019, eight weeks later than when plaintiff wanted the costume.  Plaintiff wanted costume by 1 February.    Plaintiff wanted a specific version of the costume, complete with big bat wings.    No bat wings were included, and costume was eight weeks late.  There is no "time is of the essence" or due date on the contract, but it's in text messages (outside the four corners of the contract).   Defendant says order is non-cancellable or refundable.   However, plaintiff still wanted the costume, even though it was late.   The wings were $100, and defendant claims the bat wings were in the same box as the plaintiff's costume.   Box was opened by plaintiff at his attorney's office, but prove box wasn't opened, and reclosed by plaintiff first?     Plaintiff didn't return the costume since received in April, and October when the case was filmed.     Defendant counter claims for harassment, and many nasty texts from plaintiff.   Unfortunately, slander doesn't apply when there is truth in the allegations.  Defendant and witness claim the bat wings were packed in the same bubble wrap, and box as the  Plaintiff will get $100 for the wings.       

 

I am NOT buying the 'serendipity' that the P videotaped his opening of the delayed package at his lawyer's office. He opened and removed the BAT WINGS. 🙄

Of the multitude of weirda$$ Ps and Ds, KISS boi was creepy and extremely unlikable.

Rock  all night and party ev-er-y-day, indeed. LOLOLOLOL 🤣 😈

[Chalby]

On 2/12/2020 at 3:59 PM, CrazyInAlabama said:

5 p.m. episodes, both new-

First (New)-

Father Reports Suspected Child Abuse-Plaintiffs (child's father, and grandmother) suing one year

Burning Man Bad Vibes-Plaintiff (blue haired) and defendant were at Burning Man, and plaintiff is suin

But I need your summaries to remember all my Hot Bench cases, lol. Ah well, I will struggle on without you. The abuse of the child case was SO sad. No one year old child should be covered in bruises and scratches. It just ridiculous and I hope Dad put enough of a lean on mom that she'll be afraid if the child even bumps his head innocently. I feel for her other 2 kids who don't have a father in their life to protect them.

Burning Man case was just strange. Clearly there was something else involved over a $75 parking charge. I bet gal was thinking she could get something going with blondie in his RV and was furious to see he had a girlfriend. There was no other excuse for her to get angry over something that had no impact on her, whatsoever.

[Chalby]

On 1/15/2020 at 1:59 PM, CrazyInAlabama said:

 Plaintiff claims it was defendant's job to fix the visitor's list, and it isn't.    Defendant also officiated a wedding for someone else that day at the same jail, apparently that bride followed the rules. 

I cannot get over how people will air their laundry on television for the chance to be seen, or get a couple of bucks. I would rather hide under a rock than bring a stupid complaint against a woman for not being available to marry her and her convict boyfriend in jail. Who does this AND talks about it? Class is clearly something that can't be bought and sometimes not taught. 

[augmentedfourth]

My mom's been staying with us a few nights this week while I recover from a tonsillectomy, so I have my JJ watching buddy back for a little while. At the beginning of the vacation rental case, I said to her, "This isn't going to go well for the plaintiff, he ate the steak," and we were highly amused at how accurate I was. 😄

 

The KISS costume case was amazing, and way more fun than all the loan/rent/car sale/babydaddy drama/whatever cases. More of those, please.

 

The plaintiff in the last case was actually a woman. At least "Colleen" was displayed on the screen and the announcer used "her" in the introduction. Meh, whatever she/they/Colleen is doing, they seem to have it more together than the step-brother.

 

Going back to the Burning Man case (which was also more fun than the standard fare), I too was trying to figure out why the plaintiff got all worked up about the defendant's girlfriend's fees not being paid, and I also came to the same conclusion that she might have thought she was going to be, um, rocking out in the RV with the defendant and seeing the girlfriend there spoiled her plans.

[Chalby]

On 2/3/2020 at 1:44 PM, patty1h said:

Lisa Palma was one scary tenant. She did not want to hear that her 30-day notice clause was not enforceable and it was great to see JJ drum it into her brain that that "rule" was garbage. 

That's the part that really baffled me. How on earth could anyone think a six month lease requires 30 day notice. In effect, the lease is already like 180 day notice, so what doesn't Ms. Palma understand? Her landlord should dump her but he won't because she pays rent and doesn't complain.

[Chalby]

On 2/7/2020 at 1:42 AM, Jaialaiguy said:

Have no idea how both of you could be confused by this. The contract states "I will be at your birth UNLESS at the BIRTH of another client's baby" which she was for 7 hours. Then she wasn't and showed for dracula's birth but LEFT again due to the DEATH of the child she had just assisted with. Her leaving for that reason is not covered in said contract and was a breach.  Abc contract law, not a mystery and not hard at all to follow.

I have no idea how you could be so annoyed in your response. "ABC contract law" generally doesn't put specific expectations on something as unknown and unpredictable as child delivery. So given the fact that the midwife even created this contract, I am pretty sure she wasn't anticipating this scenario. Given the ruling, I assumed JJ has all the prior info in front of her to make the right ruling, supported by this contract. However, as a viewer I think the midwife did the right thing by returning to the grieving mother. The plaintiff gave birth to a healthy baby in the end. Being this petty, especially after learning the details of the death, and how long the midwife had been on her feet working, is just pathetic.

[Chalby]

On 2/5/2020 at 3:59 PM, CrazyInAlabama said:

   (The plaintiff is a serial abuser of the word "conversate", I really hate both of these litigants).   

Thank. you for pointing this out. The first time I heard it was during some prison show where the prisoner (stating he's innocent) used the word 'conversate', which I had never heard before. I have heard converse, conversing, conversed, conversation but (to me) conversate just sounds like a made up word. I am sure it will end up in some dictionary one day, but that doesn't have to mean I like it or will ever use it. People sound illiterate when they use it.

[Chalby]

On 2/4/2020 at 1:59 PM, CrazyInAlabama said:

 (Plaintiff wants a Pyrennes cross for a service dog!)

Second-

Wild Pigs Bite-

I am not impressed with how many people have figured out how to try and get around the 'no pet' clause by filling out service dog/pet applications. It's unfair to the animals, it's unfair to the landlords, and people need to understand that 'no pets' means exactly that. Don't live there if you want a pet. I also truly disliked the woman with the pigs for outright lying. I do not wish bad things on anyone (it's not nice, and I fear the "wishes come home to roost" saying). However, I would understand if her 'pigs' ended up deceased or on someone's plate (eww pork...) because she clearly not not give a sh*t. 

Edited February 14, 2020 by Chalby
forgot to shorten original post

[Chalby]

On 2/5/2020 at 5:58 AM, LucindaWalsh said:

Photographer case: Both of the litigants had that odd thing of looking mid twenties to mid forties. I couldn't get a handle on how old they were. 

Have things changed for Tinder? Years ago it was strictly an app for sexual hookups, much like Grindr. There were sites for dating, and sites for sex - preferably with someone nearby so one doesn't have to wait long. Why would anyone who hooked up once (or even twice) consider their hookup legally responsible for anything outside of their sexual fling. If their in jail for assault, theft, etc - I get it. But this...? I just don't know if Tinder is the forum to network.

[Chalby]

On 12/24/2019 at 1:59 PM, CrazyInAlabama said:

 Defendant also bought two puppies from plaintiff, for $400 each, and puppies got sick, and plaintiff picked them up.  Puppies had parvo, according to defendant, but defendant says one was put down, and the other was back to defendant.     

These cases bother me so much because we have inept people breeding animals for money. If they can read it on Google, they feel they can pull off the task just as well as anyone else. I realize this is, indeed, a career for some people, but I take issue with people having a lot of animals they think they'll breed; animals who are not always treated well (if they don't bring in money). I feel for the female dogs who are kept pregnant until they're no longer useful, and I question people who pay out big $$ for these dogs, even when they can see that things are not right with the breeders. It's just wrong. I do support paperwork so you know the dogs aren't crossbred, inbred etc., but it is still something that doesn't sit well with me. I guess I love my mongrels. 

[Ilovecomputers]

13 hours ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

There is no "time is of the essence" or due date on the contract, but it's in text messages (outside the four corners of the contract).   Defendant says order is non-cancellable or refundable.   However, plaintiff still wanted the costume, even though it was late.   The wings were $100, and defendant claims the bat wings were in the same box as the plaintiff's costume. 

What would I do if I didn't see JJ draw with her index fingers the four corners of a contract in the air at lease once a week?  The plaintiff seemed so old-worldly; every time he spoke I was distracted by the image of him in a KISS costume with bat wings.  What a secret life he leads.

[littlebennysmom]

21 hours ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

5 p.m. episodes, both new-

First (New)-

Truck Takes a Horse-Kicking-Plaintiff suing defendant/horse owner for defendant's horse getting stuck between two trucks, and kicking plaintiff's truck.   Suing for damages, harassment, and threats.     Litigants live on 12 acre property, in separate homes, each have 3 horses.    Property is fenced to separate horses.    Defendant boards other people's horses, and one of the boarder horses got loose, and attacked the plaintiff's truck.    (Defendant has colorful, pink, blue and purple hair, and it coordinates with her tattoos).   Defendant locks driveway perimeter gate (to the main road), and then she opens the gate to the pasture, so they can graze.    Plaintiff looked out, saw defendant's boarder horses out, and getting into plaintiff's horse feed.   The defendant's boyfriend's broken down truck (truck has been there for 8 months) was parked on the main parking area, and was close by the plaintiff's truck, and one horse was wedged between the two trucks, panicked, and kicked the snot out of plaintiff's truck/car.    Sorry defendant has cancerous kidney issues, but that has nothing to do with her horses getting out, stealing feed (that can cause choke, or colic), or leaving the horses unattended.     (PLaintiff claims the kickstarter, bake sales, Gofundme, money was used by defendant for saddle purchases, tattoos, etc).  

Plaintiff gets $1,000 to fix and paint his car. 

Dead Ants in Resort Freezer-Plaintiff suing rental property owner for money he spent renting her condo at Buena Pointe, because it had ants in the freezer, neighboring condo was being painted, and four weeks of rental $5276 was the total cost.     Plaintiff is complaining a neighbor condo is being painted.   Plaintiff complains that because of the danger of paint getting on the patio furniture, that the furniture was covered up, and unusable for two weeks.   Plaintiff arrived on the 9th, and left eight days early, the 23rd.  The last two weeks were only $1,000 a week.     

Plaintiff complained about amenities, ants in the bedroom and kitchen, freezer (no pictures), condo didn't have a blender (oh, the humanity!), couldn't use the patio furniture because the neighboring condo was being painted (for two weeks?).    The condo was redoing the outside paint, so they had to cover the patio furniture because of pressure washing, and painting, and were there for 1 1/2 weeks.     Painting was over (by the 23rd) before plaintiff left on the 28th, and he wants $5,000 back.    Case is dismissed.   What a whiny jerk.  

Truck Takes A Horse Kicking -- That defendant was a professional victim.  What kind of pity party was she expecting to be thrown for her by JJ?  She brought her entire medical file that supposedly contained information that she had x rays, oncologist reports, etc. verifying she had kidney cancer.  What did that have to do with the case?   I mean, it's awful (if it's true), but it justifies nothing on her end.  Besides letting horses roam on the shared property instead of just keeping her fence gate closed, keeping her boyfriend's junky car in front of the plaintiff's home for 8 months for bf to "work on" whenever the mood strikes him is sh!tty.  I believe plaintiff's claim that she used GoFundMe money raised to pay for her medical bills on tattoos, horse saddles, and whatever else she wanted.  

Dead Ants In Resort Freezer -- As a bookend to victim defendant, here's a professional victim plaintiff.  It's like the phrase "OK, boomer" was made for him.  Whiny, entitled, and yelling at JJ is no way to go through life, Liver Spots.  Here's actual picture of plaintiff.

[CrazyInAlabama]

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

First-

Off-Road Vehicle Swindle-Plaintiff suing an ATV buyer for stopping payment on the check, after "As Is" vehicle stopped working.   Plaintiff advertised an ATV, for $3400, and defendant wrote a check, for the entire amount, and then defendant stopped payment on the check.  Fortunately, plaintiff held title until after check clears, and still has it.   Plaintiff tried to cash check, but his credit union wouldn't cash it.    So plaintiff talked to defendant, who agreed to bring cash in exchange for the title.   There is a text saying defendant has cash, and will swap for the check, title, and bill of sale.    Defendant brought the ATV back, and will have to pay $2500 to rebuild the engine.

Plaintiff receives $2500, will rebuild, and sell the ATV.   

Uninsured, and Driving Drunk-Plaintiff suing for crashing into plaintiff's parked car while defendant was driving drunk.    While plaintiff was looking at an apartment to rent, they heard a crash, and defendant had crashed into his parked car.   Defendant is counter claiming for medical bills, and is claiming plaintiff was backing out, not parked.   

Defendant only tries to submit medical bills, because as JJ says, medical reports will say if loser defendant was drunk or stoned.    Police report is submitted, and confirms plaintiff's story.     As usual, defendant had no insurance, and his license was suspended.   Defendant told police he swerved to avoid a deer, and hit a parked car.   Police officer says defendant was drunk, and refused blood or breathalyzer tests.   $3,000 to plaintiff. 

Wipe That Smile Off of Your Face-Plaintiff suing daughter for costs associated with repo'd car.       However, the plaintiff/mother co-signed for the car.   Defendant claims she was paying the payments, and was up to date, but car was repo'd anyway.   Plaintiff claims defendant didn't pay over three months of car payments, so it was repo'd.   Defendant claims she paid late one month, but paid the other two months on time.   (Strange note, mother and daughter both have the same, garish, shade of dyed red hair.   I get suspicious about collusion, and scamming when everyone has coordinating outfits, and have a hard time keeping a straight face).     

Defendant has no proof she paid the missing payments.   Car was sold at auction, and shortfall was over $10K, and mother is on the hook for this.  Plaintiff had to pay July and August, not daughter.  After plaintiff couldn't find someone to take over the payments, or make the payments herself, she called the finance company, and said to repo the car.   She's still $5,000 in hole.     $5,000 to plaintiff.   

Second-

Botched Wig Order-Plaintiff suing salon owner and wig maker, for $647 in damages when her custom wig order goes wrong.   After plaintiff complaints, the wig was rebuilt, and plaintiff still wasn't happy.   Wig was ordered in October, but when plaintiff went to pick up the wig, it was unsatisfactory, and she returned again in January, but wig was still wrong.  

Plaintiff says stylist told her to get a lower side part, to tilt the wig to the side.   Plaintiff also claims it took two trips to get measurement done.    Plaintiff sent wig back, tried to dispute with the credit card company, and lost.   So plaintiff ended up without wig, or the money for the wig.      Plaintiff receives $647

Casual Gambler Demands Payback-Plaintiff suing former son-in-law for unpaid loan to pay his bills.     Candance Principe (not kidding) plaintiff has all visitation with her grandchildren through defendant, not her own daughter (kids are 16, 14, 13).   So JJ would like to know where plaintiff had $3,000 to loan to defendant.     Defendant needed money because he was off of work, due to a non-work injury, and didn't get disability approved, so he needed money.    

Plaintiff admits she gambles and loses constantly, and doesn't work.   Plaintiff says she  relies on her husband/fiance for gambling money.   Plaintiff's fiance gave her the money to loan to defendant.  $3,000 to plaintiff, so she can gamble it away.  

Edited February 15, 2020 by CrazyInAlabama

[CrazyInAlabama]

5 p.m. episodes, both new-

First (New)-

Bad Blood Leads to Spilled Blood-Plaintiff/mother suing defendant / daughter  for vandalism, and the return or value of a litter of dogs.    Mother was convicted of assault, after cutting her daughter with a knife over an altercation over puppies.  Mother/plaintiff claims daughter was beating her, and that's why she attacked with the knife.    Several years ago, daughter got a Chihuahua from mother, daughter says the dog was a gift to mother, and free to her.   Daughter's Chi. had a litter, and that's when the fight started with Mother.   Daughter's dog has litters of unregistered Chi puppies, and sells puppies for $300 each.    First litter was five puppies, second litter was six, and one died, third and final litter was five puppies, and daughter still has four waiting on the right home.    Mother was given a Chi, and bought a male Maltese, and breeds cross-bred dogs on purpose.     

Daughter's Chi, bred with mother's Maltese stud.   Plaintiff claims she didn't know daughter's dog was in heat, but text messages show that's a lie.     Four remaining, unsold puppies from third litter are six months old that daughter owns, and have no vaccinations.   JJ is right, the mother, and the daughter are irresponsible amateur dog breeders.  JJ gives a deserved rant to defendant about being a responsible breeder, and should have given the same lecture to the plaintiff/mother.   Plaintiff claims daughter came to her house to steal two puppies, and that's when the argument, and stabbing happened.    Mother was convicted of assault, and had two or three days in jail.

I've been thinking about this, and the two or three days in jail right after the attack for the mother doesn't sound like jail.   It sounds like a 5150 psychiatric hold.   I bet the mother was ruled too impaired to go to trial.    I bet mother uses the 'not competent to stand trial' defense pretty often.  

The two puppies stolen from the mother were sold by the daughter.   Mother claims the remaining two puppies were given away, but daughter claims to have proof that mother sold the puppies.    Plaintiff gave away two puppies, or sold them at five weeks old.    Plaintiff has no proof that daughter came in, and vandalized her home while plaintiff was in jail.   Daughter claims she was in the hospital at the time, because of her wounds. 

There is a video of the aftermath.  That's when the defendant's crying starts.    Defendant claims mother cut her arm and hand, but didn't bring any medical records.   The producers blurred the actual wounds.   Plaintiff claims daughter attacked her, and has no proof of an assault by daughter.     Case dismissed.   (Daughter has restraining order against mother, and I hope it's permanent, and enforced).   Plaintiff / mother shows her true colors in the hall-terview, with rants and raving about everything.    The mother scared me, and I can't imagine the daughter, and her family having to be any where near the mother.    

Second (New)-

Man Sent to Jail By Mom-Plaintiff mother was going into business with son, and purchased a work van for him.     Business was son would use a van to pick up dogs, and take them to their new owner, and mother rented van for him.  Son was listed as authorized operator on the van, and has a valid license.   Four weeks later the mother reported the van stolen.    Woman wanted son to put van on his card, not hers.  

Plaintiff reported van stolen, and defendant was arrested, and jailed for nine days.  Son was pulled over for the stolen van, and claims that was the only charge.   Plaintiff mother claims there was marijuana in vehicle, and drug charges were later dismissed.   It was outrageous what the mother did.    The son's lucky he didn't have something worse happen than arrested, and jailed for nine days.   Case dismissed. 

Online Auction Crash-Plaintiff suing online auction house owner for lost earnings, and banning her from his business.    The auction house takes consignments, charges a fee, and sells either from his warehouse, or online auction.    Plaintiff decides she wanted some items back, because his website crashed.   

Plaintiff did get her items back, but wants $150 processing fee back from auction owner.  Plaintiff wants money for defendant banning her from his website, consignments, and visiting his warehouse.    Plaintiff claims sixty or seventy previous items were sold, and the $150 fees were for pulling the second set of items, and that's in the contract she signed. 

 I've only heard the plaintiff for a minute or two, and I'd like to ban her too.  Maybe we could chip in, and send her on that one way trip to Mars?   How dare the plaintiff saying JJ doesn't understand anything about the auction!   Outrageous.     Case dismissed.  

Collapsing Wedding Cake-Plaintiff suing bakery owner for a refund for a wedding cake, and emotional distress.      The three tiered cake top tier fell off.   Cake cost $450.   Signed contract says defendant isn't responsible for cake once delivered to plaintiff.    Plaintiff supplied her own cake stand, and that's what failed.     However, bakery owner/defendant seems to think that a health care worker/plaintiff should know what cake stand to buy.  

Defendant is counter suing for lost wages, defamation, and loss of business.   Plaintiff gets $450 for cake only.   Defendant counter claim dismissed.       

(A rather popular local specialty cake shop here charges a lot for delivery.   However,  if you pick it up, and do set up yourself, you are responsible for the cake from the second you pick it up.    The cake stands the plaintiff had were very light weight plastic, they looked like Dollar store items.     And the price the bride received of $4.00 a slice was really cheap compared to what other stores charge, plus delivery and set up).    

Edited February 18, 2020 by CrazyInAlabama

[JD5166]

On 2/13/2020 at 1:19 PM, BexKeps said:

Right??? Neither one of those two seemed to have a brain cell between them, I'm glad no one got anything.

Is it wrong that I really disliked these two on principle alone? That guy also looked way too old for his GF, IMO. He also looked like a complete douche. 

[MerBearStare]

Man, it was shitty mother day on Judge Judy this afternoon. What kind of mom falsely reports that her son stole a van? Especially when you consider how many unarmed black men in this country have been shot by police. She really put his life in danger doing that.

That mom who cut her daughter, man, what a piece of shit. Her abusive side really came out during the interview. I was like, "Yep, there it is." The daughter was annoying, but I really felt bad for her. 

[Florinaldo]

3 hours ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

Online Auction Crash-

The defendant seemed rather young so maybe he is still learning the business and will develop the skills to filter out kooks like the plaintiff. On the other hand, perhaps he cannot afford to be too selective because of tight cash flow and is counting on the penalty provisions in his contract to get back some of the money people like her will cost and to compensate at least partly for the aggravation.

[nora1992]

Just catching up on all the sweeps episodes, and am struck again by JJ’s total inability to imagine the struggles people without a safety net have.  In particular, the car buyer who had to travel by bus, and the woman who reported the rental car stolen when her son neither returned nor paid for it.  

Buses do break down, and connections are missed.  The plaintiff can’t control that.  What is he supposed to do, charter a private jet?  I agree that the defendant should be able to keep some of the deposit for the removal of the car from the website, but $500?  The defendant didn’t sell the car to the subsequent buyer at a reduced price because of anything to do with the plaintiff.  Why should he be able to keep so much?

And the rental car case: the mother wasn’t outrageous.  She can’t afford to pay for the car indefinitely, and the son won’t return it.  She’s in debt because her son doesn’t care.  I believe she tried everything she could to get her name removed, and her son’s added.  Reporting it as stolen was the last resort.  The mother tried to salvage her credit, and the results are unfortunate, but primarily the son’s doing.  She was paying for something she couldn’t use and couldn’t return.  How is that not theft?

[AuntiePam]

16 minutes ago, nora1992 said:

And the rental car case: the mother wasn’t outrageous.  She can’t afford to pay for the car indefinitely, and the son won’t return it.  She’s in debt because her son doesn’t care.  I believe she tried everything she could to get her name removed, and her son’s added.  Reporting it as stolen was the last resort.  The mother tried to salvage her credit, and the results are unfortunate, but primarily the son’s doing.  She was paying for something she couldn’t use and couldn’t return.  How is that not theft?

I felt bad for her too.  In her place, I would have confronted the son and demanded return of the vehicle.  If that didn't work, I'd go to Hertz and ask to cancel the contract.  They'd probably refuse, since they didn't have the vehicle, but then I'd cancel the credit card or account that the payments were coming from. 

Could she have gone to a tow company, shown them a copy of the Hertz contract, and had the van towed back to Hertz?

[Florinaldo]

1 hour ago, nora1992 said:

And the rental car case: the mother wasn’t outrageous.

Her solution to the problem certainly was. It was an abuse of process and a misuse of police resources. It's her own damn fault that she is in that position for signing the rental in her name. When you make choices, you have to assume the potential negative consequences, even if in your heart of heart you believe that the fruit of your loins would never leave you hanging. Signing or renting for someone else is always a risk.

[nora1992]

48 minutes ago, Florinaldo said:

Her solution to the problem certainly was. It was an abuse of process and a misuse of police resources. It's her own damn fault that she is in that position for signing the rental in her name. When you make choices, you have to assume the potential negative consequences, even if in your heart of heart you believe that the fruit of your loins would never leave you hanging. Signing or renting for someone else is always a risk.

Her solution was driven by desperation.  If she had the legal responsibility for payment but was denied access to the car from her son, then it was stolen.  The report was made after many attempts to get the son to return the car, and he ignored them.  If this happened overnight, I’d agree with you; but it didn’t.  This reminds me of the roommate cases where whoever is left behind is expected to mitigate the loss by finding another roommate.  It didn’t seem like he was imprisoned for 9 days because of this alone; the drugs found in the car were a glossed-over factor.  What other recourse did the mother have to mitigate her loss? 

[configdotsys]

Just throwing this out there...

Regardless of all the weirdness in this case, the Kiss costume plaintiff was incorrect. The plaintiff was saying that he received a Destroyer costume rather than the Psycho Circus costume and explained that the Psycho Circus costume's abdomen pieces come together in the center while the Destroyer pieces do not. That is not accurate. If you look at the pictures below. The one that shows Gene is the Destroyer costume. Notice the abdomen pieces together in the center. The other pic is the Psycho Circus costume which does not have abdomen pieces that meet in the center. Big Kiss fan here so I had to just point that out.

 

[Florinaldo]

17 hours ago, nora1992 said:

Her solution was driven by desperation.  

(...)

What other recourse did the mother have to mitigate her loss? 

4 weeks is a short time to invoke desperation as a motive for your actions.

@AuntiePam offered suggestions as to what the mother could have done. She could also have sued him in small claims for not making payments (I don't think it was made clear if he did or not). She could also have removed him as an authorised driver and asked Hertz to handle the repo.

It's sad she found herself in that situation, but it was of her own making and she jumped to a rather extreme solution.

[Guest]

On 2/13/2020 at 7:12 PM, 7EasyPayments said:

I am NOT buying the 'serendipity' that the P videotaped his opening of the delayed package at his lawyer's office. He opened and removed the BAT WINGS. 🙄

OF COURSE this is what happened! We never saw him actually opening that box -- and even if we did, what's to say that he hadn't removed the bat wings earlier? What's to say that that was even an actual lawyer in the video? That video is evidence of nothing other than old man Joachin Drume having way too much money to burn on dumb shit and a lawyer (or drinking buddy who's actually an actuary) who probably rolled his eyes in the back of his head when he got that phone call. 

On 2/14/2020 at 4:52 PM, littlebennysmom said:

I believe plaintiff's claim that she used GoFundMe money raised to pay for her medical bills on tattoos, horse saddles, and whatever else she wanted. 

Oh, there is a ZERO PERCENT chance that she ever had a dire diagnosis. Exhibit A: "I got this neck tattoo [points to right side of her neck] to honor my dead dog!" Exhibit B: Doesn't point to OTHER side of neck with identical tattoo. Exhibit C : Does not squeeze one single actual tear out  of either eye when she's blubbering in the hallterview about her dead dog, her tattoo of a butterfly (?) that's supposed to be "honoring" him, or her fatal diagnosis." Judgment: Another JJ cancer fraudster. 

And this is another case of billionaire JJ shrieking at someone that paying $3600 to have an old truck painted is too much. First of all, she's not an INSURANCE COMPANY. It's gonna cost the guy $3600 for a decent paint job  -- give him $3600. Those Silverados last forever. So what that it's old? That's the guy's TRUCK. He wants to make it whole again.

I really hate her.

[CrazyInAlabama]

Where I used to work, a rather 'interesting' person would come into the workplace.   He was one of those conspiracy nuts, so no one ever asked him anything.      He bragged that he was on one of the early Judge Judy seasons, but no one ever asked him what the case was or anything about it.     

Edited February 18, 2020 by CrazyInAlabama

[TresGatos]

On 1/17/2020 at 5:37 PM, Brattinella said:

Mrs Deckard is among the most vile and revolting plaintiffs I've seen.  Lying the whole time, whispering lies to her daughter to repeat.  Presenting a legal document for the dad to sign, with cardboard covering everything on the paper except for the signature line.  Of course he refused to sign it that way!  Daughter was insisting she HAD to have the signed document the next day so that SHE wouldn't have to pay the loan back to the defendant!  The son corroborated the defendant's story that he was going to slam his legs in the door!

I had NO sympathy for the mammoth plaintiff.  She kept overtalking JJ and not listening or answering JJ's questions.  She is used to getting her own way and was determined to get it.  And calling CPS on Dad was beyond the pale; there's a REASON he got sole custody of those children.

 

The Plaintiff is the local woman who came in to where I worked and was so excited that they were flying out to California the next day to appear on Judge Judy. I've seen her since but she hasn't said a word about her JJ experience. 

[khyber]

Part 1 of the new episode was something. I don't think anyone on either side is going to come out of this looking good. The female defendant had a dead look in her eyes. It was sad.

[Lady Iris]

Did I hear correctly that the plaintiff, who looks like he's got to be in his 60's, his daughter is 13?

On a completely shallow note, the guy defendant is awfully cute.

[DoctorK]

I have a couple of comments on the chicken killing husky case, details that went by so fast they may have been missed. When they showed the lost dog FB posting from the defendants, I clearly saw that they said their husky was missing AGAIN (same for the Great Dane I think I saw). This is key, the defendants were on notice that their fencing is inadequate. Then during the hallterview, the male defendant forcefully insisted the the plaintiffs were responsible for building their own fence to protect their animals from his dogs.

[CrazyInAlabama]

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

First-

BB Gun Play Date With Dad Gone Wrong-Plaintiff suing ex-boyfriend for vandalizing her car after an argument.       Plaintiff claims it's been about two years since the defendant spent time with the 8 year old son.    After father and son visited,   Defendant's idea of quality time is shooting BB guns with dad.      Mother had a date, and defendant wanted son gone, so he drove the son home to mother's place.    The litigants start arguing, plaintiff grabbed her car keys and threw them in the street, and keys her car.   Defendant claims plaintiff dropped charges, but there is no proof, and plaintiff said she didn't.   $549 to plaintiff.

Bullets and Boyfriends-Plaintiff suing former roommate for stealing his TV, and borrowing his car, and returning it riddled with bullet holes.    Defendant says he went to the grocery store, but instead went to pick up his brother, and go see the brother's girlfriend.    When defendant's younger brother went to the girlfriend's, there was an argument.  Then bullets started flying.

As JJ point out, if defendant had only gone to Publix, (a lovely grocery store, that does not have flying bullets in their parking lot)  as planned, the car would not have been riddled with bullets.      Funny note, defendant is getting subtitles, since he won't stop mumbling.   

Plaintiff receives $2700 for car damage, and the TV. 

Second-

Stuck With the Bill Behind Bars-Plaintiff suing defendant/ex-girlfriend for a cable bill defendant put in his name, while he was incarcerated, plus his clothes and tools.      Plaintiff agreed to cable bill in his name, as long as defendant paid the bill, because they were going to live together when he left jail (that didn't happen).     Defendant says plaintiff asked for care packages from the commissary at prison.   Defendant claims plaintiff said he would pay her back for the packages out of his income tax refund.   Plaintiff gets his drill back, and other bills cancel each other out. 

Lyrical Lips Singer Scam-Plaintiff suing former business partners for death threats, breach of contract, and other garbage.    Everyone claims they were defamed.   Plaintiff is a so-called singer (fortunately, on JJ's show I don't have to hear her sing).     Plaintiff claims defendants were supposed to pay half for everything.   Plaintiff's performing name is "Lyrical Lips".    There were no proceeds to split, and the only recording was a single song.   There is a 3 album minimum to make the contract in effect.   It only cost $40 to produce the one song.   Plus, it costs plaintiff $50 for some appearance, but she was supposed to sell a certain number of tickets to pay this, and she didn't sell tickets.      Plaintiff had to pay for her hair and makeup, for publicity photos, photos were paid for the photo shoot.    Plaintiff wants graphics for a non-existent album cover.   Plaintiff paid $20 for studio time, and defendants paid over $200 for the single song recording session.    

Case is dismissed, and plaintiff gets $20.      

[DoctorK]

3 hours ago, Lady Iris said:

On a completely shallow note, the guy defendant is awfully cute.

I thought the female defendant was rather attractive in a certain way. However, after watching her over emoting, making exaggerated facial gestures and inability to control her mouth, I don't think I would want to be around her more than a few minutes. Yep, I can be shallow too.

[patty1h]

I'm talking about the case where a husky killed 30+ pet chickens - probably a few viewers will skip this one, but the defendant Melissa Medina was extra stubborn about accepting her part in getting her dog killed and you'd want to slap her silly like I did.  

Her dog got loose from a fenced yard and ended up on neighbors property and killing chickens; the neighbor found this carnage, got nervous about being attacked by this dog and shot it.  Medina was so stuck on saying some other husky did the killing and the neighbor shot her dog just for being on the property in a "wrong place, wrong time" scenario.   She was like a mother whose child is caught red-handed in a crime and will go to her grave saying "my kid would never do something like that!".  Very annoying.

[AuntiePam]

11 minutes ago, DoctorK said:

I thought the female defendant was rather attractive in a certain way. However, after watching her over emoting, making exaggerated facial gestures and inability to control her mouth, I don't think I would want to be around her more than a few minutes. Yep, I can be shallow too.

The female defendant looks a lot like my best friend, so I was predisposed to believe her.   Neither she nor her boyfriend look like the typical meth-head -- they still have their teeth and their skin is clear. 

So did defendants call CPS and cause the plaintiff to lose custody of his teenage daughter?

[ButYourHonor]

1 hour ago, patty1h said:

I'm talking about the case where a husky killed 30+ pet chickens - probably a few viewers will skip this one, but the defendant Melissa Medina was extra stubborn about accepting her part in getting her dog killed and you'd want to slap her silly like I did.  

Her dog got loose from a fenced yard and ended up on neighbors property and killing chickens; the neighbor found this carnage, got nervous about being attacked by this dog and shot it.  Medina was so stuck on saying some other husky did the killing and the neighbor shot her dog just for being on the property in a "wrong place, wrong time" scenario.   She was like a mother whose child is caught red-handed in a crime and will go to her grave saying "my kid would never do something like that!".  Very annoying.

It was actually worse than that!  She wouldn’t even admit that the dead dog was hers!  Apparently hers just ran away, never to be seen again.  If I was the plaintiff I would have called each of the other “missing dog” owners and asked if their husky had been found!  

Wife was a complete idiot and husband wasn’t far behind.  Free-range chickens are a big thing around here, and sure, people know that a fox or bobcat could snatch one, but dogs are supposed to be CONTAINED.

[CrazyInAlabama]

5 p.m. episodes, both new-

Firsts (New)-

Dumpster Diving, Meth Use and Theft-(Conclusion of yesterday's case I missed due to car race, I'm really ticked to have to wait for a rerun to get Part 1) Plaintiff claims the defendants made a false report to CPS, and he claims the defendants false report made his relationship with his daughter fall apart .   Plaintiff's 13 year old daughter left his home after a fight, and 30 year old defendant claims girl is her best friend(I may be friendly with people that much older than I am, but I never considered someone like that a best friend, defendant woman is a few sandwiches short of a picnic).    Audio tape is submitted by defendants of plaintiff yelling at them.   Plaintiff was the subletter to defendants or landlord(I think, apparently that was part 1) to  defendants, and told them to leave his house immediately.   The plaintiff has been contesting daughter's custody with ex for years.   Plaintiff witness (building manager) says before and after room pictures show lots of filth and damage, including the bathroom vanity being stolen.  There was a 55" TV in the defendant's room, and a 65 " too (why the two TVs).   Defendants claim they were buying TV from plaintiff, but only paid $100.   Price was claimed by defendants to be $400 or $500, but defendants took TV with them, and pawned it.    

Defendant claim the plaintiff kept a lot of their items.  Defendants claim the mirror over the vanity fell off of the wall, and smashed the vanity.   Apparently def. man moved in first, and then woman and child moved in.    JJ wants to know where the defendants stuff is.    Defendants had a lot of excuses why they couldn't show up for move out, including someone tried to blow up the male defendant's car, car died, car needed work, and wanted to make appointments at strange times.       

After the CPS call, the defendant's daughter was kept away, but she apparently left before CPS removed her.   However, why does the defendant woman talk about one kid, and then defendant talks in the hall-terview about getting her kids back?   The plaintiff's story about drugs and the defendants is sounding more believable every second this case continues.  

Plaintiff finally got rid of their stuff, but it took 10 days to move it out, and they kept everything for 30 days plus, after that.    Plaintiff and defendants had a lot of communications about the move out, but defendants never showed up to get their property.    $400 to plaintiff.    (Plaintiff claims male defendant is on Meth, and claims defendant woman told him about male's issues.   Sadly I think both defendants are on something.

Second (New)-

Pet Massacre Met With Gunfire-Plaintiffs and daughter are suing defendants for the value of 36 chickens and 1 duck that were slaughtered by their Husky.    They all live in a rural area, plaintiffs raise chickens as pet.     Plaintiff adult daughter saw the slaughter by the Husky, and shot and killed the dog still in the chicken coop.  There is security video on the plaintiff's security camera of the slaughter that took over four hours.   The same day the defendant posted on Facebook that their identical Husky (and their Great Dane), went missing again.     Defendant keeps claiming that though her dog disappeared the same day that the plaintiff daughter killed the dog, she claims her dog didn't kill the chickens.     Defendant wife refuses to accept reality, and so does the husband.     Did the Great Dane come home?   If they said that I missed it.  

Plaintiffs when they saw the posting, they contacted the defendants to look at the dog, and they sent someone else over to look.       

$1700 to plaintiffs, defendants claim dismissed.  (Defendants in hall-terview  keep whining that their dogs didn't get out, and that doesn't explain the missing poster for both dogs.   Defendants say plaintiffs should have fenced their dogs out). (After the nasty looks from defendant wife, I think the plaintiffs should move before something awful happens to them, or their property).  

(When I was a kid, my aunt and uncle always had one male Dalmatian at a time.   The dogs were all unneutered, roamed the neighborhood, they ignored the neighbors complaints.    All three dogs eventually died from being poisoned.    No one knew if they got into something, such as rat poison, or puddled antifreeze.   Instead of keeping the replacement dogs in the yard, they would get another one, and let that roam until he was poisoned.  The only thing that fixed the situation was, my relatives moved.     I wonder if it's a coincidence that one time when my aunt and uncle were out of town, someone broke in and destroyed their house?)

No Insurance, You're a Criminal-Plaintiff suing fellow motorist for causing an accident, when defendant merged into plaintiff's lane.   Plaintiff's car had insurance, and as usual, defendant's car didn't have insurance.  Defendant still claims the fault in the accident was plaintiff.  Defendant is counter suing for lost wages, medical bills, etc.      Plaintiff couldn't find the defendant, but finally found def. witness through his facebook account.  Police report says defendant merged into plaintiff's lane, hit front corner of plaintiff's car, then his car spun,  and hit the barrier.      This happened two years ago, and defendant never got a police report, or contacted plaintiff.   Defendant witness claims he saw everything, and I don't believe him either.     $4500 to plaintiff. 

Edited February 19, 2020 by CrazyInAlabama

[augmentedfourth]

Yep, I also caught the "again" on the lost dog post.

 

So you know how we sometimes criticize JJ for jumping to conclusions and making determinations before she hears the actual cases, etc.? Well, today was one of those days where the second I saw the defendant in the dog/chicken case and the bitchy look on her face, I just knew she was guilty of whatever she was being accused of. And she did not disappoint. I'm not a big fan of guns, but I'm also not a fan of loose potentially dangerous dogs, so I had no problem with the Adele-lookalike daughter doing what she needed to do to save the rest of her chickens and ducks. (And she seemed appropriately remorseful.) I live in a residential neighborhood in the suburbs, and one of our neighbor's pit bulls kept getting out, and after the third time, my next-door neighbor dragged it back and cheerfully informed the owners that if the dog showed up on his property again, he'd shoot it. Magically, the pit bull never got out again. (Bonus points to my next-door neighbor because I can count on the fingers of zero hands the number of times his well-behaved goldens have gotten out. Looks like his kids are equally well-trained to make sure the gate is locked.)

 

Incidentally, just the other day, Facebook Memories reminded me of how entertained I was by a similar case a number of years ago, where the plaintiffs' dead pet chickens had names like Leia, Katniss, and Buffy. Still awesome.

 

Like all the other two-parters we've had, this one really didn't need to be dragged out over two days. Everyone came off poorly here, and while I would have been satisfied by everyone leaving with nothing, the $400 for the TV was fair. I think the recording of the plaintiff, who had appeared so mild-mannered and reasonable, did change JJ's mind a bit. See, it can be done.

[ThePurpleArcher]

7 hours ago, Lady Iris said:

On a completely shallow note, the guy defendant is awfully cute.

He was beautiful! I didn't think he was a meth-head. As for his girlfriend, wow - she could contort her rubbery face in all different gestures.  What a talent she was ! 

[ThePurpleArcher]

On 2/14/2020 at 8:53 PM, MerBearStare said:

Man, it was shitty mother day on Judge Judy this afternoon. What kind of mom falsely reports that her son stole a van? Especially when you consider how many unarmed black men in this country have been shot by police. She really put his life in danger doing that.

That mom who cut her daughter, man, what a piece of shit. Her abusive side really came out during the interview. I was like, "Yep, there it is." The daughter was annoying, but I really felt bad for her. 

For the record, I will be spending Thanksgiving with the psycho family who cuts each other and steals dogs (that's going to be a fun dinner, huh?) and I will be spending Christmas with the mother who threw her son in jail for her false claim. What a fun holiday season 2020 will be!