Jump to content
Forums forums
PRIMETIMER
Toaster Strudel

All Episodes Talk: All Rise

Recommended Posts

14 hours ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

Vicious Neighbor Endangers Lives?!

Defendants are savage brutes, but plaintiff is a dumb pushover. Why does she have to park in the street just because her children use her parking spots on the property? Can't the precious little angels walk a block or so?

  • Like 2
  • Useful 1

Share this post


Link to post

5 hours ago, Florinaldo said:

Defendants are savage brutes, but plaintiff is a dumb pushover. Why does she have to park in the street just because her children use her parking spots on the property? Can't the precious little angels walk a block or so?

I just don't get why they were so friggin' incensed.  Dad wasn't blocked in and frankly, if there had been damage to the car, that fat-assed loudmouth would have had pictures of ithe damage, not just  a photo of how close the car was to Daddy Dearest's car.  And it was NOT pushing the bumper down.  I saw about an inch of daylight between the two.  

I have to believe hat there's more to this than one parking situation.   

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, Carolina Girl said:

I have to believe hat there's more to this than one parking situation.   

Very possibly.

I am only half surprised at their being so incensed. I have seen several instances of people becoming territorial or possessive about pieces of public property like a park bench or a bike path, so such absurd behaviour is, unfortunately, almost to be expected in human society.

Plus there are cars involved, and we know how ridiculously involved some people are with their precious vee-hickles (defendant gave a few hints of this in her answers).

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post

4 p.m. reruns-

First (2017)-

Biker Tackled by Raging Motorist-Plaintiff Joseph Connolly, bike rider, suing motorist Christopher Hope, for medical bills, bicycle damages, and an assault.    Incident happened almost two years ago, in July 2015.  Plaintiff was riding in the bicycle lane, when the confrontation happened.  Plaintiff hired an attorney, who quit (not enough money in the case).   Plaintiff was riding in the bike lane, defendant stopped his car in the parking lane, adjacent to the bike lane.   When defendant exited the car through the driver's door, door went into the bike lane, and when driver went to get back in his car, the door opened into the bike lane again.   Plaintiff was in the bike lane when defendant opened the car door into the lane, plaintiff was going the same direction as the car was parked.   

Plaintiff says defendant made eye contact with the defendant, who opened his driver's door on the car, with door into the bike lane.   Plaintiff sarcastically said, "Thank you" (Yes, I read minds now), because he had to swerve into the car driving lane to avoid the car door.    

Defendant decided the sarcastic, "Thank You" from plaintiff was "insulting the advocacy of bikers everywhere", and would end bike riding as we know it, so defendant followed biker to corner him at a red traffic light, to berate him on his behavior.  Defendant followed the plaintiff for 1.3 miles from the original confrontation, to the location of the fight.     

They're stopped at the red light when defendant started berating plaintiff, after defendant got out in the traffic lane at the light.    Plaintiff says it is 1.3 miles from the initial incident, to the traffic light, and plaintiff says defendant cut him off six times.    Then at the traffic light plaintiff says driver stopped his car resting on bike's back tire.   A policeman showed up, said resolve it yourself.

When plaintiff went against traffic, down the narrow bike path to get away from defendant, maybe nudging car mirror, then the defendant tackled plaintiff into a moving car, injuring his arm. 

Spoiler

(My guess is attorney dropped case because defendant's assets are in an LLC, or a cash only business, so no assets to go after.) 

Defendant claims plaintiff threatened his life at the stop light.   (My view, is as a former police officer, if plaintiff wanted to hurt the defendant, defendant wouldn't have been standing in court in one piece.)

(Sadly, continued tomorrow on entire first 30 minute episode).

Second (2017)-

I Will Never Help Another Soul Again-Plaintiff Elizabeth Hartwig   suing former roommate, Cindy Leclerc  over a loan that was never repaid, missing property, and stalking.   Plaintiff, and defendant's family lived together in an apartment (with defendant's boyfriend, and her two children).   Plaintiff met defendant though defendant's mother.  Agreement was defendant would pay rent of $1550, and utilities were paid by plaintiff (they were in her name).   Then plaintiff loaned defendant $1500, and $288 for defendant's medical bills, and a loan for Christmas gifts for defendant's family, $1388.    No surprise, defendant remembers nothing about the loans.    Defendant claims she didn't give her children much for Christmas.

The iPhone plaintiff bought for the defendant was returned, but without accessories, so plaintiff had to pay for the accessories (another $256).  Plaintiff claimed she paid a hotel bill for defendant, because defendant had a fight with her boyfriend, and then defendant returned to boyfriend, and plaintiff moved out of the apartment.    

$2,788 owed to plaintiff so far for the iPhone accessories, and loans.    

Defendant claims plaintiff should have to pay the apartment lease, because she moved out early, claim dismissed. 

Load a Bowl of Cannabis Vendetta?!-Plaintiff DJ Anderson. suing former friend Timothy Milner for theft, property damage, and assault.    Litigants were in the pot business in Washington state (for medical at that time, now all are recreational.  Once the recreational shops opened, all of the medicinal pot shops closed).    Plaintiff couldn't grow pot himself, and needed to find a grower, defendant was growing pot for plaintiff, and they shared it.    This was to fill the litigants' need for medical pot.

Both sides claim the other assaulted them, and threw the pot plants in the snow to die.    Plaintiff (who just called Officer Byrd, "Byrd") has a police report, without a real assault.   Dispute was that plaintiff was having pot grown in Washington, but plaintiff is an Idaho resident.   Defendant says it's illegal to grow pot for out-of-state residents, too close to a school, and near a mobile home park.    (However, school, mobile home, and residency questions existed before the fight).   Defendant claims plaintiff had a grow op.  

The fight was over who was smoking the other's supply of pot.   

Everything dismissed, because it's all incredibly stupid.

Lost My Checkbook!-Plaintiff Bonnie Lee suing niece Amy Hook and her boyfriend Anthony Moorefor unpaid loans, and the return or value for a TV.   JJ dismisses the old TV case.   Niece says she did get a loan for rent from aunt, $1300.   Defendant wrote $100 checks, to equal $600, and they would be cashed on niece's paydays.  Niece says she also baby sat for aunt's children.   

Then defendants lost their checkbook, and account was closed by bank, and then defendant would pay aunt the other half in cash (no, it makes no sense to me either), when niece could manage it.  Aunt only cashed two of the $100 checks before checkbook was lost, and account closed (I really doubt they closed the bank account over a lost checkbook, the bank would just issue new checks, and change the account number, and transfer funds).  

Aunt was still owed $1100 on the original $1300 loan.   There were two other loans for apartment security deposit, and Christmas money for niece's kids for Christmas, but $1300

Plaintiff receives $1100 for the original loan, but not the two loans made after niece wasn't repaying the original loan. 

Edited by CrazyInAlabama
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

5 p.m. reruns-

First (2021)-

I’ll Take the Shotgun, Not the Wedding! -Plaintiff Leslie Orm is suing defendant Lori Mosley, his ex-fiance, for unpaid loans (a cruise deposit of $300, and for two airline tickets for defendant's son and daughter-in-law, $800), and a shotgun.    Defendant lied to plaintiff and said her son has the shotgun, but then defendant fesses up, and says she sold the shotgun.  

All of this happened two years ago, so what was the delay in filing by the plaintiff?   When defendant told plaintiff she was being evicted, and moving, that's when he wanted the shotgun back, and that was recently.   Plaintiff didn't claim for the engagement ring, which he could get back.     

The $300 cruise loan was a gift, not a loan, so that's dismissed.    The tickets for defendant's relatives are now in question, but it was a family trip, so plaintiff doesn't get money for the airline tickets.   Defendant changes her story about the shotgun constantly, so plaintiff gets $500 for the shotgun.  

Plaintiff receives $500 for the shotgun

Crashes and Lies -Plaintiff Kaneshia Davis suing her sister, Shemeka Davis, defendant/driver over car damages from defendant driving the plaintiff's car on a stormy night., Defendant skidded off the road, and totaled the plaintiff's car.   Defendant is suing for damages to her car while plaintiff was driving it.

Litigants switched cars in October, so plaintiff took sister's truck to move.   On Halloween, defendant was driving plaintiff's car, and claims another driver did a hit-and-run, and she went off the car.    Defendant's children were in the car, and were not injured.    2003 Dodge Stratus owned by plaintiff only had liability on it.  

Defendant says they had a verbal agreement, and plaintiff would drive her car until she could replace it.   Defendant claims plaintiff bought a car that was repo'd after a week.   There is no proof except defendant's story about the accident.

$1500 to plaintiff, and defendant counter claim is gone.

Second (2014)-

Taxing Friendship- Plaintiff Natoria Parks suing defendant Amber Hicks over unpaid tax preparation fees, and bank fees for a bounced check.   Plaintiff says defendant wrote her a check that was returned for insufficient funds.    Plaintiff is a tax preparer, and defendant was her client.  Counter claim is by defendant, who claims plaintiff used the routing number on the bounced check to pay plaintiff's credit card bill, and that was reversed.   Defendant wrote the check to plaintiff, and wanted plaintiff to wait 7 to 10 business days to cash the check.  

Plaintiff received the check on the 8th, and deposited the check on the 13th, only four business days.  Since plaintiff deposited the check after four days, the check bounced.  Then plaintiff used the routing number on the returned check to pay her tax preparation charges.   However, the bank reversed the credit charges. 

Plaintiff receives $240 for defendant's tax payment.     

Exes Fight Over Child’s Bed – Plaintiff Eric Smith suing defendant/ex-wife Charlotte Smith over the cost of a child's bed that he purchased for their son.   They are divorced, have 50/50 custody.   Plaintiff has another girlfriend now, but defendant claims when the litigants were shopping for the son's bed, that plaintiff wanted to reconcile with her.   Plaintiff put the bed cost $1450 on his credit card, and the defendant agreed to repay him.  

When defendant says that the litigants were reconciling, plaintiff is shaking his head.  (Plaintiff has a girlfriend, and has never wanted to reconcile with the defendant).   Plaintiff has a signed promissory note for the bed.    Defendant paid $350.

$1200 to plaintiff.

Edited by CrazyInAlabama
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

4 p.m. reruns-

First (2017)-

(Part 1-Biker Tackled by Raging Motorist, was on yesterday’s show)

Part 2 of yesterday’s case, continued-

Injured Cyclist Screaming Like a Maniac-Plaintiff/ bicycle rider Joseph Connolly suing an aggressive driver Christopher Hope who chased him down, and then attacked him.    Bike rider had a serious arm injury from defendant's assault.  (Plaintiff’s arm tendon detached from the bone, and had to be stapled back.  Ouch!)  Defendant claims plaintiff hit his passenger mirror, and then the assault happened on plaintiff.    Defendant paid for damages to parked car he threw the plaintiff into. 

Counter claim by defendant is dismissed, because it's ca-ca, and so is the defendant.  Defendant's witness in court is sitting there shaking her head like a bobble head doll.  Witness wasn't even in the car at the incident, but claims she witnessed the plaintiff screaming at the defendant, and saw the plaintiff screaming death threats.       Defendant witness is as unbelievable as defendant is.    (I know they claim they don't know each other, who would witness someone yelling on a bicycle, and come to court to testify two years later?  I wouldn't be surprised if defendant and witness know each other.)   Defendant witness (Kezia Norton) claims plaintiff was aggressive, and taunting the defendant, screaming death threats at defendant, and caused the confrontation.    Wonder how many screen credits defendant witness has? (I know the answer to this, a lot, since it's L.A. and a lot of people have some kind of show business experience).    The woman who is defendant witness was not named in the police report, and didn’t give a statement to the police officer.     Defendant's statement to the police officer at the attack scene is very different from his testimony, and statement in court also. 

Police officer statement says a lot of different statements from defendant, and plaintiff story matches police report, and so does the witness on the police report.   Police Report Witness #2 is an off-duty police officer (the officer who witnessed the attack by defendant, was a former commanding officer at Wilshire station, where plaintiff worked) and saw the argument as plaintiff says.         Plaintiff does know witness # 2 from being police officers at different stations for a long time.  Plaintiff was in the gang unit at his station.   

Plaintiff medical records are submitted.    $8500 are the out of pocket medical costs for plaintiff's arm to reattach something (trying not to picture that, it sounds awful).    (Tendons were ruptured off of bone, and had to be stapled back)

$5,000 for plaintiff.  

(My view is that one of these days one of the litigants will challenge the wrong person, and end up dead.   You never know who is armed, or seriously dangerous.     When someone follows another person with a car for 1.3 miles to confront them, there's something seriously off there.  Nothing in this case was worth dying for.   However, I think the aggressor was the defendant. But for his own safety, I wish the plaintiff had run far away from this confrontation.   A long time ago, family friends confronted a man who was harassing their car in traffic, and they were shot, and died).   

 

Second (2017)-

Dogsitting Disaster!-(or according to my spell check Dog Sitting Disaster!)- Plaintiff Cheryl Wilhite  suing for vet bills, lost wages, and punitive damages, $5,000.   Plaintiff suing defendant, Beatrice Stigen. who was dog sitting for her four dogs. Plaintiff wanted the defendant to come to her apartment, and take care of the dogs there, but instead the defendant took the dogs to her house, and turned them out with her own dogs.  

 However defendant took the four dogs to her house, and one dog got out (twice), and another dog was attacked by defendant's dog (dog later died of injuries from defendant's dog).    Defendant claims she didn't like how the dogs were kept, and didn't want to stay at plaintiff's apartment, with twice a day visits.    Defendant is counter suing for harassment. 

Defendant claims plaintiff agreed to let defendant take the dogs to her home.    Plaintiff claims defendant and adult daughter agreed to visit twice a day to take care of the dogs.    Photo of dogs was on plaintiff's phone, and was dropped and destroyed.   Defendant's phone also croaked in a recent flood.   This all happened in 2015, and plaintiff took a couple of years to sue.   Defendant says plaintiff's injured dog also hurt defendant's dog. 

 Plaintiff saw a photo of her four dogs at defendant's house, but never demanded that her dogs be taken back to plaintiff's apartment/house, or interrupted her vacation and returned home early.    If plaintiff wasn't cheap, then her dogs would have been safe at a boarding kennel.    (Hunky Officer Byrd has to tell both litigants to shut it.   Both litigants need their filthy mouths washed out with soap too).

Vet bills for plaintiff are dismissed, no evidence of date, and whole case sounds rotten.

Cases dismissed. 

Surprise! We're Squatters?! -Plaintiffs Myna Okoro, and roommate, Phillip Carter are suing former landlord Mark Kimbrough for illegal eviction, and damages.     Defendant landlord (rental house) wants unpaid rent, damages, lock changing fees, and harassment.   Rent was $525 a month, and security was supposed to be $125, but defendant says security was never paid, and plaintiff claims he paid $1,000 security, but has no proof.     

Then when some work was being done at rental house, plaintiffs claim that defendant told them they could stay in another house for two weeks, but stayed three weeks.   Defendant claims he had access to the lockboxes because he's some kind of property manager. 

However, actual home owner showed up at her house, discovered plaintiffs squatting in her house, called the police, and plaintiffs were removed.    Defendant had access to the lock box at the second house, he's apparently some kind of property manager.

Plaintiffs went to a hotel until they found another place to rent.   They didn't pay May or June.  Plaintiffs claim they lost their jobs, bank account overdrawn, and other junk.

There was never a written lease for the house. Defendant has no proof of POA for owner, or other documents.   Defendant was actually renting the house, and sublet to plaintiffs (I'm guessing illegally). 

Case dismissed. 

Edited by CrazyInAlabama
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

5 p.m. reruns-

First (2014)-

Pit Bull Attacks Child – Plaintiff/landlord Sa'de Lablanc is suing defendant/tenants Colin Felch, and Blanca Harper  over attack on her child by defendant’s Pit Bull.   Little girl testifies about the attack.  Defendants are still tenants, and plaintiff wants them out of her property.   Plaintiff's daughter, and defendant's children were playing, when 6 year old daughter was attacked by defendant's dog.     Defendants moved in on 16 September, and the attack happened on 29 September.  Child was taken to the hospital after the attack, and still has scars that she shows to JJ.   The attack happened outside in the yard.   The little girl says dog probably got scared, because the plaintiff's kid, and the defendant's 6 year old girl were wearing play boxing gloves. 

Plaintiff says when she signed lease with tenants they were going to put up a fence around their yard, and wants circus training classes the daughter missed, and daughter's pain and suffering.   Plaintiff already gave defendants notice to leave her property.    Defendants claim they're leaving at the end of the month, and are complaining about the lack of proper utilities.    As long as defendants move out, and pay their rent, then plaintiff won't pursue lease breaking fees for the rest of the two year period. 

Plaintiff receives $1 (No unreimburse medical bills, nothing else that plaintiff is out).  

Is Ex a Thief? – Plaintiff Stephanie Endres suing defendant/ex-boyfriend  EJ Curran over car damages.     Plaintiff's car had marks from being kicked numerous times, almost 2 years ago, when the defendant borrowed her car.   Then defendant was arrested for domestic violence and jailed for two months, then they got back together again, and only split after another domestic violence incident happened.   

After the car kicking, plaintiff had a baby, and they reconciled.   Then in August, defendant beat her up again, and took a bunch of stuff.     Car damages are dismissed.

Plaintiff claims defendant broke her phone, and stole her Xbox, as he was leaving her.  Defendant claims plaintiff broke his phone first.    Xbox dismissed, phone dismissed (they each broke the other's phone).

Everything dismissed. 

Second (2014)-

Funeral & Family Fight – Plaintiff Kerry Magee  suing defendant Patrick Bailey, for a loan to defendant for  defendant's father's funeral costs, and an assault.     Litigants are half-brothers (share the same mother). Vernon, defendant's witness gives a lot of entertaining testimony.   Defendant says his father's funeral was paid for by union insurance, but plaintiff did give him $1300 for bills.   Plaintiff claims he invited the defendant to go to the Las Vegas NASCAR race.   Vernon the witness, was going along on the trip to Vegas, and claims plaintiff was going to pay everyone's way to the race in Vegas.  

Vernon the witness called hotel security, and claims it took two security guards to get plaintiff off of defendant.   The photos of defendant's injuries are bad.  

Defendant gets $2700, and that is $4000 minus the $1300 loan from plaintiff.  

Bulldog Stud was a Dud! – Plaintiff Dominique Urtecho suing defendant/family friend Miguel Aceves over an English Bulldog breeding.   As the title says "the Stud was a Dud!"  Plaintiff has stud, and they wanted to breed defendant's female, to get puppy.   Stud fee was $500.   Male was taken to female's location, a friend of defendant was to help with the breeding (not defendant's witness).   There was no litter resulting from the breeding, and therefore, no stud fee is owed.   

The breeding was by artificial insemination, by a co-worker of defendant.   Male is stimulated to produce semen, and then female is inseminated.  

Contract submitted by plaintiff, it says return service, but that didn't happen either. No puppies, so no pick of litter.  Plaintiff has bred her male twelve times, always at the vet's office, except this time. 

Plaintiff case dismissed. 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

4 p.m. reruns-

First (2018)-

Judy Bets on Officer Byrd’s Life -Plaintiff/uncle Richard Carrano is suing defendant niece April and Jeremy Carter, for money plaintiff loaned niece for a car purchase.   Defendant husband has three kids.    Defendant niece is mentally disabled, and has PTSD (her son was run over by a train, so takes Zoloft).    Defendant wanted $1100, (doesn't match her statement, or uncle's statement).  Total cost of car was $2600, according to some handwritten  note.   Defendant husband says wife had $1500 saved, and uncle only gave wife $1,000 to buy her dream car Cadillac.     (My question, what the hell kind of Cadillac costs $2600?).  The usual loan not gift statement comes from defendant husband.

A woman on Zoloft, with PTSD, ferries her grandchildren (two grandchildren 2-years and 2 months) around, and husband claims she's competent.    Uncle/plaintiff says no one paid anything back, but defendant husband claims he did work adding up to $800.   Bank said plaintiff had to take out a $5,000 loan, and he repaid $1500 the same day. 

Plaintiff receives $3935 is the remaining loan amount, plus interest.    

Guilty Tenant? – Plaintiff Jacqueline Norin is suing defendant Mark Arguilez for trashing her rental unit.    The move out was a year before filing this case.   Defendant took responsibility for all damages to the unit, but plaintiff says defendant was hard to locate.  Defendant claims he was going to fix everything, fixed nothing.   

JJ gets pictures of damages.   

$4100  to plaintiff. 

Second (2017)-

Child Abuse Allegations and Assault?  -Plaintiff Melissa Washington, suing soon to be ex sister-in-law Assiria Washington for medical bills, lost wages, pain and suffering after an assault.    Plaintiff has two children (Ages 2 and 3) with husband, and they are divorcing.    Plaintiff and husband (Jared Washington) are supposed to swap weekends, but that doesn't happen too often.   Ex-SIL Assiria Washington, says plaintiff was trespassing, and assaulted her first.   This wasn't the first custody exchange at defendant's home.      Defendant says she tried to press trespass charges before this occasion, two months before, and owners of house say they told plaintiff to stay off of their property (house owned by defendant's uncle).   Former husband has a DUI, and doesn't drive.    

By now ex-SIL keeps shaking her head no, and it's very irritating.   Defendant husband, his father, SIL, and a few more relatives live in the home where this all happened. 

Trespass claim thrown out.    Plaintiff pulled up in front of house, and uncle (home owner), opened door, and plaintiff mentioned one kid (Apollo) had a scab on knee.    When plaintiff came on Sunday morning to pick up both children at ex's family home, at the usual time.   Jared, the ex-husband, asked what happened to the baby's knee, answered as day care by plaintiff.    Uncle let plaintiff in, and when plaintiff saw more scratches on the 2-year-old's legs, plaintiff asked what happened to the youngest.      Defendant ex said he would talk to plaintiff later, and discuss it calmly and privately, plaintiff refused to stop yelling.    Plaintiff followed ex-husband, his mother, SIL, outside to their car, with plaintiff with two kids with her.   Both parents were acting badly in front of little children.    Plaintiff was yelling at everyone, including her former mother-in-law.   

Plaintiff took youngest child to ER that day, not admitted, or anything but antibiotic ointment.    (My guess, plaintiff is trying to get visitation cancelled with ex-husband, but wanted to keep child support coming in).

Continued on another episode. tomorrow afternoon.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

5 p.m. episodes-

First (2014)-

Diseased Puppy or Misdiagnosis? -Plaintiff Kathleen O'Connor suing defendants Kimberly and John Pearson over a King Charles Spaniel puppy she bought from defendant.  Puppy was purchased 18 months ago.   Puppy had a return guarantee for another puppy if the dog had a congenital defect.  Syringomyelia (or something like that) was the diagnosis, and puppy was returned to defendants.   (This disease is similar to Chiari Malformation in humans.).   

The vet report says an MRI would be required to diagnose the disease, but plaintiff chose not to do the MRI.  Instead, plaintiff put the dog on several anti-seizure medications.  Vet found no pain, no seizures, just what the plaintiff says. 

Dog has been at the defendants' home for eight months, was taken off of the medication plaintiff had dog on.    Defendants say the dog has zero issues over the eight months they've had her back.    Defendant says dog has zero issues in her home, but plaintiff claims the dog has a congenital neurological condition.   

Plaintiff claims puppy is either sedated, or another dog.   The plaintiff's video is very sad, bizarre behavior by the puppy.   

Defendant said she tried not to get attached to the dog, because if she was in pain, then defendant would put the dog down.     Defendant says the puppy came out of her shell, is off medication, and dog is fine.   Defendants don't want to return a puppy to plaintiff. 

Defendants say the puppy is doing the equivalent of chasing her tail, and it's not the seizure episodes. (To me the puppy looks like a dog with very itchy feet, allergies maybe?  I bet from food, or contact with something on the floors, or yard.  I had a dog with similar foot chewing, and when the dog chew bones were changed for another brand, the chewing and itching stopped.) 

Plaintiff claims puppy is drugged, and being neglected by defendant.   JJ asks defendant if she would sell another puppy to plaintiff and says no.   

Plaintiff receives  $1500 for the puppy purchase, and vet bills. 

Second (2014)-

Punch Drunk Love -Plaintiff Hollie Dowdle suing defendant/ex-boyfriend Zachary Storrs for an assault, and return of belongings.  Plaintiff moved into defendant's apartment, and she wanted him to leave the apartment (it was a loft/apartment above defendant's grandmother's garage).   On the night in question, woman was watching TV while defendant was trying to sleep.   Then, the plaintiff's phone rang, so defendant answered it, and instead of her female cousin, it was some guy.    Plaintiff claimed defendant was wrong, and defendant says this was the third time she was cheating.   Then defendant says plaintiff called her grandmother, and took everything with her.  

Defendant claims plaintiff took everything but a shirt, and a pair of jeans when she left his apartment.   Plaintiff claims defendant assaulted her, and she was bruised and bleeding, when she left the apartment.   Plaintiff claims defendant kicked her in the nose during the fight.   Plaintiff claims fight happened at 2:30 a.m., and grandmother came to pick her up at 10:30 a.m.   (That's a garbage claim).   

(No police report.   Plaintiff's mother wasn't involved in any of this, but did come on Officer Byrd's dime to come for a free trip to L.A.)   Plaintiff applied for a protective order, and received one.  But, plaintiff has no application for the protective order, or a police report.

Plaintiff claim dismissed. 

Pyramid Scheme – Plaintiff Jeanette and Michael  Kelly suing defendants,  David Kennedy and his mother, Deborah Kennedy for ripping them off on a pyramid scheme .  Typical pyramid scheme, where plaintiff earns money by bringing in other suckers, now morphed into MLM-Multi-level Marketing.  The defendants were doing MLM marketing (a pyramid scheme).  

Plaintiffs bought into the defendants scheme for $135.   Then, plaintiffs had to bring people into the business, and the people they recruited, and they were foolish.

JJ will not help the plaintiffs, they were fools.   They're lucky, it only cost them $135 to find out it was a scheme. 

Case dismissed. 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post

4 p.m. reruns-

First (2018)-

Get Divorced Faster! – Plaintiff Christine Murray suing defendant/un divorced ex-boyfriend Edward Campbell, for attorney fees to move his divorce along faster.   They met online, defendant was married, but legally separated, and is still in process of the divorce, started in family court for the support order, but goes through Superior Court. (You can't get a divorce in family court, so going to NY Supreme court for the entire divorce, custody, etc. is still on-going).    Plaintiff sent email to defendant saying she paid $5,000 to his attorney.

Defendant says plaintiff demanded he get divorced ASAP, but they broke up a month after they met, and long before this case.   Plaintiff claims defendant said he would pay her back the $5,000, from a Worker's Comp check due to defendant for $15,000.   Defendant claims that they were just friends, in his view.  Plaintiff claims they were going to be together forever (which turned out to be a month).  Plaintiff needs to borrow Officer Byrd's sacred ink pen.   

$5,000 to plaintiff. 

He Had a Gun!   Read the Constitution?! – Plaintiffs Kim and Kerry St Amand suing defendants/mechanics Todd and Toby Fuller for a deposit for a car, 2006 Chevy Impala.   JJ dismissed something about earth moving by plaintiff, and that can go back to local small claims.

Defendant had a customer that didn't want to repair the Impala, so he bought it from the customer, fixed it, and resold it to plaintiff husband.  Plaintiffs claims defendants ripped them off, so put a nasty review online.    JJ has zero idea what online reviews can do to a business.  

Defendants paid the car owner $600, and fixed the transmission.   Then plaintiffs bought car for $3500, with $2000 down, but never received another penny form plaintiffs.   

$2,000 to plaintiffs, and defendants keep the car to fix up and resell. 

Second (2017)-

This case is part two of yesterday’s case, so I'm pasting that in first.

 (Child Abuse Allegations and Assault? -  Plaintiff Melissa Washington) suing sister-in-law for medical bills, lost wages, pain and suffering after an assault.    Plaintiff has two children (Ages 2 and 3) with husband, and they are divorcing.    Plaintiff and husband (Jared Washington) are supposed to swap weekends, but that doesn't happen too often.   SIL says plaintiff was trespassing, and assaulted her first (Assiria Washington).   This wasn't the first custody exchange at defendant's home.      Defendant says she tried to press trespass charges before this occasion, two months before, however, owners of house say they told plaintiff to stay off of their property.   Former husband has a DUI, and doesn't drive.    

Trespass claim thrown out.    Plaintiff pulled up in front of house, and uncle (home owner), opened door, and plaintiff mentioned one kid (Apollo) had a scab on knee.    When plaintiff came on Sunday morning to pick up both children at ex's family home, at the usual time.   Jared, ex-husband asked what happened to the baby's knee, answered as day care by plaintiff.    Uncle let plaintiff in, and when plaintiff saw more scratches on the 2-year-old's legs, plaintiff asked what happened to the youngest.      Defendant ex said he would talk to plaintiff later, and discuss it calmly and privately, plaintiff refused to stop yelling.    Plaintiff followed ex-husband, his mother, SIL, outside to their car, with plaintiff with two kids with her.   Both parents were acting badly in front of little children.    Plaintiff was yelling at everyone, including her former mother-in-law.   

Plaintiff took youngest child to ER that day, not admitted, or anything but antibiotic ointment.    (My guess, plaintiff is trying to get visitation cancelled with ex-husband, but keep child support coming in).   Case continued below.

Street Cat Fight in Front of Children?  - (part 2 of this revolting tale of family brawlers, part 1 from yesterday reprinted above)-Plaintiff, a soon to be ex-wife Melissa Washington is suing her soon to be ex-sister-in-law, Assiria Washington for medical bills, lost wages, pain and suffering after an assault.   Ex-husband Jared Washington, ex SIL, and her family all live at the house where plaintiff came to pick up the 2- and 3-year-olds after weekend visitation.   SIL/defendant claims an assault by plaintiff, and claims plaintiff hit first.   

Defendant/ex-husband says both litigants were yelling insults at each other, and then plaintiff put 2-year-old in the middle of the street, and a neighbor picked up the 2-year-old out of the street (Apollo).     Plaintiff says she was arguing with the SIL/defendant (plaintiff was carrying the 2-year-old, and dragging the 3-year-old along), when SIL and MIL yelled at her, and claims SIL broke plaintiff's nose and busted her lip.   

Plaintiff filed for a protective order, and it's granted for a year, unless SIL requests a hearing, so order was in effect for one year.    Parents do exchanges at McDonalds (good choice, they have cameras).    Plaintiff picture is bad, and defendant has no photos of her injuries.  My conclusion is SIL can really land a punch.     

Plaintiff should have stayed off the defendant's property, and out of their house.   The soon to be exes should have arranged the McDonald's handoffs much sooner.  Defendant says plaintiff dropped the 2-year-old in the street, leaving the 3-year-old alone, and a neighbor picked the little boy out of the street.     JJ disbelieves the SIL/defendant's police report, and defendant claims plaintiff ripped out chunks of hair. 

Bet Officer Byrd, and security guards are on high alert through this, and Officer Byrd has to tell litigants to shut up, and calm down.    

$3700 to plaintiff. (So, JJ rewarded plaintiff for dropping her 2-year-old in the street so she could brawl?)

(A reason so many do exchanges at McDonald’s is that there are security cameras at all times, useful when you apply for the visitation change, or restraining order). 

Young Waitress Dupes Older Man?  - Plaintiff (59 years-old) suing defendant/restaurant server (20 years- old) for an unpaid loan to buy a laptop computer.   Defendant says it was a gift.   Plaintiff was a regular customer at the restaurant, and defendant was a server at a Hooters style restaurant where the servers wear costumes, (lingerie), and she claims they were friendly.    Plaintiff was gullible, but defendant was a predator. 

Defendant says she thinks plaintiff wanted to sleep with her for the computer.    Defendant claims computer was a gift, in return for possible sex.   (Big surprise if she turns out to be an aspiring actress).     Honestly, in my view there is no written contract, and I bet there was no real expectation of repayment for plaintiff.  After computer purchase, defendant dumped customers. 

Computer cost $2300, no payments were made by defendant.  

Plaintiff receives $2436.

Edited by CrazyInAlabama
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

5 p.m. episodes (both episodes have at least one new case)-

First (2021)

Dancer’s Dream House or Nightmare Hostel? -Plaintiff/former Renae Baca tenant  suing defendant/landlord Kenneth Crawford, plaintiff is suing for return of rent, security deposit, harassment, and an assault for $5,000.  .    One bedroom had six beds (bunks), the other bedroom had four beds (bunks), and the third bedroom has two beds (bunks?).   Landlord rents bunks to international students mostly, and rents to dancers and others who come here to train, landlord lives in the hostel/building also.    Hostel is a single family dwelling, with four bedroom, one is defendants, and the other three rooms are rented.    Rent is $600 a month.  Plaintiff was in the six bed room, and there were three, sometimes four people in that bedroom with tenant.     One person was in the two bed room.    

Plaintiff lived in home for three months, moved in August, and out in November, paid $600 for each month, received $60 back on her security deposit, of $110 total.   There was no written lease,      Plaintiff claims room was substandard, no fire escapes.   Plaintiff was homeless when she decided to rent the bunk.    Defendant doesn't have a license to run a flop house.  

Counter claim from defendant is dismissed.  As defendant says, if you're 38 year-old, and have to rent a bunk in his place, you have other issues.    Fortunately, I have no idea what plaintiff's art is like.   If plaintiff says house was so awful, why did she recruit three other people to live there also? 

Plaintiff receives $50 security.

Parking Lot of Nonsense -Plaintiff Brian Don suing defendant Francis Moore is suing over car damages, from a parking lot accident in a Trader Joe's parking lot. and both claim they were parked.   Defendant is counter suing for his insurance deductible.  

Both were backed to their spots.   Plaintiff and girlfriend were leaving the parking lot, plaintiff says he was pulling forward, claims defendant pulled forward and hit the passenger back door, then continued up the side of the plaintiff's car and hit the front door, and hit the front of plaintiff's car.    Defendant has front end damages.   Plaintiff only had liability insurance.   Defendant has full insurance coverage.    

Plaintiff has a totally bizarre description of how the accident happened.   Defendant says plaintiff pulled forward, and turned directly in front of defendant's car, and hit defendant's car.    What a surprise, plaintiff's witness confirms the plaintiff's statements, however, she's his girlfriend.  

Plaintiff and defendant's case dismissed.  No way to figure out exactly what happened. 

Second -(A rare four case episode, only last case is older)-

Life-Saving Bulldog Surgery! (2021) -Plaintiff Spencer Farman suing defendant Christopher Cvitanov over an unpaid loan ($1500) for Bulldog surgery.   Defendant's 15 month old Bulldog had a Pyometra (uterine infection), not bladder infection the way defendant said it was.   Both men worked at a junk business together.   Defendant didn't repay the loan, because he couldn't purchase the junk yard from plaintiff's cousin.   Then plaintiff bought the company, and defendant was pissed off.   So he paid nothing back.   Defendant says he was going to be fired, so he left.     

Plaintiff receives $1500. 

Give Me Back My Gold Coins! (2021)-Plaintiff Renee Valliere suing defendant Sherrie Sharpe  because defendant didn’t return gold coins that were collateral on a loan.  Defendant loaned $3,000 to plaintiff, and three gold coins were collateral given to defendant.   Then plaintiff wants the coins back, and claims she has the money to repay the loan. 

Plaintiff claims she tried to contact defendant to repay the loan, and get her collateral back.   Plaintiff had the $3,000, and wanted the coins back.   Defendant accepted the coins late for collateral, and when plaintiff gives defendant $3,000, defendant has to return the coins, within 48 hours.   

Coins will be returned by the Sheriff, and money given to plaintiff.   However, plaintiff has money at court with her, and defendant has the coins, and exchange will happen at court outer office.  

Have You Heard of a Written Contract? (2021) -Plaintiff Corey and Gordon Radeke (same defendant from last case), suing defendant Sherrie Sharper for non-payment of contractor work on defendant's house.   Defendant gave a small stamp collection to plaintiff Gordon.

Defendant was paying plaintiffs a little, but she said when her house sold she would pay the rest to plaintiffs, but she never sold the house. 

Case dismissed, no contract.  

Tenant Tidiness (2013)-Plaintiff Thurston Moore suing defendant/former tenant Elizabeth Hunter, for unpaid rent, and cleaning fees.    Defendant is counter claiming for rent return, but plaintiff says defendant never paid the rent during the two month tenancy.   Rent was $525.    Plaintiff claims she stayed a month, but defendant says it took her almost three more weeks to totally vacate.    

(I really like her necklace).     However plaintiff says defendant paid $1,050, which is the full rent for two months.    

Defendant receives $100 security back (she claims it was $225). 

Tomorrow's case is the one where JJ says the defendant cooked her own goose, and defendant says she doesn't have a goose.    Defendant was also studying to be an EMT or Paramedic as I recall.    I hope defendant never went into a first responder field. 

  • Like 2
  • Laugh 1

Share this post


Link to post

4 p.m. reruns-

First (2018)-

Drive Away from the Hurricane! -Plaintiff /landlord Brian Semmler,  suing defendant/former tenant Jason Beal, for unpaid rent, for replacement charges for benches defendant destroyed to use to board up his windows.   The condo is in Naples, FL.   Defendant didn't pay September's rent, $1100 (hurricane hit 10 September), and he claims the condo had a lot of damages, and claims plaintiff told him not to pay rent and keep the money for his needs after the hurricane.    As JJ says, defendant chose not to evacuate, and defendant says he stayed to "protect the condo he was renting (for four years)"    Defendant and children stayed in the condo.     Since defendant didn't pay September rent, he had $1100 rent money to evacuate with.     

Defendant claims he stayed behind, endangering his two children, to protect the apartment.   Defendant moved to another apartment in the condo complex in October, but that costs $1750.      Defendant hasn't paid October rent to new landlord, or security either.     Plaintiff is being charged by condo complex for the benches defendant destroyed.    Defendant has no receipts for any hurricane preparation, or supplies. 

Replacement costs for the benches were $1,065, paid by plaintiff to HOA. 

As JJ says, defendant is a perennial victim.   Plaintiff gets $2865 (if he put the real total of $3965 he would have had two months rent paid, that defendant owed, but he didn't). 

Friends DO Let Friends Drive Drunk! – Plaintiff Cecily Kelley suing defendant Chad Crossman over damages to her car.    When they left plaintiff's place, defendant drove plaintiff's car.   Both decided to drink at the bar, and defendant had an accident driving home.    As JJ says, plaintiff allowed someone who had been drinking to drive her car, and that's her responsibility.    Plaintiff claims defendant forced her to give him the keys.   

Defendant gave plaintiff $120 for car damages.    Plaintiff paid the other $250 to the shop.  Then car shop found more damages.  Each litigant pays half.

Plaintiff gets $64 more, and that's it. 

Second (2018)-

Sobriety, Cheap Housing and Dangerous Heating?! – Plaintiff /former tenant, Mike Madani was living in a sober living house in Long Beach, (but claims he doesn't have a problem with drugs or alcohol), and is suing defendant/former property manager Jan White and former roommate,  Andy  Deffinbaugh, for assault by roommate, illegal eviction, and moving costs.       Sober living house isn't subsidized, but is licensed.   There are eight apartments in the facility, with 2 bedrooms, and 2 baths in each apartment, each bedroom has two to three beds, so up to 48 residents.    Defendant Andy Deffinbaugh, and plaintiff wanted an affordable place, and could only find the sober living facility.   

Plaintiff was there for six months, and didn't pay for January, and was told to leave.  Plaintiff claims the place had roaches and rats, but he stayed for six months.   Plaintiff is 67 on social security, and hasn't worked for 10 years.      

Defendants say it's only a sober living facility, because it doesn't allow drugs or alcohol.  But isn't subsidized, or licensed (and yet they pack two and three in each bedroom?).  Plaintiff moved to some other place in L.A.  from the defendant's flop house in Long Beach.

JJ dismisses illegal eviction, and no moving costs either.  JJ will consider the assault by Deffinbaugh.     No police report by plaintiff.  Plaintiff submits dental bills from assault in December, but dentist wasn't until February.  Plaintiff claims defendant Deffinbaugh broke his teeth, and elbow.  

Everything dismissed.

Sneakiest Insurance Scam Ever?! – Plaintiff Precious  Bilingsley suing defendant Iyanta Burns over car damages.    As usual, defendant didn't have insurance until after the accident.   Plaintiff says she parked, and when she returned to her car, she found a note from defendant, saying defendant had backed into plaintiff's car.    Repairs are $1200+, and plaintiff made a police report, and talked to claims adjuster.  Adjuster claimed defendant had called to get insurance 15 minutes after the defendant hit plaintiff's car, so disallowed claims.   Defendant wasn't covered by insurance until the day after the accident. 

As JJ says to defendant, she probably only left note, and then went to get insurance, because people saw defendant back into plaintiff's car.  

$1210 to plaintiff

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

5 p.m. episodes-

First (2014)-

Road Rage Slam! -Plaintiff Kenneth Mabry suing defendant Kelly McKee for attacking his car windshield with a hammer.   This happened on 4 November 2014, at 2 p.m., and litigants don't know each other.    This happened in L.A. during early rush hour (sorry JJ, 2 p.m. is rush hour in L.A.). 

Defendant's witness is her mother.   Plaintiff pulled over for a passing ambulance, defendant pulled over, to let ambulance go by.  Then they both pulled back into traffic, stopped at a stop light, defendant started screaming at plaintiff, and threw a soda at plaintiff's car.    Both litigants got out of their cars, and defendant got a hammer or baseball bat out of her car, and smashed plaintiff's windshield.   

Plaintiff says he pulled up to the light, ignored screaming defendant, and then defendant threw a full cup of soda into his car.   Plaintiff says defendant hit his car 8 to 10 times with a hammer from her car, smashing his car window.   Defendant's mother was screaming all kinds of threats too. Then, plaintiff says defendant climbed in her car to leave, but the mother wasn't in the car, so police had time to arrive and see the end of the incident. 

Defendant claims plaintiff cut her off, so she had to apply her emergency brake.  What a bunch of garbage defendant, and her mother are talking about 

Defendant is training for emergency services, an EMT student,  which makes me very nervous.  

This is the one where JJ tells defendant her 'goose is cooked', and defendant says she doesn't have a goose, or eat goose.   Rotten defendant says she hopes JJ doesn't need CPR, because she wouldn't perform that for her.    The gasp out of the audience is loud, and I bet Officer Byrd is on high alert, and really ticked.

Defendant laughs at JJ saying she committed vandalism. 

Plaintiff receives $500.

Bunk Bed Blowup- Plaintiff Kevin Johnstone suing defendant Melissa Baldwin, over bunkbeds he bought for his kids, when they lived together.   Defendant wouldn't let plaintiff take the bunk beds when he moved out, claiming she paid for the bunk beds. 

  Plaintiff was hiding money from his soon to be ex wife, and used that to buy the bunk beds.  Great move to say all of this to a family court judge who served for many years.  Money to buy bunk beds came from a settlement to plaintiff.   The litigants had a joint account, and plaintiff didn't want his ex-wife to get any money.   Plaintiff didn't have a bank account, just defendant, and he used the account.   

Plaintiff had $34,000 settlement, and received $28,000 after legal fees, for a bad back.   Litigants met playing softball.   Plaintiff still receives $1237 a month disability, and his last two kids were after he was disabled. How nice, plaintiff brought his mommy to court with him. 

Case dismissed. 

Second (2014)-

Don’t Fence Me In! -Plaintiffs Jeffrey Irwin and Ron Berry are suing defendant Debbie Toga for non-payment for putting a fence up once, and having to move it again.  The first fence was put in where defendant told them to put it, and that was on a neighbor's property, and plaintiff paid for the first fence.    Plaintiff claims defendants ripped up the check and broke her door.    First bid was $1502. 40 foot Redwood fence (42 feet).   Defendant paid $1450.    

Plaintiff says they put fence up once, and it was on neighbor's property, which isn't defendant's property.    After a day's work on the fence, plaintiff says they put up fence, and defendant wanted them to put fence on the high-class hotel next door, destroying the landscaping and other items, on the hotel's property.    Then defendant told the plaintiffs to move the fence, and erect it on her property.   Plaintiffs had to work twice as long, and use a lot more supplies.  

Defendant claims she had permission from the hotel to put the fence on neighboring hotel's property, and destroying the hotel's property.    (I hope the hotel sued defendant for fixing their property, and the landscaping she destroyed.)

Plaintiffs receive $2700 for the double fence installation. 

Premeditated Theft? -Plaintiff Ann Klugherz suing defendant Alan Jones for breaking items while moving them, and stealing from her home.   Plaintiff hired son's friend, defendant ALan Jones, to move items out of her property that she was selling.   House sold and plaintiff told defendant's brother, that defendant could have a futon, recliner, and TV stand from her basement. 

Defendant says his brother told him that he could take anything out of the house basement he needed.   Brother of defendant is plaintiff's witness.    Plaintiff moved out, and was selling the couch, and brother told defendant he could have anything in the basement.  

If your late grandmother's china is so precious to you, why would you leave it behind in the basement after you sell the house, and move out?   Plaintiff is totally hysterical, claiming defendant deliberately smashed her late grandmother's china, and it can't be replaced.   

Basement had futon, TV and stand, and recliner, and couch was sold to someone else.   Plaintiff is suing defendant for taking the couch, but he returned it.   Plaintiff says defendant took a VCR, and vacuum from the basement, and microwave.   Defendant returned the microwave also.    Plaintiff is suing for house damages, what a bunch of ca-ca.  

Plaintiff's son gave code to get into house to defendant.    Son testifies that defendant told him that he had permission to take futon, but that's a lie.    

Everything dismissed.  

Edited by CrazyInAlabama
  • Like 1
  • Laugh 1

Share this post


Link to post

Wow what was up with the road rage bitch today?  Throwing soda and using a hammer on someone else's car.  

And then she was nasty to our esteemed Judge Judy,

Boy oh boy.

Edited by NYGirl
  • Like 6
  • Laugh 2

Share this post


Link to post
51 minutes ago, NYGirl said:

Wow what was up with the road rage bitch today?  Throwing soda and using a hammer on someone else's car.  

And then she was nasty to our esteemed Judge Judy,

Boy oh boy.

My guess is if she was even able to graduate from her EMT course and get a job, she was probably fired in the first week.  No doubt has a LENGTHY employment history, as she's a  nasty little combative bitch who appears incapable of knowing right from wrong.  

  • Like 11

Share this post


Link to post

Can I just ask a question?  (This commercial came on during JJ)

Does it NEVER occur to this morons in the Bounty commercial to PICK UP the precious item that’s in the way of the approaching spill?   

  • Like 5
  • Laugh 10

Share this post


Link to post
14 hours ago, Carolina Girl said:

My guess is if she was even able to graduate from her EMT course and get a job, she was probably fired in the first week.  No doubt has a LENGTHY employment history, as she's a  nasty little combative bitch who appears incapable of knowing right from wrong.  

How does someone reach the age of 28 behaving this way? If she takes a hammer to a car over an incident as trivial as this, what does she do when something bad happens? Her mother was no bargain. The apple didn't fall far from the tree. 

  • Like 12

Share this post


Link to post
3 hours ago, TVMovieBuff said:

How does someone reach the age of 28 behaving this way? If she takes a hammer to a car over an incident as trivial as this, what does she do when something bad happens? Her mother was no bargain. The apple didn't fall far from the tree. 

Couldn't agree more.  "Hope you never need CPR - cuz I wouldn't give it to you."  Yeah, that's the kind of attitude you want from an EMT.  

  • Like 11

Share this post


Link to post

19 hours ago, Carolina Girl said:

My guess is if she was even able to graduate from her EMT course and get a job, she was probably fired in the first week.  No doubt has a LENGTHY employment history, as she's a  nasty little combative bitch who appears incapable of knowing right from wrong.  

Wish former coworkers knew about this forum and could fill us in on our little spitfire.

  • Like 5
  • Laugh 3

Share this post


Link to post

Is JJ sanctioning the delayed theft of the puppy?!?!!  Seems like she is.  The plaintiff has been taken advantage of twice.  Something tells me this won’t be the last time the defendant is sued in her lifetime.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post

4 p.m. reruns-

First (2018)-

Sexting Gone Terribly Wrong! -Plaintiff Jeremy Smith and girlfriend, Rachel Smith (mother of two by someone else, and soon to be mother of Jeremy's child) suing defendant Latanya Stevenson for punching her after defendant claims plaintiff sent her risque photos of her, sent by plaintiff, and breaking her glasses.   Plaintiff is current girlfriend of defendant's baby daddy, and man is defendant's ex-boyfriend.  Boyfriend of plaintiff, and ex of defendant, and has two kids with other women.  Plaintiff man is having child number three with plaintiff, and he has a 4-year-old and 2-year-old with defendant.     Plaintiff has a 7-year-old with another woman also.  

The sender of the nasty pictures to defendant was the plaintiff man, and woman is fine with that.   Plaintiff man claims he went to drop the kids off at defendant's, and claims defendant punched him.  Defendant claims plaintiff man burned her with a cigarette, she called police, and there is no proof, no medical report, or police report. 

Defendant claims plaintiff woman attacked her right after the confrontation with plaintiff man.     Plaintiff woman claims defendant attacked her while she was sitting in plaintiff man's car.    Defendant went downstairs to confront the plaintiffs, leaving her 2 and 4-year-old alone in the apartment.     

Plaintiff woman, says defendant assaulted her while she was sitting in plaintiff man's truck.  Plaintiff says defendant said she was going to hurt her and cause her to lose the pregnancy.    Plaintiff man sent videos of the plaintiffs having sex, and sent them to the defendant, and plaintiff woman is OK with that.  

Plaintiff woman receives $1 for the assault.  That wiped the smirk off of her face. 

Second (2018)-

The $9,000 Favor! -Plaintiff Lourdes Torres suing defendant/ex-boyfriend Peter Riendeau, over an unpaid loan to pay his debts.   Defendant calls money a gift, not a loan.  Plaintiff missed a flight in Houston and was late for court.    Defendant showed up in court on time.    Litigants lived together for just over a year, and in December 2016, plaintiff loaned defendant $9,000 to pay off his credit card debt.   

Plaintiff received $9,000 from a lawsuit settlement (she says she signed a confidentiality agreement, and can't discuss the details, but needs to prove JJ where the money came from).   Plaintiff also bought a house for cash.  

$5,000 to plaintiff for the loan. 

Boyfriends’ Trip to Spain Fail! -Plaintiff Justin Whitfield suing defendant/ex-lover Donald Umphenour for the cost of a trip to Spain, and credit card charges.  Defendant is accused of cheating, and home invasion. Defendant is swilling the Water That Should Not Be Drunk.   Plaintiff can't prove charges by defendant.  Plaintiff denies he cheated on the defendant.  

Defendant has no pictures of damages, or any proof of the home invasion/burglary.   Defendant has a restraining order against plaintiff.    Home invasion police report is submitted by the defendant.  There are no photos.   There is a security camera photo of plaintiff's friend robbing the defendant's place.  

Plaintiff receives $2376 for trip to Spain.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

5 p.m. episodes-

First (2021)-

Australian Puppy Custody Battle! – Plaintiff / dog breeder Michael and Mary Donnelly suing defendant/teenage neighbor Charlee Friedman (female) for refusing to return puppy to plaintiff, trying to neuter the animals, and filing a false police report.  Defendant claims puppy was a gift, and told police plaintiff was trying to break into defendant's home.    Plaintiff had four puppies purchased from a breeder, for $4,300 (two males, two females). 

  Unfortunately, plaintiff woman's top looks like jailhouse orange.   After the puppies arrived, defendant came to play with the puppies, and defendant took one puppy home the next day.    Plaintiff let defendant keep the puppy over night, but defendant didn't return the puppy.    

Then, defendant refused to return the puppy, was letting him out off leash, wasn't bringing the dog home at all.   Defendant was to have the dog available for testing and breeding, but defendant tried to get the dog neutered.   There is no signed agreement between litigants.   

Defendant refuses to return the puppy, follow rules about leash walking, and allow breeding.     Defendant's parents refuse to get involved.  So, defendant wants JJ to believe that plaintiff gave a puppy that cost over $1,000 plus shipping as a gift.     Defendant has called police and claimed plaintiff was trying to break into her house.   Defendant doesn't know the difference between neutering, and vaccinations.    Defendant wanted to chip the dog, but refused to meet the plaintiff for registering (My guess, the defendant wanted to register the chip to herself, another way to establish ownership).     Defendant tried to get dog neutered, and then demanded that puppy get neutered when vet said dog was too young.   

Plaintiff says there are bears and mountain lions in the area, and plaintiff saw the dog off leash right by the road at night.   

Defendant's father lies in court, and says dog is a gift.    The parents are just letting the daughter get away with stealing an animal.    After the dog's behavior at the vet, and having to wear a muzzle in court, I would wonder if the testing will happen?   I wonder if the dog even gets routine vet care?    I suspect that the defendant and her enabling parents will encourage the bad behavior by the dog, so plaintiff won't want him.     I wouldn't want to breed an animal to that dog anyway, he seems to have a bad temperament.   

My question is why is defendant dog wearing a muzzle in court?   Vet says dog has been difficult to work with, and they have told defendant to take him out of their office on at least one occasion. 

I wouldn't let the defendant family have a dog I cared about.   I think dog has already proven to have an unsuitable behavior to continue to breed him.   

JJ says plaintiff has the right to breed the dog, and she will allow neutering after a certain time period, and defendant can keep the dog.   Plaintiff says defendant won't keep any appointments.   For one year, plaintiff can breed the dog five or six times, and genetic testing will be in the order.    I see no way that defendant will follow the agreement.   

If defendant refuses to follow the agreement, then JJ will craft another order for plaintiff with a marshal's help to get the dog back, and that will happen without another hearing in court. 

 Plaintiff should never have let that defendant near her puppies, and another case where trying to do something nice didn't work.  In the plaintiff's place, I wouldn't let defendant or her family on my property.    She's already made false police reports, and you know she'll do it again.    I would arrange to meet somewhere else, with security cameras.     

JJ should give the plaintiff the cost of the puppy, and shipping.  Plaintiffs tried to do a nice thing, but the defendant and her parents will never do anything the daughter doesn't want to do. (Personally, I wouldn't want a puppy from this dog, his behavior was awful, and the vet already told the defendant to leave their clinic once.   If the dog requires a muzzle in public, and acts badly, then there's something wrong, either with how he's been raised, or genetically.  My guess is it's the raising.  )   

Second (2013)-

Fake Silver Sale? -Plaintiff Robert Dodge (owns a coin and precious metals shop) suing silver vendors Robert Gutowsky and his sister Lisa Clark, for selling him fake silver.    Plaintiff said the market price for silver is a more than the defendants sold him silver for just over $4,000. 

Plaintiff thought $1 less than market price was a deal.     Market price is about $28.00, and defendants were selling it for a dollar off market price, and defendants were buying the silver off of eBay.     Defendant purchased the silver he resold for $9 or $10 an ounce.    Plaintiff submits an appraisal that the silver was fake.  

Plaintiff receives $4300 for the silver he purchased from defendants.   

Teen Denies Bad Driving -Plaintiff Luis Hunter is suing Sara Mebrahtu (teen driver)  , and her father Geseteh Cohasay (car owner) suing defendant for damages from defendant daughter/driver running a stop sign.   

Plaintiff mother was at the scene immediately,  and says defendant's mother said only parents were covered by insurance, but not daughter.  Plaintiff mother says defendant mother wanted plaintiff to lie and say she was driving so the insurance would pay for the accident.   Defendant daughter claims plaintiff was at fault in the accident, and she's irate that police gave her a ticket, and says since she was unfamiliar with the road, the accident wasn't her fault.   

Plaintiff driver says he got to the stop sign, and stopped fully, and then went, but defendant driver ran her stop sign, and smashed the plaintiff's right front fender.   Defendant driver blames everything on plaintiff, had no insurance, ran the stop sign. 

Plaintiff receives $2,000 for car.

Edited by CrazyInAlabama
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

I see no way that defendant will follow the agreement.   

JJ was so proud of the arrangement she came up with, she probably never even considered how likely it was that the defendant would really abide by it. She also did not bother to take note of what the plaintiff said about the assessment of the dog being more involved than simply genetic testing and that she would need to examine its behaviour for a period to determine its readiness to breed.

Taking these into account would have corrupted the perfection (in JJ's mind anyway) of the beautiful edifice she had put together.

Also the 1 year term for the arrangement was completely arbitrary. I think that the ruling was truly unfair to the plaintiff and a reward for the psychologically troubled defendant, who was nothing less than a dog thief.

Edited by Florinaldo
  • Like 11
  • Useful 1

Share this post


Link to post
21 hours ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

Defendant purchased the silver he resold for $9 or $10 an ounce.    Plaintiff submits an appraisal that the silver was fake.  

The way those two frauds were tap dancing around the fraud allegations put Ben Vereen's performance in "Pippin" to shame.  They KNEW that silver was fake.   Loved that they tried to say that some of it was silver they bought from the plaintiff previously.   Notice they said "oh, we tried to get a refund but we couldn't" - sounded to me like they were in cahoots with the fraud that sold it to them.  

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post

19 hours ago, Florinaldo said:

Also the 1 year term for the arrangement was completely arbitrary. I think that the ruling was truly unfair to the plaintiff and a reward for the psychologically troubled defendant, who was nothing less than a dog thief.

I think the defendant has some mental difficulties.  She should never have been left to represent herself--and her father doesn't seem too helpful.  JJ thinks of herself as Reigning Expert in All Things...Especially Dogs.  She showed she knows nothing of the health/physical requirements for a working/herding dog.  The defendant and her family are not providing a safe home for a dog who will love to roam...among the mountain lions and bears!! It's too bad THIS TV show was selected to solve this problem..

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post

4 p.m. reruns-

First (2018)-

Restraining Order Riot -Plaintiff /room renter Denise Silva suing former landlady Charlotte Caron, (she was a renter also) for returned rent, and a false restraining order.    Plaintiff says she saw an ad for renting a two bedroom condo, and gave defendant $3950 total, and lived in the room for seven weeks.   Defendant never moved out, so the two bedroom condo for rent was a lie, and I wonder if subletting was allowed?    Defendant evicted plaintiff by getting a temporary restraining order, instead of going through housing court.     

The crucial incident that defendant used to get rid of plaintiff was when defendant's nephew came and stayed the night, and defendant claims plaintiff went bonkers.    Defendant and nephew slept in the same bedroom that night.   Plaintiff claims the nephew's friend was sleeping on the couch the next morning,   Defendant says there was 'nothing incestuous' going on with the nephew.   Defendant says she went to the police station to make a report about plaintiff, but the police station was closed (no way it was), actually it was court.  

Plaintiff receives $5,000 for rent, the police incident

 

Pit Bull Has a Bad Day! -Plaintiff Luis Galano is suing Tony Toledo and Jenny del Valle, defendants over an attack by defendant's Pit Bull.   Plaintiff was friends with defendants, knew the dog well, and even walked dog with defendant woman.   They were all at the lake house, and plaintiff saw a BBQ fire, put it out, and then the Pit Bull latched on to plaintiff's arm.   

Defendant finally admits that "Ice" the pit bit him that day also.  Defendants say dog never bit anyone before this day.   Plaintiff claims he not only had the bite wound, but internal injuries, and medical personnel didn't treat his wounds appropriately.    Defendant blames the bite on the commotion that day.  Defendants' sworn statement blames everything on the plaintiff, and say plaintiff provoked the dog.

Plaintiff was taken to the hospital by ambulance.   

Plaintiff receives $2675 for medical bills. 

Second (2018)-

Intimate or Not Intimate? -Plaintiff Kelsey Smith  suing defendant Lisa Serbus, for a loan to get her car fixed.     Plaintiff claims they were just friends, and not a couple,  but defendant says they were intimate, and he had belongings at her place.  Defendant says they lived together from Thanksgiving until the following February.    Plaintiff had no car, no job, and claims he lived with his cousin, Elwood.     Plaintiff borrowed defendant's car, but claims she was driving the car when it started acting up.    

Car repair cost $430, and she bought new tires.     The litigants met on "Plenty of Fish".  Defendant says when she argued with plaintiff, he assaulted her daughter, while cousin, and plaintiff were packing up plaintiff's belongings.   Police report was not submitted (it needs a subpoena in SD).   Defendant daughter claims plaintiff hit her across the throat with his forearm, and elbow.   Plaintiff denies the assault.  

JJ mentions a good point, if plaintiff didn't have anything at defendant's house, then why was he packing his stuff up at defendant's house? 

Plaintiff case dismissed.   No $470 for lying plaintiff. (actually, JJ awards plaintiff and defendant daughter each $470, so no money.)

Process Server Payback! -Plaintiff Monique Brewer, was a process server for defendant, and is suing defendant/former employer Scott Caywood for unpaid wages.    Plaintiff was free-lancing process serving for defendant.   Defendant says plaintiff did a bad job, and he owes her money.   Defendant says he gave plaintiff 15 cases to serve, and she only submitted four affidavits of service.    Plaintiff claims she served all 15 individuals, defendant says she only served 4, and service was only complete on 1.

$225 to plaintiff. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

5 p.m. episodes-

First (2021)-

Indoor Playground Meets Covid?! – Plaintiff /playground operator Elena Goldstein suing defendant Shamaiya Hill over failure to pay for her child’s birthday party at their facility.  Plaintiff had owned an indoor event venue, for 23 years, in California.   Plaintiff booked a birthday party for defendant's kid, and it happened in December 2020 (this is in L.A.).   Plaintiff claims there were no restrictions for private facilities in California.     Plaintiff serves food at the venue (two pizzas, and other food).   JJ reads the rules in L.A. in December 2020, which  says no private gatherings, no indoor events, and had 20 people at the birthday party.    Plaintiff claims the L.A. Health Department approved her procedures, and gatherings.    They certainly weren't essential the way plaintiff says.  

The permitted events were for people who were in the same household, or bubble.  Plaintiff had another party starting at 3:00 (also 20 people), defendant's kid party was 20 people from 12:30 to 2:30,  Plaintiffs were booked heavily during the month.   Plaintiff has no proof she can have this event center open, and is sent outside to get proof faxed to her for JJ to see.  

Case is recalled, so plaintiff can show proof her business was deemed essential by the Health Department in L.A.      Letter from Health Dept. is dated 11 September 2020, but is for a day camp.  Sorry, it's an event center, not a day camp that the letter refers to.   Plaintiff claims letter says they could have 10 kids for a day camp, but the kids weren't campers, and had at least one person with them (Under the Sea Indoor Playground in Los Angeles).    

Then JJ tells plaintiff she was stupid to risk people's lives by having events, and tells defendant she was equally careless and stupid to have the party like this.  

As JJ says, the parties were prohibited.     The party kid was 1 year-old, and won't remember any of it, and there were many family members attending.   I wonder how many people caught Covid from this?

Plaintiff was paid $260 deposit, and she's not getting another penny. 

Vegas Trip Gone Bad (2013) -Plaintiff Sarah Fay suing defendant/former friend Johnetta  Nabors for hotel costs for a trip to Vegas.    Defendant says plaintiff's boyfriend has always been an issue, and that's why she didn't want to go to Vegas.    Plaintiff and boyfriend went and paid $400 to defendant.    Defendant decided not to attend, because she never got her ticket.   Plaintiff wasn't 21, so she couldn't book a room.

Defendant says her ex-boyfriend came back, and "people" were taking money off of defendant's debit card.   Defendant is blaming plaintiff for giving her the money. 

Plaintiff gets $400.

Second (2014)-

Domestic Violence Victim? – Plaintiff Otis Mays Jr suing defendant Frances Howard, for falsely accusing him of assault, and return of his property.  Defendant said she saw pictures of other women on plaintiff's computer.    After the argument, defendant saw that plaintiff had taken their daughter, so she called the police and reported daughter kidnapped.    Child is five years old.   Litigants have been living together for five years, with only plaintiff working.    During their living together, plaintiff called police twice in 2013 (when the argument happened).   On one occasion they both got physical, and defendant called the police, and she assaulted him first.   A couple of months later was the argument where she saw the computer photos, had an argument, and that was when she made the false kidnapping report.  

Defendant is getting welfare, and she was on the lease, because the government doesn't know plaintiff was living there.   So daughter went with dad, and defendant told police he kidnapped her daughter. 

Because of the lie about kidnapping, plaintiff was arrested, and lost his job.  However, the argument and arrest happened in December, the day after Christmas.   Defendant also claimed aggravated domestic assault. 

Plaintiff receives $5,000. 

Brother Sister War – Plaintiff Skyler Chadrick-Wehrman suing defendant  Christopher Wehrman and wife Catherine Wehrman, for moving costs.   Defendant had three children under four (my worst nightmare).   Defendant was using plaintiff's truck to go to and from work.   Plaintiff (age 19) was living with brother and wife, and helping around the house.    JJ points out to defendant that claiming to be poor, and having another baby are incompatible. 

Plaintiff got student loans and grants, and loaned $2300 to defendant to fix his truck.  Defendant claims he only borrowed $800 and it wasn't a loan, but a gift, and claims he repaid $600.    Plaintiff shows the $2300 that was loaned to defendant, out of two loans plaintiff took out.     Defendant says the money went to support the household, and he was using plaintiff/sister's truck.    

Plaintiff receives $2350

 

Edited by CrazyInAlabama
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
On 4/29/2021 at 3:59 PM, CrazyInAlabama said:

 

First (2021)-

Australian Puppy Custody Battle!

 

I fail to see how the plaintiff is right in this situation, most of what she said are false claims and she seemed confused in the court room. Others saying the defendant has mental/psychological issues is strange to me because this girl doesn’t demonstrate any signs at any point in the courtroom. It seems to me the plaintiff has these issues. Strange claims made, the obsessive nature of the dogs and their infrastructure, causing her to have a seizure trying to ramble about this to JJ. If anything the plaintiff is lucky she has been given this deal and is lucky she gets to use the dog for her personal gain. The dog quite clearly is healthy and taken care of with his owner, who knows how he would be if held hostage by redneck scientists! The husband didn’t seem to have much to add to the case, stuck in the form of a frozen popsicle who certainly has caught a case of a severe brain freeze! I wonder if he even knew what was going on and was just nodding and agreeing with his wife.

Share this post


Link to post

The case "Tragic Family Breakdown" was pretty sad - it was painful to see father Honeycutt feel so betrayed by his 19 year old daughter, OVER A CAR, that he breaks down in tears and disowns her on national TV.  This guy seemed equally angry and heartbroken that his child sued him, and I guess that's an understandable emotional response, but I was also getting angry at him -- to see a father be so closeminded and blinded by hurt, so adamant about cutting ties with his child over something as trivial as a car.   

Raise your hand if you think Honeycutt is taking out his anger over his divorce, etc. on his daughter.  His outburst was not an adult or parental move, but I should not be surprised because people get mad for the most trivial things, but this seemed entirely blown out of proportion for the circumstances.

 

Edited by patty1h
  • Like 8

Share this post


Link to post
28 minutes ago, patty1h said:

The case "Tragic Family Breakdown" was pretty sad - it was painful to see father Honeycutt feel so betrayed by his 19 year old daughter, OVER A CAR, that he breaks down in tears and disowns her on national TV.  This guy seemed equally angry and heartbroken that his child sued him, and I guess that's an understandable emotional response, but I was also getting angry at him -- to see a father be so closeminded and blinded by hurt, so adamant about cutting ties with his child over something as trivial as a car.   

Raise your hand if you think Honeycutt is taking out his anger over his divorce, etc. on his daughter.  His outburst was not an adult or parental move, but I should not be surprised because people get mad for the most trivial things, but this seemed entirely blown out of proportion for the circumstances.

 

I had the feeling that mom with her sweet demeanor was behind this. Lots of anger over the divorce and the kid sided with her. So she wants to cut him out. I think maybe the whole thing could have been avoided if the parents could have had a conversation. Lots of betrayal there but dad needed to recognize that 18 year olds will do lots of things they will regret. Hopefully he will come to his senses. 

  • Like 17

Share this post


Link to post

4 p.m. reruns-

First (2018)- Plaintiff / driver Robin Brook was picking up her sons, when defendant Svetlana Gutierrez's daughter was hit by plaintiff.    Plaintiff is suing for mirror damages.   Defendant daughter was taken away in an ambulance, required stitches, had bruises.    Plaintiff claims daughter ran into the side of her vehicle, and hit and broke her mirror. 

 Crossing guard is the plaintiff's witness, and plaintiff and witness blame everything on the little girl.    Plaintiff claims little girl ran out from behind a hedge, and girl hit the right side mirror.    Plaintiff says girl collided with her passenger side mirror, and the mirror fell off.   Mark Misonznick is the crossing guard, who claims to have witnessed the accident, and blames everything on the little girl.   

JJ asks plaintiff if the girl had died, if she would have been suing the defendant mother, and my guess is she would.  (Plaintiff claims she wouldn't have sued if the child died) Plaintiff keeps arguing with JJ.  

Plaintiff case dismissed.     Defendant dismissed also. 

(The last time this ran, I remember a lot of us deciding that there is no way all of the testimony was accurate.   Either the driver backed into the girl, and hit her collarbone, or the speeds were way off.   My mirrors fold back, and if something the size of this girl hit them, the mirror would have folded, if that was the direction the little girl hit.       This testimony in the entire case was off).

The Judge Asks a Woman-to-Woman Question -Plaintiff Irene Lopez suing defendant /ex-boyfriend Jesus Arellano for bail money, loans, and being a jerk..   Cheating defendant was arrested for outstanding warrants for domestic violence for failure to appear (it was for the side piece, who is the mother of three of his children, no kids with plaintiff).  Bail was $4,000, requiring $2,000 cash.  Outcome of defendant's case was he pled out, had to go to anger management class (I need one now, I want to make him cry).   Defendant is supposed to pay the other $2,000, but hasn't.    

JJ wants to know what the plaintiff's attraction to the defendant was, nothing I can see. 

$4,000 to plaintiff.

Second (2018)-

Dog Loses Eye at Photo Shoot! -Plaintiff Aitana Cardoso  suing defendant Brittany Hernandez, for vet bills, and dog's pain and suffering,  over an attack on her dog at defendant's house, dog is , an emotional support dog,  resulting in the loss of an eye.

Litigants were friends before this.  Plaintiff dog is a French Bull Dog, and defendant's dog is a Husky, GSD mix, and was a foster dog.    It was a photo shoot for Life Clothing, and both litigants were paid $200 each, photos were going to be taken at defendant's apartment.   Defendant is a freelance DJ. 

  Defendant dog was a foster, for three weeks. Plaintiff brought her dog to the defendant's apartment for a photo shoot.   Plaintiff says her dog was attacked instantly on arrival, and she claims defendant did nothing to help or stop the attack.   

After the attack, plaintiff took her dog to her apartment, and eventually to the vet.   Defendant says plaintiff wasn't supposed to bring her dog,  Defendant says it wasn't an attack, but the dogs were just playing.  

There is a text that both dogs need to be in a video for photographer. JJ will call photographer about the text.    JJ goes to call photographer.  PHotographer wasn't required for photo shoot, so plaintiff just brought her dog.  

Plaintiff case dismissed. 

Judge Catches Bad Driver in a Lie? -Plaintiff Christian Bernal suing defendant Teddy Hernandez over car accident.    Defendant was driving his roommate's car.    Defendant had no insurance card at the time of the accident, and since roommate was out of town, he also did not have permission to drive the car.   Plaintiff witness said defendant just backed too fast in the parking lot (all of this happened at a barber shop where plaintiff works, and his witness, and defendant were clients).   Defendant claims plaintiff was backing out also, but he wasn't even in his car.   

Defendant presents "evidence" that he claims plaintiff was going to go to the police, and say defendant was intoxicated.     Defendant hit a parked car, and rammed a hole through plaintiff's bumper, and other front end damage.    

$1800 to plaintiff

Edited by CrazyInAlabama
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, patty1h said:

The case "Tragic Family Breakdown" was pretty sad

It was sad on both sides. Lots more to the story, I am sure.

  • Like 13

Share this post


Link to post

5 p.m.

First (2021)-

Tragic Family Breakdown -Plaintiff/ daughter Grace Honeycutt (19 years old) suing defendant father Lawrence Honeycutt over a car title.     At the end, father says when he signs the title to daughter, that he no longer has a family.   Defendant separated from ex wife in 2017, divorced in 2019, daughter lived with her mother.      Plaintiff is a horse trainer, and no longer works for defendant father.      Plaintiff had two horses, in father's name, and she wanted them signed over to her, and a car also.   Car was purchased by defendant father, and daughter wants defendant to sign title over to her,   Title was originally in daughter, her mother, and father's name.    Mother signed title when daughter turned 18.    Mother was SAHM, and plaintiff mother purchased the car from her own money, out of joint funds.    

Defendant father looks very upset over the car financing issue.   Plaintiff claims father's car was sold for $28,500 (a van owned by father's business), and car was purchased from joint account from father's business.     Mother gets alimony from % of income from ex-husband's business.    Daughter / plaintiff lies like a rug, about money from van going into mother's account in lieu of alimony, and mother bought car for $5500 from that account. (Hope that's accurate, it's damn confusing.   Daughter claims father punched her in the chest too.  

They paid everything off, that's why the ex-husband gave the money to the ex-wife after he sold the van.  They paid the van note off, some credit cards for the business, and personal credit, and bought the car.   The ex-wife still had $10k left

Defendant signs title over to daughter, and says car was bought from the business account, and daughter was supposed to pay him back with interest.    Then mother and daughter didn't want to pay interest.   There is about $14000 after van payoff, car purchase, credit cards, and $10k remainder was given to plaintiff mother.    Defendant has to pay half his income for younger child's support $1,000 including medical insurance, and he's current in the child support.   Plaintiff mother says defendant never gave her $10k, but $21k went into her account, to pay the credit cards, debts, and buy the car.  Plus, child support for the other kid is $600 a month, plus $400 for medical insurance, and defendant is up to date on that.    Even with SAHM (or dads) the court don't do long term alimony anymore, they do it for a while so the person can get more training, or work on getting a job, but it's usually not forever the way it used to be.   

  The ex-wife also has the house too.   I don't see the defendant as a bad guy, but I can see the daughter, and ex-wife are out for all they can get.   

Defendant father is very emotional about the daughter suing him, and states that when he signs the title, that it's the end of his relationship with daughter. He says, "when I sign this, she's lost a dad".   I bet she doesn't care either.    

     The daughter was supposed to pay him back for the car, but didn't, and the relatives were mad he wanted interest too.    He was more than fair with the ex, and I see the ex, and her daughter as a matched set.     I bet when the mother, or daughter needs money, then they'll want to get back to the father then.     

Daughter not only has the title, but wants to submit more evidence.    JJ tells defendant to sign the title.  Note to daughter, "crying", and actually producing tears is a lot more effective, than just faking it.     

Plaintiff gets title signed, and I hope she's happy.                        

Second (2014)-

Vicious Assault, Broken Jaw -Plaintiff Cory Peer  suing defendant  Jonathan Attebury over a broken jaw inflicted by defendant at a bachelor party. Plaintiff claims everyone was drunk that night.   

Case was delayed from two weeks ago, because there was an outstanding warrant in Tennessee over this case, but defendant lives in Indiana.    Plaintiff dropped the charges between two weeks ago, and court.   Plaintiff claims the local D.A. wouldn't pay to extradition on defendant, and he can get money from JJ and Officer Byrd.    Defendant claims they didn't leave the plaintiff behind at the bar, and plaintiff was in the limo, crying and wanted to go home (That would cost $100 more, so they said no). 

Defendant claims plaintiff shoved him twice, wouldn't leave him alone, and so he punched the plaintiff, breaking his jaw.  

$5,000 to plaintiff for medical bills, and suffering.  

Who Wrecked My Truck -Plaintiff Giavanni Giacalone suing defendant Cheyenne Pratt, over a car wreck of a car driven by defendant, that was owned by the plaintiff.   Defendant claims his ex-girlfriend grabbed his steering wheel, and caused the accident.   Defendant is the nephew of plaintiff's ex-girlfriend.    Plaintiff didn't have collision insurance on car.   

Plaintiff witness was a passenger with defendant in plaintiff's car, and defendant's ex-girlfriend.   She claims she told defendant to wait for another car, and defendant went anyway, causing the accident.   Defendant claims his ex-girlfriend grabbed the steering wheel, causing the accident.

$1100 to plaintiff for car. Plaintiff was suing for $4,000, KBB is $1100. 

Edited by CrazyInAlabama
  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post

JJ often says "you want emotion, go to Dr. Phil" and this case exposes why she's not good in that arena. When she even attempted some degree of reconciliation, it came off as brittle. During the tag, when the daughter was crying, I hate to say that I looked for tears. Nothing. A lot of drama going on in that family.

Coupled with her terrible judgement on the dog ownership case a couple of days ago, I'm going to take a break from her show.

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

Crossing guard is the plaintiff's witness, and plaintiff and witness blame everything on the little girl.    (...)
JJ asks plaintiff if the girl had died, if she would have been suing the defendant mother, and my guess is she would.

An older case I do not remember ever seeing. JJ seemed to have made up her mind even before the hearing began. She even dismissed out of hand the crossing guard's testimony. She usually berates litigants for not bringing witnesses, but here it did not matter that plaintiff made the necessary effort.

The driver was also correct in pointing out that JJ's question about what she would have done if the girl had died was an irrelevant and invalid analogy. In fact, it was simply hyperbolic nonsense on JJ's part.

51 minutes ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

Tragic Family Breakdown

Plaintiff tried her damnedest to blacken her father's character during her testimony, but even her mother had to contradict her and say he was not in arrears with child support or alimony, although she did try to fudge some details of the rather involved financial transactions they made. I suspect she may be quietly fanning the flames of the father-daughter conflict.

Defendant lost me a bit with the concluding breakdown and especially with his invocation of their deity ("you will meet god someday!"), but this show is from the US and the intrusion or irrational religious sentiments is to be expected.

17 minutes ago, gingerormaryann said:

During the tag, when the daughter was crying, I hate to say that I looked for tears.

She made quite an effort to fake it, but I did not see any real sign of crying either.

 

Edited by Florinaldo
  • Like 7

Share this post


Link to post
11 minutes ago, Florinaldo said:

She made quite an effort to fake it, but I did not see any real sign of crying either.

Her face looked awfully flushed to me.   I wonder how often the wife and kids were afraid of that man. 

 

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post

2 hours ago, poeticlicensed said:

I had the feeling that mom with her sweet demeanor was behind this. Lots of anger over the divorce and the kid sided with her. So she wants to cut him out. I think maybe the whole thing could have been avoided if the parents could have had a conversation. Lots of betrayal there but dad needed to recognize that 18 year olds will do lots of things they will regret. Hopefully he will come to his senses. 

The more I heard the defendant mention debt, the smarter the plaintiff seemed.  If his name is on the title, couldn’t it be seized to satisfy a debt?  Or wouldn’t he have the right to seize it from the daughter?  Based on his histrionics in court, I can easily imagine him doing that out of spite.  The daughter’s restraint and tears spoke volumes: she didn’t take this action lightly.

 There are some people who expect adoration from others: defendant reminded me of some I know.  Nothing is ever enough.

  • Like 7
  • Useful 1

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

Plaintiff gets title signed, and I hope she's happy. 

That ex-husband/now ex-father is just too emotional and unstable.  I wonder what went on in that home...for decades.  Was he refusing to sign the title to maintain power?  Looked like it to me. 

  • Like 4
  • Useful 1
  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
16 minutes ago, Back Atcha said:

Her face looked awfully flushed to me.

Flushing is easy. Dredging up real tears is the truly hard challenge and she failed it.

The more I reflect on that case the more I see the mother as the dark power behind the scenes, encouraging the rift. Which may have been an easy job considering how overemotional he was.

The daughter's attitude during her testimony seemed quite studied and rehearsed; it would not surprise me if the mother coached her.

  • Like 14
  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post

At the end of the show, the mother said something like "Thank you, Judge Judy", not sarcastically but I found it weird to be cradling your daughter and that comes out of your mouth.

  • Like 3
  • Useful 1

Share this post


Link to post
13 hours ago, Florinaldo said:

Defendant lost me a bit with the concluding breakdown and especially with his invocation of their deity ("you will meet god someday!"), but this show is from the US and the intrusion or irrational religious sentiments is to be expected.

 

 

Wow, Florinaldo, that’s unfair and untrue. Google “Toronto Blessing” and you will see what I mean.

There was obviously so much more underneath this family’s troubles. We don’t know their backstory. Watching this case felt like peeking through the keyhole during someone’s therapy session, and JJ is no therapist, as she has let us know many times.

I hope the rest of sweeps week is filled with weird stories and humorous litigants. Judge Judy’s last season should go out with a bang!

 

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
41 minutes ago, Intocats said:

Wow, Florinaldo, that’s unfair and untrue. Google “Toronto Blessing” and you will see what I mean.

I stand by my view that religion occupies a much more prevalent (and pernicious) place in the US public space than in Canada, where the deity and religion in general are invoked much less frequently as a pure reflex and for no real good reason. Which does not preclude outlyers like the one you mention.

  • Like 9
  • Useful 1

Share this post


Link to post

This episode is even being shown on my twitter feed!

  • Like 1
  • Laugh 2

Share this post


Link to post
16 hours ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

5 p.m.

First (2021)-

Tragic Family Breakdown -Plaintiff/ daughter Grace Honeycutt (19 years old) suing defendant father Lawrence Honeycutt over a car title.     At the end, father says when he signs the title to daughter, that he no longer has a family.   Defendant separated from ex wife in 2017, divorced in 2019, daughter lived with her mother.      Plaintiff is a horse trainer, and no longer works for defendant father.      Plaintiff had two horses, in father's name, and she wanted them signed over to her, and a car also.   Car was purchased by defendant father, and daughter wants defendant to sign title over to her,   Title was originally in daughter, her mother, and father's name.    Mother signed title when daughter turned 18.    Mother was SAHM, and plaintiff mother purchased the car from her own money, out of joint funds.    

Defendant father looks very upset over the car financing issue.   Plaintiff claims father's car was sold for $28,500 (a van owned by father's business), and car was purchased from joint account from father's business.     Mother gets alimony from % of income from ex-husband's business.    Daughter / plaintiff lies like a rug, about money from van going into mother's account in lieu of alimony, and mother bought car for $5500 from that account. (Hope that's accurate, it's damn confusing.   Daughter claims father punched her in the chest too.  

They paid everything off, that's why the ex-husband gave the money to the ex-wife after he sold the van.  They paid the van note off, some credit cards for the business, and personal credit, and bought the car.   The ex-wife still had $10k left

Defendant signs title over to daughter, and says car was bought from the business account, and daughter was supposed to pay him back with interest.    Then mother and daughter didn't want to pay interest.   There is about $14000 after van payoff, car purchase, credit cards, and $10k remainder was given to plaintiff mother.    Defendant has to pay half his income for younger child's support $1,000 including medical insurance, and he's current in the child support.   Plaintiff mother says defendant never gave her $10k, but $21k went into her account, to pay the credit cards, debts, and buy the car.  Plus, child support for the other kid is $600 a month, plus $400 for medical insurance, and defendant is up to date on that.    Even with SAHM (or dads) the court don't do long term alimony anymore, they do it for a while so the person can get more training, or work on getting a job, but it's usually not forever the way it used to be.   

  The ex-wife also has the house too.   I don't see the defendant as a bad guy, but I can see the daughter, and ex-wife are out for all they can get.   

Defendant father is very emotional about the daughter suing him, and states that when he signs the title, that it's the end of his relationship with daughter. He says, "when I sign this, she's lost a dad".   I bet she doesn't care either.    

     The daughter was supposed to pay him back for the car, but didn't, and the relatives were mad he wanted interest too.    He was more than fair with the ex, and I see the ex, and her daughter as a matched set.     I bet when the mother, or daughter needs money, then they'll want to get back to the father then.     

Daughter not only has the title, but wants to submit more evidence.    JJ tells defendant to sign the title.  Note to daughter, "crying", and actually producing tears is a lot more effective, than just faking it.     

Plaintiff gets title signed, and I hope she's happy.                        

 

 

Lawrence Honeycutt certainly gave off the vibes of "Gay S&M DILF". He's a natural for gay porn (just sayin').

The daughter's reaction at the end is going to make a great GIF. It will go virtual, I'm sure.

Edited by LetsStartTalking
  • Like 1
  • Useful 1
  • Laugh 1

Share this post


Link to post
15 hours ago, gingerormaryann said:

At the end of the show, the mother said something like "Thank you, Judge Judy", not sarcastically but I found it weird to be cradling your daughter and that comes out of your mouth.

Consider that she may have been a submissive woman all her life...first to her father and then to this so-called man.  Grateful for anything that appears to be kindness.

  • Like 2
  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
20 hours ago, patty1h said:

The case "Tragic Family Breakdown" was pretty sad - it was painful to see father Honeycutt feel so betrayed by his 19 year old daughter, OVER A CAR, that he breaks down in tears and disowns her on national TV.  This guy seemed equally angry and heartbroken that his child sued him, and I guess that's an understandable emotional response, but I was also getting angry at him -- to see a father be so closeminded and blinded by hurt, so adamant about cutting ties with his child over something as trivial as a car.   

Raise your hand if you think Honeycutt is taking out his anger over his divorce, etc. on his daughter.  His outburst was not an adult or parental move, but I should not be surprised because people get mad for the most trivial things, but this seemed entirely blown out of proportion for the circumstances.

 

I don't know....but there was something going on for sure.  One of the few episodes that was disturbing to me on some level. 

  • Like 8
  • Useful 2

Share this post


Link to post
17 hours ago, Florinaldo said:

The more I reflect on that case the more I see the mother as the dark power behind the scenes, encouraging the rift. Which may have been an easy job considering how overemotional he was.

The daughter's attitude during her testimony seemed quite studied and rehearsed; it would not surprise me if the mother coached her.

I, on the other hand, picture life in that household--scary.  The defendant's tears and out of control emotion may have been the result of holding back his horrible temper.  Perhaps the mother is the "power" behind the scenes, but nothing dark about it.  She and two kids probably had to walk on eggshells most of their lives ... keep any "bad news" from the father. Honor him as he requires.  And then the dam burst and it's over.  He's shocked and heartbroken.  And now THIS! As always, I wish someone who knows this family would step in and give us the real story.

Edited by Back Atcha
  • Like 7
  • Useful 1

Share this post


Link to post

4 p.m. reruns-

First (2018)-

Gun Custody Stand-Off? -Plaintiff Tyler Stoneking  is suing defendant Lauren White over an argument at work that escalated, for defamation, a false restraining order, and attorney fees for defense of the charges.     Plaintiff and defendant were both server / bartenders at a restaurant.      Plaintiff claims he was allowed to leave work early, with supervisor's permission.  He claims defendant talked to him as if he was her employee, and plaintiff complained to his supervisor, and defendant was reprimanded.   However, supervisor told plaintiff to leave early because of the argument.  After the argument, plaintiff came back to he work place as a customer (on his own time), told defendant her car was dented, and tires were slashed.   

Accusations include stalking, tire slashing, stalking, and other harassments.    Plaintiff claims he wasn't reprimanded, or disciplined, but was fired.   The day after the fight, plaintiff was fired, and protective order request was filed.    Plaintiff's guns were all confiscated, but he says his buddies on the police force will protect him.    When protective order hearing happened, the lawyer agreed to represent plaintiff, and depending on the protective order hearing outcome, lawyer would sue Buffalo Wild Wings.    Defendant is counter suing for attorney fees, car damages, school tuition.   When plaintiff's attorney showed at the hearing, defendant hired her own attorney.  

JJ reminds plaintiff that it's one thing to get aggressive outside of court, but Officer Byrd (not doing a crossword puzzle during this taping), and JJ together won't stand for his aggression, interrupting testimony, or the judge.    Officer Byrd is on full alert through this case, and I'm sure the security people are too.    Facebook posting by plaintiff says the same officer responded to argument, was plaintiff's buddy.    At the third hearing the witnesses didn't show up (defendant claims they were afraid of plaintiff, and the restaurant quashed the subpoenas).    On the third hearing plaintiff didn't show up, and postponed to December.   Both litigants showed this time, and a deal was made to continue the temporary protective order, so plaintiff could get his guns back sooner.   Since plaintiff made the deal, his case is dismissed.   (He lost his guns for two more months, instead of two years) 

(This happened in Springfield, IL).    

Plaintiff case dismissed, and defendant case dismissed (I hope defendant moved far away). 

Second (2018)-

The Stabbed Mattress, Mini Bull Terrier Battle? -Plaintiff/ex-boyfriend Logan Bain is suing defendant/ex-girlfriend Allison Dominguez for return of his dog, the balance owed on a motorcycle, and damages to his property.   Litigants bought furniture together, motorcycles together, and the miniature English Bull Terrier.    Litigants lived together for two years. After an argument, plaintiff claims defendant returned to his home, broke in, destroyed property, and stole the dog.  Defendant keeps interrupting JJ, and I hope JJ throws out the defendant's case.   

Defendant only has one dog, the one in question.  Plaintiff has a two Chihuahuas, and there was a litter of Chihuahua and Mini English Bull Terrier (Terrier was spayed).    Plaintiff paid $450 for the dog, and defendant keeps the dog.   $450 to plaintiff. Both motorcycles were bought and titled by plaintiff.   PLaintiff paid off his motorcycle, but defendant's has owes $1987 for the motorcycle.   JJ tells plaintiff to sell defendant's motorcycle.  

Plaintiff gave defendant a 30 day notice, and right before move out, police took defendant away.   There was a brief protective order, and plaintiff was put out of his house, and then judge allowed him back.  Defendant tried to break into the house smashing a window, while plaintiff was out of the house, and his mother called police.  

Defendant wants the motorcycle, and for an illegal lockout, that's dismissed. 

Plaintiff gets $450, and window cost $274 .  so $726 to plaintiff. 

Possession of Heroin Bail Payback?! -Plaintiff Jamie  Green is suing her ex-boyfriend/defendant John Cole, for return of bail money from an arrest for heroin possession.   Defendant has been in jail many times, and spent years in prison.  Sadly, plaintiff has three kids not with defendant, and a fourth child is with defendant. 

Defendant has to ask JJ which charge he was arrested for.   He says he had 15 charges that year.    (Close caption says done, instead of dunned for the bail)

Bail was $25,000, and plaintiff paid $2500, now up to $2627.     Defendant only spent two years overall, and one year after this arrest.    He's also been charged with child endangerment, and all four children were taken away, and all are with plaintiff's step dad. 

Plaintiff receives $2627 for the bail.

(defendant says he lashed out at the community, because his kids were taken away from him.   I would like to thank the authorities that got the children to safety from this man.   He also sounds sort of out of it, in a substance use way).  

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

5 p.m. episodes-

First (2021)-

Daycare Trauma – Plaintiffs Anna and Michael Bean suing defendant/daycare owner Valeri Clark for ruining their credit, car damages, and for daycare money back.   Parents are accusing daycare provider of ruining their credit, and car damages.   Provider is suing for defamation of character and breach of contract.  Car note was $390, and daycare was $460, and defendant would be driving the plaintiff's car or buying the car, and paying the car note, and not charging for daycare.   A few months later the plaintiff took child from the daycare, and they were notified by lender car was in default.  It was plaintiff's responsibility to pay the car note.  Plaintiffs have the car back.    

There was bumper damages, and that will cost $350, and spray paint on part of the car body.   Plaintiffs claims defendant dumped their infant at other daycare locations, and claim child was cold (this was in August).     However, other daycare location is plaintiff's other home location.   Also, plaintiff's wife's friend worked at the second location. Defendant said that there were too many kids dropped off at the usual daycare location, so baby was taken to other location where there were more providers.    After this, baby was at the daycare for two more months.    Plaintiff case dismissed. 

Mrs. Bean and her friend who worked at the other facility started their own licensed daycare facility (this was in Utah).    Plaintiff didn't start the courses until after she took child out of daycare, the daycare was in her house basement.   Utah only required a few three-hour online courses, and get a kitchen and other inspection from authorities.   Then plaintiff called and filed a CPS complaint (plaintiff wife denies she's the complainant, or knows who is. Bull pucky in my opinion). There are social media postings by plaintiff wife saying she reported actual violations to the state, and she was lying.  This was after she got her daycare license, and was a competitor to defendant.   Plaintiff wife is glaring at JJ. 

Plaintiff case dismissed.   Defendant receives $5,000 .

Second -

Home Destroyed by a Tortoise (2021) -Plaintiff/landlord Jonathan Mejia suing defendants/former tenants Jonathan Marr and  Tricia Rodriguez for unpaid rent.    Defendant and wife have four kids (I think they're all her kids), and claim they were moving out when plaintiff illegally locked them out.     Defendant wife was working at Family Dollar and Subway, and quit both jobs.   Defendant wife was previously widowed, and lives off of her survivor benefits.    Plaintiff says rent was $1,050, and defendants stopped paying, since they were both working, or receiving children's survivors benefits.     

Neither defendant lost jobs due to Covid.   Defendants wanted to spend $2200 a month for rent on an AirBnb, instead of paying their $1050 rent to plaintiff.    Security was $1200 at plaintiff's place, and photos of damages are submitted.  Pictures of the walls are disgusting.    Yard is trashed.    Defendants had a huge tortoise, who dug a 4' x 4' cave under the house foundation, that went over 6' back under the house.   

Defendants owe $2200, and damages, $3600 added in total $5700.   The house pictures show the defendants are filthy.   

Defendants want their security back, not happening.   Defendants want their washer and dryer back, they don't want the machines back, just the money for it, so that's dismissed. They also claim they were illegally locked out.    

Plaintiff receives $4,500 and keeps the $1200 security deposit. 

Ex-Lover Vacation Spat (2014)-Plaintiff /ex-girlfriend Brittany Bass  suing defendant/ex-boyfriend Sean Minney for a trip to Salt Lake City, a stolen debit card, and  .   This happened after defendant quit or left his job.    This became a loan after they broke up.   

The litigants never lived together, and were on-and-off according to plaintiff.   

However, defendant claims plaintiff came to his place at 5:30 a.m., forced her way into his place, assaulted him, kicked his dog, walked over his roommate's daughter. and she admits she hit defendant. 

$421 for trip, but defendant gets $421 for assault, so money is zeroed out.     

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
6 hours ago, Back Atcha said:

I, on the other hand, picture life in that household--scary. 

I think there is a high probability that all three litigants we saw actively contributed in their own special way to the toxic dynamics within that family. Including the allegedly "submissive" mother.

47 minutes ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

Daycare Trauma

Despicable plaintiff was obviously trying to undermine a competitor with her untrue posting about a complaint to Child Services. She and her husband were both liars and I think he may be somewhat afraid of her, despite his bulk.

47 minutes ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

Home Destroyed by a Tortoise

Another instance of freeloaders trying to wiggle out of their financial obligations, once again using the convenient all-purpose "COVID" excuse. Plaintiff was annoying to listen to, but he was fully entitled to winning and to getting as much money as reasonable.

Edited by Florinaldo
  • Like 8

Share this post


Link to post
SilverStormm

Community Manager Note

Official notice that the topic of Sean DeMarco is off limits. If you have 1-on-1 thoughts to complete please take it to PM with each other.

If you have questions, contact the forum moderator @PrincessPurrsALot.  Do not discuss this limit to this discussion in here. Doing so will result in a warning. 

 

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...

Customize font-size