Jump to content
Forums forums
PRIMETIMER
Toaster Strudel

All Episodes Talk: All Rise

Recommended Posts

Ms. Catalina gave me the creeps, like one of those women you see on Snapped… 

Her voice, Lashes, Lips, made her look like a Kylie Jenner Wannabe, except for the acne scars.  

  • Like 3
  • Laugh 1

Share this post


Link to post

7 hours ago, Hellohappylife said:

Ms. Catalina gave me the creeps, like one of those women you see on Snapped… 

Holy vacant, Batman!  She had dead eyes.  It was crazy.  In the ~10 minutes I saw her in her life, I could tell she wasn't someone you should hand a car over to.  

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
7 hours ago, Hellohappylife said:

Ms. Catalina gave me the creeps, like one of those women you see on Snapped… 

 

24 minutes ago, VartanFan said:

Holy vacant, Batman!  She had dead eyes.

She looked like one of those trashy Bratz dolls that I never allowed my daughter to have. And the coy, empty headed baby voice reminded me of Meg Tilly in her early acting days.

  • Like 2
  • Laugh 2

Share this post


Link to post
10 hours ago, Hellohappylife said:

Ms. Catalina gave me the creeps, like one of those women you see on Snapped… 

Her voice, Lashes, Lips, made her look like a Kylie Jenner Wannabe, except for the acne scars.

She was very creepy and her voice, ugh! It was obvious that she thought she was a gift from God and all men would fall over to do her bidding. The hair, yuck. Lashes, lips, ugh. Outfit? I would have liked to have seen the entire thing as she wore the top only to enhance herself. And nothing, nothing is attractive about her to compensate for that baby voice. I think she though she could get JJ to be on her side acting all dumb and innocent. And she's a realtor? Um, no. I did Google her and the pix are actually worse than her appearance on JJ!

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post

Ms Catalina had lip fillers and plenty of Botox. The irregularities in her voice were because of not being able to move her mouth freely. She was creepy though. 

Guys love women like that though. 

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post

4 p.m. episodes-

First (2018)

Service Dog Started It- Plaintiffs Kelli Boyd and Christopher Pate are suing defendant KaSandra Waldron for vet bills from an attack on her Service Dog.  Plaintiff takes service dog, apparently for agoraphobia, to her friend's house, which she's done hundreds of times before.     

Dogs get into tussle, after service dog chomps on the pit's nose, and it's on, resulting in interesting shenanigans.      Plaintiff who is on two crutches in court, claims she picked her dog up (easily a 40-50 lb. dog), and ran to the car, and went home, and then eventually to the vet.   How did someone who can barely make it up the aisle hoist her dog?       Her dog required over $2,300 in vet care.   

The dogs (2 pits at defendant's house, 1 service dog from plaintiff) have all gone to dog parks, and the one who finished the fight has gone after other dogs in the past, and the owners say the dog was getting cranky and senile.     Plaintiff man says the attacking dog went after animals at the dog park, so that doesn't tell him that the dog is aggressive?  As JJ says, there has to be some negligence, and there wasn't any negligence in this case. 

If the defendant hadn't agreed to pay the bills, then she would haven't had to pay.   The defendant made the mistake of saying she'd help with the vet bills, already paid $800, and JJ pays defendant $350 more to make it half of the bills.     When will defendants learn to shut up?     

Roommate Force Out and Robbed- Plaintiff  Nikki Marshall and Bradley Marshall, (now husband)  are suing former roommate Angel Pritchett for rent, and for loss of property, return of security deposit.   19 year old newlywed, married to the Incredible Hulk, moved into apartment with defendant and her boyfriend.   Rent was in thirds.    In November (barely a month after move in) plaintiff moves out, doesn't pay November or December (she moved back into her grandmother's house).  New roommate moves in 1 January, and apparently only stayed for a couple of months, because in March the plaintiff and new husband move back in, and get the boot in April when defendant says she's breaking the lease and moving out.   

Plaintiff is very off, doesn't know what she paid, or when, claimed security deposit was $1000, and she paid it.    Then it turns out plaintiff didn't pay November or December, so she loses $350, and since both roommates broke lease, they didn't get the security deposit back anyway.     

There's also garbage about the new husband claiming they weren't allowed to get their TV, and other stuff.   But defendant had texts showing they were given opportunities to get their stuff, and defendant told plaintiff when she was leaving, and that the door would be left unlocked, and plaintiff still didn't get their stuff.     

 Very bizarre case, and I wonder if the plaintiff wife is even competent to sign a lease, since she didn't seem to know what was going on, and anything involving where she lived, and when.    Plus, plaintiff roommate wife was only 19, and I don't know if she could legally sign a lease on an apartment (you can sign a house mortgage at 18 or 19, depending on the state, but many apartments don't rent to people under 21).  The whole rent was $425, split three ways, $158 each. Security deposit was $475, and kept by landlord for breaking the lease, and non-payment. 

The defendant gets $316 for rent.   Everything else dismissed.  In the Hall-terview, 

Second (2017)

You Get What You Paint For! -Plaintiff Lisa Mason suing defendant/painter Brent Frazier for money she paid for him to paint her home, mental anguish, and .    Plaintiff wanted to put house on market, and was going to pay $4511 for painting inside and outside, and she paid him $2630.   Plaintiff gave defendant five days to paint the entire house.   Defendant has a regular job, and was doing this on the side.  Paint inside was every room, removing three rooms of wallpaper.   

Plaintiff's two other estimates were both around $6300, a $2000 deal to save on the paint job.    Plaintiff claims she paid $3000 to the other company.    Defendant claims she had to get another company to patch walls, repaint, and still paid less than the $6300 she was estimated by the other.  Plaintiff wants all of her money back from defendant, so she would get a free paint job.

Plaintiff claims she didn't see progress on the paint job, and she barely saw the paint job, but defendant says she was at the house a lot, and her husband was there every day.  As JJ says, defendant should have put a mechanic's lien on the house. Defendant is countersuing for unpaid work.  

Everything dismissed. 

Don’t Fence Me In! -Plaintiff Marcus Teat suing defendants neighbor Carol Miller (owner) and Patrick Hilbun (tenant)  over damages to a joint fence. Previous fence was replaced jointly eight years ago, and plaintiff says fence rotted again, from being on the dirt from her uphill side of the fence.   

Plaintiff says defendant owner should put a retaining wall on her uphill side of the fence, about $2,000.    Plaintiff also says that when the defendant tenant waters it's hitting the fence, and rotting it out.     

JJ asks plaintiff why don't they put up a cyclone (chain link) fence instead of privacy fence? 

My view is that a metal fence wouldn't stop the uphill side of the fence on defendant's side wouldn't stop the erosion, and water runoff from defendant's property.

JJ tells plaintiff to build a permanent fence on his side of the fence line.   Case dismissed

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

On 6/5/2021 at 7:18 AM, parrotfeathers said:

(I remember this case.    I've never typed the work 'Naked' so many times in my entire life, as I did in this case). 

But what about Shampree Reed? ah, the good old days.

So help me out people She will tell some litigants to put things out on the curb, they   defendant had every right to...so she tells a defendant he was negligent yesterday that he was in the wrong. Have I had too many vodka and cranberries or am I missing something?

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

A little trivia from an article I read on today's "new" episode.  Look for the Queen Bee pin in Judge Judy's hair.  This was the last case that was taped (they're being broadcast out of order).  

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post

5 p.m. episodes-

First

Judge Judy Makes a Call (2021) -Plaintiff /contractor John Rand suing defendant/home owner Kathryn Nugent for failure to pay for work he did on her home.  Defendant says the dust and filth from painting, and minor construction/drywall was so bad that she moved out with a friend.   JJ calls, and the 'friend' is her ex-husband.   

Estimate was $500 maximum.  Plaintiff starts getting snotty with JJ, when plaintiff says she worked at a friend's house, instead of her home office because of the dirt and dust.  Then after coming home after work, she went back to friend's house to stay for a few days.   John, the friend is her ex-husband.   

Defendant says the had to spend $688 on another contractor to finish the job, plus they did electrical work too. 

JJ makes the dreaded Phone Call of Justice to John, the ex-husband, and 'friend' of defendant.  Poor John wasn't expecting JJ to call him. 

Plaintiff receives $500 he was owed. 

Mother vs. Son (2013) -Plaintiff / son Marcelis Brown suing defendant / mother Daniella Hibbetts  over money taken from a joint account by defendant's ex-husband, $2532.   Defendant and mother had an account with both of their names on it, and defendant's ex-husband/stepfather got $3400 ($200 on Sunday, and $3200 Monday).    Defendant called bank on Sunday, and again on Monday, and Wells Fargo put the money back in the account, temporarily.   When Wells Fargo put the money back into the account, defendant took the $3450 out, but didn't give any money to the son/plaintiff.

Then Wells Fargo decided that the $3450 shouldn't have been refunded to defendant, but instead they took the money from plaintiff's bank account.  So plaintiff is out $1500.  Defendant says fight should be between plaintiff and the stepfather.   But, defendant still had the ex-husband's name on the account, and they've been divorced for four years. 

$1500 to plaintiff.

Second (2014)-

Bang Up Neighbors -Plaintiff Carissa Hartung suing defendant/neighbor car owner Teri Argo for backing into plaintiff's parked truck, they live in the same apartment complex.      Defendant says she never hit plaintiff's truck, and didn't have insurance either.    Defendant says she drove daughter and fiance to the movies, and then went next door to plaintiff's apartment to whine at her about how she parks her truck.    

There is no on site manager, and defendant had called, and texted the manager about the parking issue.    Plaintiff was only moving in, and parked across from the garages, and parking spaces (not legal).    Plaintiff witness / fiance, Forest Rankings, says they were just moving in, and then defendant knocked on the door, and he says defendant said she has hit plaintiff's truck.    Defendant told fiance that it was a tiny dent, and only needed to get pulled out. 

Then litigants had an argument.  Plaintiff woman says the insurance company said defendant wasn't insured.   Defendant is asked if she actually had insurance on the day of the accident, and she says it was in her ex-fiance's name, and she can't contact him because of a no contact order.

Plaintiff receives $2098.

Spa Party Hustle? -Plaintiff /business owner  Monica Chiappetta is suing Cheri Gall, defendant for not supplying spa services for five people for massages, facials, and other spa services.    Plaintiff wanted enough staff to do the massages, facials, etc. at the same time.  ,       Plaintiff says she sells business insurance, and is a consultant.   Plaintiff also didn't get a definite price, but wanted it to cost $1,000 or $1500 maximum.    There was no menu of services either.   

Defendant says plaintiff is a scammer.     Plaintiff wants all of her money back, because there was only one masseuse on duty that day.   Defendant says there was only one masseuse on duty, then two were getting facials, and two more getting mani-pedis, then they would change places.   Defendant says they had a support person, another person was a nail tech,   Plaintiff says no one had a massage. 

$700 deposit was paid by plaintiff the week before, and $480 the day of the service, but no massages happened at all.  

This entire situation is bizarre. 

So, plaintiff paid $1180 for a few mani-pedis, and facial, some by an unlicensed person, and apparently defendant is the only licensed person at the salon.   

(at the beginning, I thought plaintiff was another get everything for free type, but then I heard the case, and it was totally the defendant's bad behavior)

$1000 to plaintiff. 

 

Edited by CrazyInAlabama
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

Plaintiff wanted to put house on market, and was going to pay $4511 for painting inside and outside, and she paid him $2630.   Plaintiff gave defendant five days to paint the entire house.

Lotsaluck with that--I have a small hallway { mean REALLY small}  and it took a Home Advisor guy three days--one to scrape a border from the wall-- she had unreasonable timeline.

Edited by One Tough Cookie
  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
12 hours ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

Estimate was $500 maximum.  Plaintiff starts getting snotty with JJ, when plaintiff says she worked at a friend's house, instead of her home office because of the dirt and dust.  Then after coming home after work, she went back to friend's house to stay for a few days.   John, the friend is her ex-husband.   

Defendant says the had to spend $688 on another contractor to finish the job, plus they did electrical work too. 

JJ makes the dreaded Phone Call of Justice to John, the ex-husband, and 'friend' of defendant.  Poor John wasn't expecting JJ to call him. 

 

I thought the "new" contractor was the ex-husband.  Thanks for the clarification.

 

12 hours ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

Plaintiff / son Marcelis Brown suing defendant / mother Daniella Hibbetts  over money taken from a joint account by defendant's ex-husband, $2532.   

Loved Marcelis' cheerful attitude!  He smiled the entire time.  Cannot believe his mom thinks he is a traitor.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

4 p.m. episodes-

First (2018)

Endangered Children or Jealous Ex?- Plaintiff Shelly Wright suing defendant / ex-husband James Wright Jr. for loan, credit card debt,  and her laptop.   Plaintiff loaned money to ex, and he gave her laptop to his attorney, (to find shenanigans for evidence for custody maybe?)    One of the kids brought the laptop to defendant's house, and then defendant gave it to his attorney.    

  Plaintiff says the reason defendant is suing for full custody of their children because he doesn't want to pay the current and back child support.  Three kids 3, 7, and 5, are involved.  Also, plaintiff says defendant sued for custody because she has a boyfriend.   Plaintiff also wants the items from the divorce agreement that weren't returned by defendant, that is sent back to family court in their local jurisdiction.   

Plaintiff gets $2214, and her ex looks like a nut.    She has bad taste in ex-husbands.

Stormy Fence Fight-Plaintiff Joseph Guerrero suing defendant Jesse Wallace for costs to replace common fence.    23 feet of common fence was taken down in a storm, and plaintiff wanted to replace the fence, and did.   Defendant says plaintiff did rotten job on common fence.   Defendant says no agreement for fence, said the plaintiff's effort to repair fence is very bad, and he's not paying for it.   The plaintiff only put in some new vertical boards, and some fence posts, but used almost all of the old, decrepit lumber.   Defendant did put up new fence on the back of his property, because of neighbors with an aggressive dog.   

 Unfortunately, there's a phone message where the defendant tells the plaintiff to fix the common fence, but use the least amount of money he can.  My guess is the plaintiff has only been patching the fence when he has to, and is too cheap to pay for a decent fence replacement, by a real fence builder.       Defendant claims he meant pay for materials only, not labor.   (An insurance adjustor never would have authorized a payment on a 25-year-old fence.)

Plaintiff gets $100.

Second (2017)

On Second Thought...I'm Outta Here-  Plaintiff /renter Shauntel Taylor  suing landlord/defendant Darcy Bretzfor return of rent, and deposits, and harassment.   Defendant/landlord is counter claiming for damages to the home.     Defendant is doing a lease purchase from the owner, and rents the house out.     Plaintiff gave a $1600 deposit on the house, never moved in, and wants her deposit back.  Plaintiff actually dragged her child to court, and child is escorted out by Officer Byrd.   Defendant isn't the owner, and it's a deed contract (it's basically a lease purchase to defendant from the owner).  

 Plaintiff was driving by, saw the house for rent, toured the house, put down the $1600 deposit in total.   Plaintiff was trying to do renovations before move in, such as ripping out all of the carpet.  Plaintiff claims the carpet was disgusting, and was taken out with defendant's permission.  Plaintiff took control of the property, ripped out the carpet, and claims the $1600 was to replace the flooring, and she says it was a loan to defendant, not rent and security.  PLaintiff was going to move into the house with her children, at least three kids by the time this aired.  

There was a current tenant when defendant did the lease purchase contract, and that person moved out after three years.   Plaintiff wanted defendant to spend the $1600 deposit, and first month, plaintiff ripped out carpet, but left tack strips, old rug, and padding behind, ripped out cabinets, and other things.    Defendant didn't replace the floors, but had to get a contractor to remove the tack strips, and padding.  

Plaintiff gets the $1600 deposit back, because the place was rented to someone else for the same rent, on the same month plaintiff was supposed to move in.   Defendant counter claim dismissed.  

The Disabled Ex-Husband and the Trashed Convertible-Plaintiff Kimberly Beard suing former friend/defendant Eric Britton, for damaging her car while defendant was borrowing it.  Defendant is the roommate of plaintiff's ex-husband, they were only married for two months.   

Plaintiff is the care giver for ex-husband (for free).  Plaintiff parks her 17-year-old car in the garage at plaintiff's home in the winter.    Plaintiff went to Florida for five days, and without her permission, the defendant took the car.    Plaintiff claims defendant drove the car without her permission, and car was ruined.   

Plaintiff claims she had an offer for $2200 for the car.   Defendant says his own car has been broken all winter.   Defendant said he never drove the car before this occasion.   Defendant says his roommate (the ex-husband) needed groceries, and computer repair, so he drove the plaintiff's car.

Plaintiff received $2000 for the car that was totaled,

Plaintiff receives $2,000.  

Judge Judy Doesn't Believe You-Plaintiff Mable Winstead is suing ex-boyfriend/defendant Rockery Seale,  for unpaid loans to pay for two DUIs ($2429).  Defendant is counter claiming for lost property.  The litigants lived in an apartment for the entire 15 years they lived together.    Plaintiff hasn't worked for 10 years, after surgery on her eyes (on SSI).    Defendant had foot surgery for a birth defect, but worked until recently.

Five years ago, the defendant needed to pay fines for DUI and probation.    Plaintiff gave the defendant the money from the amount she had saved for a cruise.   Plaintiff gets SSI, is totally disabled, but her daughter pays her to babysit her five grandchildren.    Plaintiff babysat for the three youngest for a year, and the daughter paid her.     Plaintiff paid the money for the fines, and DUIs from an account the daughter held (to keep below income and assets levels?).

My guess is this case is all about getting that show money, and everything will be dismissed. 

Plaintiff case dismissed. Defendant gets his property back.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

5 p.m. episodes-

First

Fresh Out of Prison! (2021)- Plaintiff Jessica Kimoni suing defendant Joshua Miller for an unpaid loan, and an assault.    Plaintiff claims she was scratched and bruised after an argument, but when defendant called the police, he was arrested.   Defendant was in prison for 18 months, and then a halfway house.  Then defendant moved in with plaintiff.   Defendant lived with plaintiff for a couple of month, but it was platonic, not romantic.   

Defendant says plaintiff told him she could stay rent free until he could get a job, and then would pay $480 or $500 a month.    Plaintiff claims the first month he moved in she loaned him $150 to $200 (he doesn't remember the amount).     The end of the third month they had an argument. and plaintiff demanded money then, accused defendant of using drugs, etc.   THen defendant called police to mediate, and defendant spent the weekend in jail, and he was released on the next Monday without charges. 

There are no medical reports from the assault.  There is a photo of a chest scratch.   

(As mean as JJ is to landlords, she doesn't think ex-convicts are bad from the start, unless they prove to be). 

Plaintiff loans added up to $630.

Plaintiff receives $630.

Crash After Bible Study (2014) -Plaintiff Jennifer Romero suing defendant Aaron Ballou after he hit her parked car, while he was on his way home from Bible Study.    Defendant blames it was plaintiff's fault, because of bad parking.     Defendant did not have a driver's license, or insurance, and he wanted plaintiff's insurance information.   

How could defendant have been watching the road, and still hit a stationary object?    

Plaintiff receives $4,000.

Second (2014)-

Pit Bull Stabbed 16 Times?! – Plaintiff/Beagle owner Nancy Medina  suing defendant/Pit Bull/Boxer cross,  Kelly Sheppard owner, for an attack on plaintiff's Beagles.    Plaintiff has an electric/invisible fence.   Pit Bull was being walked by Avery (brother of defendant) while he was dog sitting for defendant, dog lived in fenced back yard between one hour visits a day, by Avery.    Defendant Avery took dog for a walk, on a leash, past plaintiff's house.    Beagles were playing with another neighbor's dog, in their yard.    Then defendant Avery let the Pit Bull/Boxer cross off the leash to go play with plaintiff's Beagles, and other smaller dog.  

Then, Pit Bull/Boxer, Beagles, and other dog went to the wooded part of the yard, out of defendant brother's sight, while he was on his phone.     Next, Pit Bull/Boxer came back to him with stab wounds.    Defendant sister/owner was out of town when this happened, and she absolutely lied in her sworn statement to the court.   

Avery lied and said the Pit mix was on leash, when the plaintiff's dogs came out to play with his dog, and claims plaintiff came out of her house with a butcher knife, and plaintiff stabbed the Pit mix without provocation.     Plaintiff had one Beagle on leash, and a neighbor's Lab and the Pit mix came out of the woods behind her house.  Then the Pit mix attacked the Beagle, and the Beagle's collar came off.   Plaintiff is on the ground, screaming for help, and she says she never saw the defendant.    Plaintiff says she's called Animal Control on wandering Pit Mix on her property a bunch of times before.   Plaintiff was bitten, has medical records of three bites.

Defendant brother lied in court and to his sister, he let the dog off leash at his sister's driveway (300 yards away from plaintiff's house), not right next to plaintiff's house.   Defendant's despicable husband Shepherd claims Beagle, and owner were the aggressors, and nothing was his dog's fault.   JJ points out to the defendant husband that if a dog came on Officer Byrd's property, and bit one of his kids, and Byrd was armed, that it would be lights out for doggy.        

Defendants dumped dog on someone else.

$5,000 to plaintiff, everything from despicable defendants is dismissed.

Hit and Run…Fast! -Plaintiff Chanelle Brown is suing defendant/driver Shaquille Taylor for slamming into plaintiff's car, and then leaving the scene.   Defendant claims he wasn't there, and didn't hit her. 

Plaintiff was dropping her daughter off, when a car came from her left (defendant had a stop sign and ran it), and slammed into her car.   Then defendant and passenger got out of the car, and ran like Hell.    Plaintiff identifies defendant as the driver.    Plaintiff called police, and an ambulance.   

Plaintiff had to turn private investigator to track down defendant, using the report from the police.    That had the car owner's name on it, owner is Mr. Gallimba, and he told her who he sold the car to, and gave her proof he sold car to defendant, and it has defendant's signature on it.       Defendant says "I don't own a car, because I'm homeless" over and over.    Signature on sale document, and sworn court statement are identical.   Defendant's mother is laughing at her son's story, and can't even look at him without cracking up. 

Plaintiff receives $3500

 

 

Yes, where I live they either have only one 30 minute new case, or a new case, and one from 2012-2014.   However, some of the older ones are some of the more bizarre cases.     

The last first run case will be on Friday 25 June.    I wonder if the syndication agreement will mean 2 hours (where I am it's 4 -6 Monday through Friday), through September?     

Unfortunately, my local Fox station (it's part of a group) sometimes has ads for other Fox outlets they own.   They're changing a lot of the daytime lineup over the next few months, and the shows are raunchy talk shows. 

Edited by CrazyInAlabama
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
On 6/1/2021 at 3:27 PM, Carolina Girl said:

I'm starting to get very annoyed at Judge Judy's literal telegraphing to the side she favors of what to say when she calls on them.  Asks leading questions of the litigant she doesn't like and damn if the other side doesn't immediately parrot the "injury" they had.  Smirking plaintiff in the rock case suddenly decided that defendant had been drinking, that she had snotted she had "lived there 20 years" AFTER JJ had elicited that information from defendant.  

It's a good thing it's her last year.  Because she's really becoming a biased old crank. 

And she acts as if she knows how every business is run and what customers' procedure are.  She has NO CLUE!  She knows everything about dogs: breeding, training, characteristics.  She knows exactly how much it costs for body work in any/all kinds of accidents and any/all makes of automobiles.  I have commented to my kids too often-- (I'm 80 and they're in their 50s) for YEARS that she probably spoke/speaks to all her children, grandchildren, husbands the way she speaks to the participants on her "court" television show.  She is a harridan!

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
On 6/8/2021 at 4:10 PM, Carolina Girl said:

they're being broadcast out of order).  

The entire season of "new" shows (for me anyway) only consists of one new case per show. The 2nd and/or 3rd case is usually from 4-5 years ago.

Is everyone getting this season's shows that way, or is it just me (NV)??

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
3 hours ago, MsTree said:

Is everyone getting this season's shows that way, or is it just me (NV)??

Same here, it is jarring to go from a new case (covid safe set up) to an old show (the normal set up) in one commercial break.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
9 hours ago, MsTree said:

The entire season of "new" shows (for me anyway) only consists of one new case per show. The 2nd and/or 3rd case is usually from 4-5 years ago.

Is everyone getting this season's shows that way, or is it just me (NV)??

Me too.  One NEW case and the second is usually one with everyone onsite and the full audience behind.  For the "new" cases, I listen for Bird to tell her the Case Number, since that last one was 225.  

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
18 hours ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

very lied and said the Pit mix was on leash, when the plaintiff's dogs came out to play with his dog, and claims plaintiff came out of her house with a butcher knife, and plaintiff stabbed the Pit mix without provocation.     Plaintiff had one Beagle on leash, and a neighbor's Lab and the Pit mix came out of the woods behind her house.  Then the Pit mix attacked the Beagle, and the Beagle's collar came off.   Plaintiff is on the ground, screaming for help, and she says she never saw the defendant.    Plaintiff says she's called Animal Control on wandering Pit Mix on her property a bunch of times before.   Plaintiff was bitten, has medical records of three bites.

Defendant brother lied in court and to his sister, he let the dog off leash at his sister's driveway (300 yards away from plaintiff's house), not right next to plaintiff's house.   Defendant's despicable husband Shepherd claims Beagle, and owner were the aggressors, and nothing was his dog's fault.   JJ points out to the defendant husband that if a dog came on Officer Byrd's property, and bit one of his kids, and Byrd was armed, that it would be lights out for doggy.        

Defendants dumped dog on someone else.

I absolutely loved the smack down she gave to Avery and his sister! JJ at her finest!!😏

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post

On 5/28/2021 at 3:43 PM, DoctorK said:
On 5/28/2021 at 2:51 PM, CrazyInAlabama said:

JJ is wrong, the defendant dumping stuff in plaintiff's yard is ridiculous, and inexcusable.

Yep, JJ was clearly one sided in this case, the defendant was disturbing the peace, throwing debris over into his yard (JJ says no proof of this - BS, - for preponderance of evidence if they were obviously thrown over the fence from her yard should be enough). 

AND she wouldn't let the poor plaintiff provide all his information.  JJ kept saying "twigs," and he was trying to tell her they weren't twigs.  A twig can travel only so far...this was much more.  The only things JJ knows about lawncare are the expletives she uses to the servants who take care of her properties.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post

4 p.m. episodes-

First (2017)

Child Abuse by Mom’s Boyfriend?! -Plaintiff /father Ralph Case II suing defendant/ex Vanessa Aldridge, for attorney fees, and false court cases. Plaintiff says there were multiple bruises on their mutual son, and when father saw the bruises, the child said the mother's boyfriend hit him.   Plaintiff says boyfriend of defendant abused the child, and defendant claims that they took the training wheels off of the child's bike, and the bruises were from falls.  

Plaintiff won in court, everything was dismissed that defendant filed against plaintiff.  Defendant female birth vessel only recently received visitation in the summer with child, after having some weekend visitation. Plaintiff has full legal and primary physical custody of the little boy.   Plaintiff initiated a protective order for the child, and to keep the boyfriend from going on vacation with defendant , and the little boy (child was 6) with the boyfriend.   Defendant's boyfriend could not go on vacation, and later the protective order was dropped.   

Then defendant and boyfriend were going on a week vacation together, but because of the hearing the boyfriend couldn't go with the defendant and son.    Boyfriend, Jason Gould went to the hearing, and the petition was withdrawn, because defendant FBV was on vacation already. 

Police report (plaintiff flagged an officer down from picking up son, and officer did abuse report) substantiates the bruises, and officer documented the bruises with photographs.  

Defendant's request for counsel fees is dismissed.  Defendant wanted the child relocated, so she could get full custody, this was denied.   

Plaintiff case dismissed.    Defendant case absolutely dismissed.

Bailout Gone Wrong – Plaintiffs Shaughnessy Fahy, and girlfriend Lynette Turner, are  suing defendant/landlord Romeo Castro for illegal eviction, bail, and storage costs.  Plaintiff was down on his luck, and defendant allowed plaintiff to move in, then girlfriend, and her mother moved in.      Plaintiff moved into a room in the home owned by defendant, then shortly after plaintiff girlfriend moved in also.   Plaintiff's girlfriend's mother moved in also, sleeping on the living room couch, and claims she was paying $300 a month.    

Illegal eviction, and hotel costs are dismissed.  Also, storage costs are dismissed.  

Plaintiff's complaint claims defendant was arrested, and he bailed defendant out, and wants to be repaid.    Defendant and girlfriend argued, and someone called the police, and defendant was arrested.   

Plaintiff man butts in one time too many, and is told to refile locally.  

Second (2018) –

Overcrowding Chaos-Plaintiff David Clark was living in the living room, and then the two hipster brothers, Oscar Saavedro and Eduardo Saavedro, defendants moved in four family members of defendant.    So seven people.    It was a three bedroom, with two family members each of defendants in each room, and plaintiff living on the couch.    moved the other brother and wife in, and then moved the brother and wife (I guess wife) into the living room.  So, there were seven people living in the apartment, with the last two in the living room also.   

About this time the idiot defendant has to take a drink of the Water That Shall Not Be Drunk.    

The plaintiff talked to the landlord about all of the tenants not on the lease, and the landlord told the brothers that no one on the lease could live there.   Police showed up when plaintiff's bead work was destroyed by whiny little man-baby, and his girlfriend/wife/whatever the hell she is.        Plaintiff was told to leave by police, after complaint by woman not on lease (Anna whoever the hell she is, apparently girlfriend of the last couple that moved in).      Plaintiff stayed in hotel for three days, and then moved home with family.   

 Plaintiff gets $598, and defendants still look like whiny little jerks.  

Bleeding Head Intro-Plaintiff/former roommate Kandyce August, is suing defendant  Olusola Aiyenuro  for security deposit, rent, and moving costs.      Defendant, and wife  moved into apartment, and then separated in December.    Police threw out wife, and so man advertised for roommate, and plaintiff woman moves in.   

Defendant wife moves back in, with roommate in the other bedroom.      Shit hits the fan when the wife sees the woman roommate plaintiff.     Plaintiff wants security deposit back, rent, moving costs, etc.     

Defendant didn't mention to plaintiff that his wife was booted for domestic violence, until after she moved in, and she saw the picture of his head injury, and heard about the restraining order.      Defendant starts slandering plaintiff, and JJ doesn't put up with that.  

Plaintiff gets security deposit back.  I think JJ should have given the plaintiff $5k for stress, and having the restraining order wife move back in.

Teen Vandal in the Hot Seat-Plaintiff Elizabeth Johnson suing her son’s ex /defendant Vanessa Pope for damages to a rental house.    Plaintiff's son, and defendant were shacking up at a house owned by plaintiff.   

Then, defendant bought car for $6500, and didn't have the money to insure and register it.     Defendant says ex loaned her money, $650 for car registration, but it actually was from the mother.     

Defendant also trashed the house too, and says she threw a few things around.     I hope the plaintiff's son learned about nut cases from this, and doesn't keep repeating this mistake

$650 to plaintiff.

Edited by CrazyInAlabama
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

5 p.m. episodes-

First (2021)-

Never Tell a Contractor to Stop! -Plaintiffs Jacqueline and Fernando Relampagos , are suing defendant/contractor Frank Ruiz for not finishing a construction job.   However, plaintiff told contractor to stop before he finished.   Plaintiff and family bought the house and lived in it until 2013, and rented it out since then.    From 2013 to 2019 they had three different renters.     The plaintiffs decided to remodel the house, for $19,900 estimate, and during the remodel plaintiffs rented out house and tenant moved in January 2019.    Tenant moved in and in September 2019, tenants stopped paying rent.    Plaintiffs paid defendant $18,550 over the course of the job.   

After tenants stopped paying rent in September 2019, plaintiffs filed for eviction, and the 3 day notice to quit was served on tenants in November, but tenants didn't move until January.     Plaintiffs told defendant to stop work in November during the eviction process.   Then in January, plaintiff wife called defendant and told him to resume work on the house in February 2020.    Plaintiff filed a complaint with state licensing board, in early 2020.

Board investigation says defendant may have violated some part of the California Business and Professional Code.    Defendant came in under budget, and then Covid hit, and defendant said he couldn't work safely.    Plaintiff wants $3400 for money paid to another contractor to finish uncompleted work.

Emails from defendant say that plaintiff told him to stop working, then the Covid shutdown, and then defendant wanted $1500 to finish.     Defendant says he talked to plaintiff wife during the shutdowns, riots, and after Covid.      Defendant was working, doing a satisfactory job, and plaintiff wife told him to stop, kept him off the job until Covid shutdowns happened, and then when things opened up, plaintiff was already complaining to the board, and getting other contractors.   

Plaintiff case dismissed. 

Second (2015)-

Disabled Daughter Caring for Mother? -Plaintiff Angela Otis, mother,  and fiance, Monte Barrientes are suing defendant /daughter, Ashley Crook and fiance, Vincent Greer over rent all four were responsible for, and daughter and fiance moved out.    Mother is accused of keeping disabled daughter's checks, mother was payee, and an extra check from Social Security, for $2000, that mother kept.       Defendants are expecting a baby too. Daughter (one of five) has been on social security since she was five (ADD), and mother has another child with Social Security disability payments.    

Daughter, and fiance and mother are all on the apartment lease.    All of daughter's checks went to the apartment rent, and to qualify for the lease.   

Mother told to take care of her own rent, not the daughter.   Fortunately, daughter, and fiance have their own apartment now.    The $1705 extra check was kept by the mother. 

Plaintiff told to stuff it.    $1700 to defendant.   Defendant fiance says mother turned on them when fiance became the payee for daughter. 

Sick Cat, Harassment and Threats -Plaintiff/cat buyers Valerie Plotner, (mother)  and (daughter) Emmalee Plotner suing defendant/cat breeder Crystal Methven over a sick kitten, purchased for $450.  Plaintiff daughter bought kitten from defendant for plaintiff mother.    JJ says now grown kitten looks like a Himalayan.      When plaintiff daughter picked up the kitten, she was given the vet record with shots.    However, defendant claims the shot record was blank, and plaintiff filled it in later.   Defendant claims she told plaintiff to get the shots.  

So how did plaintiff figure out the back up vet's name?    Crystal Methven has a very interesting tale about plaintiff daughter going after her in another court.  

However, defendant misrepresented the kitten to plaintiff.  

JJ will give kitten purchase price $450, back to plaintiffs.   Defendant's ridiculous harassment claim is dismissed.  

(There were online postings on other sites about Crystal Meth-ven's name last time this was on.    There's another woman with the same name, who actually has a bunch of drug arrests, and I'm sure online searches bring up the other woman's information.   )

Edited by CrazyInAlabama
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
On 6/9/2021 at 5:59 PM, CrazyInAlabama said:

 Defendant says "I don't own a car, because I'm homeless" over and over.    Signature on sale document, and sworn court statement are identical.   Defendant's mother is laughing at her son's story, and can't even look at him without cracking up. 

Plaintiff receives $3500

Clearly his elevator didn't go past the 2nd floor.  In fact, it didn't even get off the first.  

  • Laugh 5

Share this post


Link to post
15 hours ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

Crystal Methven

That name has to be made up.  Crystal Meth - ven?

  • Like 1
  • Laugh 3

Share this post


Link to post

4 p.m. episodes-

First (2018)

I’m Moving Back in Dad! -Plaintiffs/tenants Nicolas and Kellsea Slage. are  suing defendant Babak Baghaei for $1800 security deposit on an apartment the two plaintiffs rented from defendant.    Defendant only owns one condo, and then decided to move home to his dad's place, after running into financial problems, and decided to lease it to plaintiffs.  Plaintiffs offered a walk through with defendant, but defendant refused.   Plaintiffs moved out early because of their military clause, because they were reassigned. 

Plaintiffs get $1800 back.   Apartment looked wonderful on move out. 

Snowy Spinout! -Plaintiff Margaret Erickson suing defendant  Michael Gandy (driver) and Jennifer Gandy (car owner) for car accident damages.    Defendant had no driver's license, and defendant woman knew that.    It was a dark, and snowy night.    Defendant car was not insured either, and accident was all defendant man's fault.   Plaintiff car was totaled. 

$2000 to plaintiff.  

Sister Slam! -Plaintiff Ronda May suing defendant/sister (Veronica) Ruby Robison for loans to repair her work vehicle, and for rent.   Defendant has no defense for not paying back loans.  Defendant says she loaned plaintiff $4,000 in 2014, and wrote it off as a gift on her taxes.  Plaintiff denies ever borrowing money from defendant. 

$2050 to plaintiff for loans. 

Father Figure Fail? -Plaintiff Dale Bartosh suing defendant John Lambert  over loans.  The two met online, and plaintiff gave the money to defendant, and claims it was a loan.   However, defendant denies anything was a loan.   

Loans were made at various times, and were made even though defendant never repaid any previous loans or gifts.  (I call them gifts too).  Defendant only gave plaintiff $13, not repaid loans.

Plaintiff case dismissed.   There was no expectation of repayment. 

Second (2017)

Man Has No Clue Why Girlfriend is Mad!- Plaintiff Kenneth Starks suing ex-girlfriend Rachelle Martin over her breaking his TV.   This all started over him eating something that disagreed with him, and girlfriend told him not to eat it.   When girlfriend started arguing, he told her to leave, and that's when she broke his TV.     They were dating, had an argument, at his apartment, and plaintiff claims defendant grabbed his TV off the mantle.  After defendant broke the TV, she still stayed at plaintiff's apartment that night.  

Defendant claims her texts saying she broke the TV, and would pay for it, were just telling plaintiff what he wanted to hear.   

$1,380 to plaintiff for his TV.

Remembrance of Trucks Past-Plaintiff Misty Beal suing defendant Donald Praeger for the loss of an old truck she inherited from her late father.   Defendant charges $50 a month for storage, and plaintiff claims she paid defendant $600 in cash, and her son watched the transaction.   

Defendant says plaintiff didn't pay him a penny, and he was out of state at the time plaintiff claims she paid him.   A former employee of defendant was the only person who was accepting money at the time, and she was fired.   Plaintiff also claims she 'visited' the truck at the storage area frequently. 

Defendant claims business was closed when plaintiff claims she paid the defendant the money.  Defendant says the only record is $99.99 on a card, but plaintiff claims she doesn't pay by card.  Truck was left in November 2015, and in May of 2017 plaintiff went for her truck and it was long gone, for non-payment of storage fees.    (What the hell is the plaintiff wearing?   It looks like Teddy Bear fur on her sweater).

There is no proof that plaintiff paid for the storage fee, and if you believe her (I don't), she only paid for a year, not 18 months.      At the end of the year, plaintiff wanted the truck back, but it had been sold off long before.   Plaintiff should have paid $900, for the 18 months.   Plaintiff claims she went and visited the truck regularly.   After November of 2016 truck storage was never paid, and he sold the truck off for junk in March of 2017.    

JJ gives plaintiff benefit of the doubt, and says plaintiff still owes $600 to defendant for a year of storage (he only does a year at a time).   I would give him $1200, because there is no receipt, defendant was out of state, when plaintiff claims she paid him, and she's a liar.  Defendant has a bedroom rented out, her brother lives in the attic, plus another tenant.   

$600 to defendant, plaintiff case dismissed. 

Share this post


Link to post

On 6/4/2021 at 5:49 PM, CrazyInAlabama said:

They also had a flock of chickens, turkeys (who all died, I wonder if it was at Thanksgiving?

Stop!  you're killing me!😄

  • Like 1
  • Laugh 1

Share this post


Link to post

5 p.m. episodes-

First

Vegas Road Trip Fail! (2021) -Plaintiff David Johnson is suing defendant Yushua Muhammad for the damages to plaintiff's truck,   Plaintiff purchased the truck in North Dakota (diesel flatbed truck) for his business in Nevada.   Plaintiff was driving from Nevada to L.A. to get the logos put on the truck.  Plaintiff's car was in L.A., and he was moving from L.A. to Nevada, adn picked up the keys to the apartment he just rented.    Defendant would follow truck from L.A. to Nevada, defendant driving the plaintiff's car.    

They left L.A. late at night.    Plaintiff didn't say how much he would pay defendant.   After the accident with defendant driving plaintiff's car,   Defendant was driving, plaintiff was asleep in the back seat, when the accident occurred.   Police report is submitted by plaintiff.

Defendant was driving, and was changing to the left lane, then back to the right lane, lost control.   Defendant says the adjustable steering wheel wouldn't stay in one position, and wouldn't lock in one position.    Plaintiff paid $900 for the car (it was a work in progress, fixer upper).   However, defendant was working for the plaintiff at the time of the accident. And JJ figures the defendant was owed $225 for driving both ways.    

Plaintiff receives $900 he paid for the car, minus $225 owed to defendant, and gets $675.

Hoarder or Heavy Drinker? (2015) -Plaintiff Brooklyn Merritt/former tenant  suing defendant Cameron Siminski /former landlord, for tooth damages when plaintiff fell over defendant's junk.    Plaintiff says defendant, her mother, brother, and various others lived in the house too.   Police came to the house frequently because of disputes between defendant and her relatives.     Plaintiff claims she tripped over defendant's hoarded junk pile, and broke her teeth.   

However, defendant has a video of plaintiff saying she doesn't know who broke her teeth or how it happened, and claims plaintiff was drunk.

The photos plaintiff submits of the 'hoard' is nothing.   JJ tells plaintiff she should use her phone flashlight, or carry a flashlight in her car.    

Plaintiff case dismissed.    

Second (2014)-

Full House Fire! -Plaintiff/nephew Albert Thompson suing defendant/aunt Terresa Terry over insurance claim money.   Plaintiff wasn’t even in the home when the fire happened, but aunt put in insurance claim for his property in the house, and she kept the money.   Plaintiff claims in Florida (where house was), if a house is rented out, that aunt would get less insurance money.    Defendant claims the house wasn't rented out, but plaintiff submits the signed lease with aunt.       Aunt's son (plaintiff's uncle) lived in the house.    

There is an email saying rent for plaintiff would be $300 a month.  Then about midnight on June 7 / 8, the house burned up, and was a total loss. while plaintiff's property was in the house, but he was out of town.      Aunt told plaintiff to lie to insurance company that he was just visiting, because in Florida if a house is rented out you only get 10% of the property damages.   

Defendant wanted plaintiff to lie to the insurance company about being a tenant, and say he was just visiting.     Aunt lives in Indiana, but the rental house was in Florida.      Aunt received $65,000 for property damages. and would only get 10% of that amount if the house was rented out.  

JJ points out defendant committed fraud in her claim, and she should have settled with plaintiff. 

$5,000 to plaintiff.   (This case is from 2014, so I'm guessing the day after this aired, the insurance company was notified by many people, and insurance agents [there is a database of payouts from insurance].   I'm guessing the defendant had to pay a lot of money back to the insurance company, was cancelled, and has to use the state high cost insurance pool).

Motorcycle Crash He Said, She Said! -Plaintiff /motorcycle owner Michael  White is suing defendant Amber Patterson over a motorcycle accident.  Each litigant claims the other person was driving the motorcycle at the time of the accident.   Defendant says she's been a motorcycle racer for four years, won Rookie of the Year titles, and wouldn't drive the way that caused the accident.   However, in the hall-terview, defendant says she did crash the bike.  

Plaintiff says he took defendant for a ride, then she wanted to ride the bike, and crashed it.  Defendant went for a ride on the bike as a passenger, and says when she was riding bike the crash happened, and it wasn't her fault.  

Plaintiff case dismissed. 

Edited by CrazyInAlabama
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
26 minutes ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

However, defendant has a video of plaintiff saying she doesn't know who broke her teeth or how it happened, and claims plaintiff was drunk.

And asking for her Mommy!

  • Like 2
  • Laugh 1

Share this post


Link to post

Many, many people rely on someone saying, "Don't worry about it" when it comes to money. I think that many folks say such things as niceties, to be polite, but don't necessarily mean that the money never needs to be repaid. 

From now on, I'm going to be more cautious about saying this kind of thing, just in case someone takes it literally.

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
5 hours ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

JJ points out defendant committed fraud in her claim, and she should have settled with plaintiff. 

$5,000 to plaintiff. 

I guess JJ just let that landlady get away with fraud on the insurance company.

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

On 6/11/2021 at 7:57 AM, Carolina Girl said:

That name has to be made up.  Crystal Meth - ven?

Perhaps her name is a way of signaling that she sells crystal meth out of a van?

chris farley comedy GIF

  • Like 1
  • Laugh 2

Share this post


Link to post
16 hours ago, RedElf said:

I guess JJ just let that landlady get away with fraud on the insurance company.

JJ's jurisdiction is in civil procedures; she does not get involved with criminal issues and is most probably precluded from trying to enforce penal provisions of the law.

However, she has frequently mentioned that she hopes the local authorities have been watching a particular case which involved fraud or similar actions and she has even volunteered to send them the recording. I would not be surprised if she routinely does it anyway, whether she mentions it on air or not.

She may have been hoping for a similar outcome in this case, with the insurance company realising they have been played. Of course, they may decide the amounts involved are not worth the effort.

At least the defendant got the money to compensate for being screwed by his despicable aunt.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
On 6/12/2021 at 12:08 AM, RedElf said:

I guess JJ just let that landlady get away with fraud on the insurance company.

 

I wonder if the people in her office will report this?!?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
17 hours ago, One Tough Cookie said:

I wonder if the people in her office will report this?!?

You are told when your episode is going to air.  I hope that nephew of hers either called up the insurance company himself or had someone else do so and said "watch Judge Judy today....it will be worth it."

In any event, I'm sure that that lying bitch aunt was contacted by her insurance company at the time and told "you have 30 days to return the money or you will be charged with insurance fraud."  

Wonder also if she had to state UNDER OATH that she lived in the house and it was not a rental property.  In that case, another problem.  

  • Like 4
  • Useful 1

Share this post


Link to post

4 p.m. episodes-

First (2018)-

Grandmother Raises Ungrateful Brat-Grandmother Deborah Jean Byars,  who supports herself with disability and social security ($800 a month plus food stamps) was hit up by granddaughter, defendant Sarah Pettis (grandma raised her until 14) for loans for Christmas, and bills.    Granddaughter claims they were gifts, not loans.   

Granddaughter had full time job, two kids, and an unemployed husband.    First loan was for back rent, $450, paid directly to the landlord.     Second loan $1,500 as co-signer at bank, for Christmas.     Foolish grandmother borrowed on her credit card, and wrote a check to deadbeat, ungrateful brat she helped to raise.   At the same time grandma gave $400 to deadbeat druggie nephew who lived with the granddaughter.    Transfer fee for the loan was $45.   (I don't understand why husband files separately, unless there's a tax advantage for defendant ). 

Totals $1950 so far. ( I missed the end, and if JJ gave grandma $1950, she was more generous than I am..  I feel sorry for the plaintiff, but she knew the granddaughter and nephew are deadbeat). 

He Treated Me Like a Queen-Plaintiff Max Krider is suing defendant Leslie Mattila, for unpaid loans.   Defendant loaned new girlfriend money for bartender school, and race fees (5k races).   Supposedly after they broke up was when he loaned her the most money. 

 Defendant says he was just jealous of her new relationship, and the loans were gifts.   Defendant claims they were not loans, and plaintiff is lying.     He has text messages that plaintiff responded to, but she claims she never saw the only one about repayment.    Plaintiff might have been gullible, but defendant is a thief, and a loser.     I think they were gifts until he knew she was never coming back.   

Zero to plaintiff.   

Second (2017)-

Vicious Call to Ex-lover's Boss-Plaintiff Marli Massara, and her father, Michael Massara, are suing defendant Paul Rainbolt ((I'll call him Man Bun), for damaged property, and mutual property. 

 Defendant married his wife (she's in court), then shortly after he separated from wife, and started boinking plaintiff.   Plaintiff knew man was married, and had a small child, and bought a bunch of stuff for their mutual apartment.   While daughter was boinking Man Bun, he tried to fix plaintiff father's washing machine which did work after, and a grill, that didn't work either.    Damages to grill and washer are dismissed.   Even worse, plaintiff knew defendant was married, and had a child with the wife. 

Paul Rainbolt (Man Bun) defendant says plaintiff woman bought small household items, shelf, home organizing stuff, picture frame, file cabinet, and her clothing.   Permanent shelving attached, so it's staying at the apartment, so that's dismissed.   Filing cabinet goes back to plaintiff.    (Man Bun's bleached pony tail/bun is ugly).    Man Bun claims the picture frame is with plaintiff, and the Apple TV is missing.  Defendant wants to be paid for a concert he had to leave, because he had to come home and deal with plaintiff's drama.  

After the break up, defendant claims plaintiff woman called his boss at the call center he works at, and made claims that defendant/Man Bun had an extensive criminal record.   the claims were that the defendant is a thief, and had numerous pending charges.     Defendant was suspended from the job, until the claims were investigated.     Plaintiff's idiot father claims his daughter didn't do this.      The phone number the call came from is Marli Massara (plaintiff).      

$5,000 to defendant for the 14 days of work he was suspended for because of plaintiff's false claims.  Plaintiff isn't getting anything back either.    

Roommate Roulette-Plaintiff/cousin Crystal Snow suing cousin/defendant Kayla Friesen for money owed for a security deposit.    The litigants moved in together, and as soon as plaintiff boyfriend got out of rehab, he was supposed to move in.   Defendant was going to have her new boyfriend move in too.    Defendant wants a half month's rent.   Defendant wanted the apartment for herself, so plaintiff moved out, and defendant's mother moved in.    Defendant sent a text message to landlady alleging plaintiff damaged apartment.    There is no record of text.

Plaintiff gets security back, and defendant can pay her own security deposit.     Defendant lies about when her mother moved in, but her stuff was moved in two weeks after plaintiff moved out.   

Defendant gets $150 half a month's rent, so plaintiff gets $645 (security deposit, minus the rent).  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

5 p.m. episodes-

First (2014)

Mother Daughter Drama -Plaintiff/daughter Karla Oliveras and Brian Rawlins, her husband  suing defendant/mother Belinda Levy for car payments.  and false calls to CPS.     Plaintiffs were selling car to mother, she stopped paying, and thinks it’s a joke that she’s a deadbeat. 

A couple of years ago, plaintiff woman was in an accident driving mother fiance's car, and received a settlement $80k, minus medical bills, actually received $28k.   Defendant fiance received money for his car from insurance, and defendant mother was given $7k for a down payment, and fiance thought defendant would pay car off.   

However, mother's mother died, and proceeds of house sale went into daughter's bank account, because defendant had brain surgery (obviously removed her entire brain, and her conscience), to avoid paying medical bills, and anyone else being able to take the money.    Daughter used $2,000 with mother's permission on daughter's wedding.   So, defendant mother ran out of money, and stopped paying car payments.    Defendant lived in a very pricey apartment, that daughter paid for.  

Plaintiff daughter needs a POA for the vehicle to get it in her name, so she can sell it, and pay off the loan.   Mother/defendant forced to sign title.    Plaintiffs will lose money on the Fiat 500c.   Mother never paid a penny on car for six months, so plaintiffs had to pay the 2400, and repo'd the car in December, before Christmas.   Plaintiffs told defendant in December that they would stop paying her rent, and the beginning of January, defendant called CPS.    Defendant also didn't pay after October for car, and plaintiffs paid the missing payments to loan company.  

After plaintiffs repo’d the car from mother, mother called CPS with a false claim against plaintiff.   Mother is actually laughing about calling CPS.    This is absolutely retaliation.   I hope the daughter keeps this woman away from her stepson.   The poor daughter looks like she's about to cry.  

Plaintiffs will sell the car.    

Plaintiff receives $2104 (including an extra $1,000 for the CPS lies).   (This happened in 2014, so I wonder what has happened since?  I feel so sorry for the daughter.   JJ ignored the part where the mother wanted her money in plaintiff daughter's bank account, to keep it off the radar for her disability payments.    I bet that's part of why mother and fiance of eight years aren't married either.      The daughter said in the hall-terview that her mother was never really in her life, and obviously wouldn't be from now on. I hope the daughter, and her husband stuck to that, and cut the mother off.) 

Truck Driver Babysitter Blues -Plaintiff Amber Wetzel  suing defendant Edward St. Jude for unpaid baby sitting fees.   Plaintiff watched three children for defendant, as a live in nanny, while defendant was doing his job, long haul truck driver.    $400 a month, plus room and board was the salary.   

Witnesses for defendant are plaintiff's parents.   When 19 year old plaintiff moved in, defendant (32 years-old) starting boinking plaintiff.   Plaintiff also helped defendant move to another house, because he was on the road.   ( I was totally stunned when I realized that the 19 year old plaintiff testified that she was boinking the 37 or 39 year old defendant, and her parents were testifying for the defendant.)

$800 to plaintiff.

Second

Stranded Lazy Laborer?! (2021)-Plaintiff Terry Powell suing defendant Evon Soliman (woman)  for non-payment, and for stranding him in Florida.  Plaintiff was hired by defendant to fix water damage at their place in Florida (they both live in Connecticut).     So, defendant hired him to fix her house, flew him to Florida, pay his expenses (hotel and food), and pay plaintiff $900.       Defendant rented a suite in Florida, and both litigants stayed in the same suite/room.   After six days, defendant fired plaintiff, and paid him nothing.    Defendant also didn't pay for plaintiff's plane ticket home.   Plaintiff paid $190 for his own airfare home.    

Plaintiff gets money for his airfare home, wages, $1090.   

Tribal Moccasin Mix-Up! (? )-Plaintiff Rhonda Johnson suing defendant Rafael Silva  for a custom pair of Native American beaded boots for a celebration.  Cost was $200, and plaintiff sent $100 money order.

Plaintiff didn't tell defendant when she needed the boot to arrive by, or what they were for.    Defendant says depending on the style, size, leather type, it can take two weeks up to six months to do custom boots (moccasins in this case).   

Defendant whines about still having the leather he ordered for the moccasin / boots, 

Defendant had the $100, and that's been months, and boots were never finished.

$100 to plaintiff. 

Don’t Fence Me In (2018-2020)- Plaintiff G. Beyrouti (no first name, just an initial) suing defendant / neighbor Yang Yu for construction of a fence.      $2320 was the materials cost, plus the labor to put in concrete around the posts, and erect the fence.     The plaintiff claims defendant agreed to pay half of their joint fence, $2841.72.     Defendant claims materials were $1941 total, and first demand letter from plaintiff was a lower amount.  

Plaintiff claims the defendant suggested the joint fence, and plaintiff would do the concrete base to keep the erosion down.     Plaintiff intended to do as much labor as he could, but had hand surgery, and had to hire the labor out, so the price went way up. 

When plaintiff decided he couldn't do the labor himself, he didn't tell defendant, and defendant thought he would only have to pay half of the materials cost.   

$919 for half of the materials cost to plaintiff. 

Edited by CrazyInAlabama
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

46 minutes ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

After plaintiffs repo’d the car from mother, mother called CPS with a false claim against plaintiff.   Mother is actually laughing about calling CPS.    This is absolutely retaliation.   I hope the daughter keeps this woman away from her stepson.   The poor daughter looks like she's about to cry.  

After hearing about the brain surgery, I wondered if the mother might have tumors, or perhaps experienced some personality change due to the aneurysm. No one said anything like that, although that might be something no one would want to share on television. (On the other hand, if the situation is that delicate, why be on Judge Judy at all???)

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

Plaintiff receives $2104 (including an extra $1,000 for the CPS lies).   (This happened in 2014, so I wonder what has happened since?  I feel so sorry for the daughter) 

Most confusing case to follow!  Thanks for trying to explain these nutty defendants!  Loved it when JJ wished the defendant boyfriend good luck.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
58 minutes ago, parrotfeathers said:

Most confusing case to follow!  Thanks for trying to explain these nutty defendants!  Loved it when JJ wished the defendant boyfriend good luck.

In her halter view the despicable mother told “the 10,000,00 viewers that her daughter ruined her life.”  As if the 10,000,000 viewers didn’t collectively want to punch that twit in the nose.   
 

  • Like 7
  • Laugh 1

Share this post


Link to post
12 hours ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

 

Truck Driver Babysitter Blues -Plaintiff Amber Wetzel  suing defendant Edward St. Jude for unpaid baby sitting fees.   Plaintiff watched three children for defendant, as a live in nanny, while defendant was doing his job, long haul truck driver.    $400 a month, plus room and board was the salary.   

Witnesses for defendant are plaintiff's parents.   When 19 year old plaintiff moved in, defendant (32 years-old) starting boinking plaintiff.   Plaintiff also helped defendant move to another house, because he was on the road.   

$800 to plaintiff.

 

I was only paying half-attention to the hallterview, but did the defendant claim you don’t pay a girlfriend?!?!?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

This episode is listed as NEW on my cable guide, and I just noticed that the audience is back.  Have they been back before this and I zoned out on this fact?

Share this post


Link to post
46 minutes ago, patty1h said:

This episode is listed as NEW on my cable guide, and I just noticed that the audience is back.  Have they been back before this and I zoned out on this fact?

I've noticed that a lot of "new" episodes are the first case is in COVID mode and the second case is often pre-COVID, which makes me wonder if these are either cases they didn't use in their "original" years for one reason or another or old cases just put in as filler.  There's 12 days left I think - last first-run broadcast is June 26?

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

With the new episodes, it's either 30 minutes of empty courtroom (sometimes, two cases), and then a filler case that's older.      Sometimes, I can find the original airdate, and put it in, and other times I'm guessing.     I think some episodes used differing titles a long time ago.      

 

4 p.m. episodes-

First (2018)-

Service Dog Attack?! -Plaintiff Stuart Bernstein, and Josef Bernstein (son) suing defendants for vet bills, when defendants Cheryl and Troy Allen's dog attacked his dog. The  dog walkers were daughter Cloe Martin, and Alexie (Cloe's cousin),  dog dragged their daughter down, and ran across the street, attacking plaintiff's dog. 

Defendant girl was walking Mastiff/Bull Dog cross (95 lbs.), and it attacked the plaintiff's dog.    Plaintiff was walking his dog (Belgian Malinois, 57 lbs.), his wife's service dog, when the vicious, huge out-of-control Mastiff/Bull Dog (95 lbs.) attacked.   

One girl usually walks two dogs, about 150+ pounds combined, but this time one girl was walking the Mastiff/Bull dog.      Man crossed the street to dirt area for dog walk (in front of the Topanga police station).     Two defendant girls were walking the dogs,   One girl was dragged across the street by the huge dog, and attacked plaintiff's dog.     Kid defendant dog walkers keep changing their stories, and one keeps giving other one lines.  Leg injury on plaintiff's dog doesn't look good.     

I wonder if the apartment complex allow 150 lbs. of aggressive dog in the apartments?

Defendant mother keeps trying to nit pick, and get her two cents in.  The glares by the wife directed at JJ are disgusting.         Defendant's parents slander the plaintiff, something about him as a dog owner, and his dog.  Defendant says the plaintiff should have avoided the attack.  How? When he was across the street first, and attacked by the defendant's dog.    

$480 to  the plaintiff.    

Unbelievable Tree Chopper Trauma -Plaintiff James Coppens is suing Bryan Bennett, defendant because when a hurricane threatened Florida, when defendant  Bennett chopped down three mature trees on plaintiff's property without permission.   

Plaintiff claims defendant chopped down three trees down to the stumps,  on plaintiff's property by hiring a tree service.   Defendant didn't just trim branches on his side of the property line, or contact the owner to get them to take down a dead tree.   Defendant said he just decided to have the three trees cut down on someone else's property. Defendant claims the survey showed the trees were partially on his part of the property line.  Defendant lived in his house for a year before the tree cutting happened, but did not even try to find out who the owner of the plaintiff's house was, or to get permission to cut the trees.      

$5,000 to plaintiff.

Second (2017)-

Drugs, Kids, and Feuding Parents-Plaintiff Nancy Minacci (mother-in-law), and DIL Carmela Minacci, and Steven Minacci,(husband) are suing defendant for tax deduction, and refund for the children.  Plaintiffs were going to lose custody of their children after drug arrests, and defendant Joshua Mendez, (ex of plaintiff) took custody. 

Plaintiff has three children, 10 and 8 with defendant, and baby with plaintiff husband.    Plaintiff mother is suing for income tax for the two boys, but the plaintiff mother only had the children for two and a half months.   (Plaintiff daughter-in-law is another personal care assistant).   Defendant pays $200 a month for child support for his two kids.   

Before 2016 defendant had custody of his two kids, and the children's mother had the kids part time, no support order.     In 2015 defendant had six months custody for the two boys, and all of 2013, and 2014 defendant had custody.     In 2016 the three kids were with the plaintiff, her idiot husband, and they got busted for drugs, and CPS wanted to put the three kids in foster care.   Baby was born 2015, and plaintiff claims the baby wasn't born addicted.    MIL has an 8 year old, and dumped into foster care, and she had the baby for a few months. 

Defendant was about to become homeless, so he let children go to their mother.    CPS is involved in 2016 because of allegations from plaintiffs about the defendants.   The oldest child is in a therapeutic foster home.   Plaintiff mother-in-law gave 8-year-old to CPS.    I wonder if anyone drug tested the plaintiffs, including the MIL?    They seem totally stoned, especially the MIL, who can barely talk.      Defendant says plaintiff DIL called CPS herself.     Defendant says allegations by plaintiff wife, and MIL are preventing him from taking custody, because of CPS allegations. 

Defendant says in hall-terview that plaintiff ex-wife has had parental rights severed to all four of her children, two with defendant, one with the other plaintiff, and who knows about the fourth child.  

Plaintiff case is dismissed, and JJ says defendant should go to family court to get custody of his two kids.

Childcare Drama-Plaintiff Krystena Wall suing defendant Kayla Franks, for unpaid babysitting fees, and damaged property.   Defendant was working part time, and later full time.    Defendant is now paying her mother to watch the children, but didn't pay plaintiff.   Plaintiff was never paid at all by the defendant.   Defendant claims plaintiff was supposed to take two classes to be paid by the state, and she didn't take the classes.    Defendant is paying her own mother $250 every two weeks to care for the children. 

I love it when a litigant barely has to say a word to win.   

Plaintiff receives $850 for babysitting services.

Drug Arrests and Friendship-Plaintiff  Cheyenne  Verbish  suing her former friend Jenny Benzon for a loan for bail, after defendant was arrested for selling drugs.   Defendant was arrested more than one time, for drug sales in a short period of time.    One needed a co-signer, and that case defendant took a plea, she also served jail time too.

I fail to see why defendant is so damn happy about getting arrested twice for selling drugs, and going to jail.     Plaintiff signed for bail for the first arrest, and a few days later defendant offended again, got caught, and bail was revoked.  $1251 was bail charge paid by plaintiff,

$1251 to plaintiff. 

 

Edited by CrazyInAlabama
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

5 p.m. episodes-

First (2015)-

Wedding Limo Scorcher! -Plaintiff /bride Sonia Fuller, and groom Orlando Fuller, are suing limo company for leaving her stranded on her wedding day.  She wants defendant /limo company owner "Butch" Linster Murrell  to refund the rental fee, and emotional distress.  Joseph Rose is the limo driver.  At 2:15 p.m. ceremony was over, and bride went outside to find the limo missing (limo was booked until 4 p.m.).   

Limo driver, Joseph Rose claims bride was 45 minutes late coming out of her house, and they were late to the ceremony, and ceremony didn't end until well after 3 p.m.    Limo driver was parked around the corner (no parking in front of the venue), bride got out of car at 2:50 p.m., and ceremony didn't end until after 3 p.m. 

Plaintiff booked limo until 4 p.m., but when they walked out of the ceremony venue, the limo was nowhere to be found, and then Joseph Rose drove up in his dad's car, to give the bridal couple a ride.   Driver of the limo is Joseph Rose, who is also a neighbor of the bride.  Instructions were to pick up bride at 1 p.m., and then again after the venue ceremony, before 4 p.m. at the venue.   Bride claims the air conditioning wasn't working, but limo driver says air conditioning was working as usual.    JJ points out that the front seat where Mr. Rose was would be cooler than the back of the stretch limo, and several people in the bridal party complained it was too hot in the back compartment.   

Bride says limo was missing after 3 p.m., and then at 6:00 p.m. Mr. Rose drove up in his dad's car to give bridal couple a ride.    Limo company owner claims couple were only booked until 4 p.m., but were late, and Mr. Rose gave them a ride because he was being a good neighbor.    Defendant says plaintiffs didn't call limo owner until almost 4:30 p.m., after contract expired.     

Groom says the plan was for bridal couple to go out the back of the banquet hall, go nearby to take pictures, come back to the banquet hall for the dinner and reception, and all before 4 p.m.   

JJ will call the venue to find out when the ceremony actually ended.  (what the hell is on plaintiff bride's head?)  

$100 to plaintiff for air conditioning issue, nothing for limo contract expiring. 

Second

Dueling Newspapers! (2021) -Plaintiff/professional photographer Sonia Tatulian is suing defendant/publisher David DeMulle for using her photos off of her social media in his paper without crediting her, and for slamming her in his paper. 

Both litigants own small papers.    Defendant claims someone else sent him the photos, he didn't steal the photos.   Defendant admits he took the photos off of plaintiff's FB page.   

$250 to plaintiff, and defendant is told to be more careful in the future. 

 

Hoarder’s Fence Runneth Over?! (older, but I don't know the date ) -Plaintiff Richard Ransier is suing defendant Kjerstin Thweatt over fence damage from defendant piling hoarded trash against it, and claims that fence is in danger of collapse from the weight of the junk defendant piled on it. 

Plaintiff submits an aerial picture of her property, and a recent picture of a lot of junk piled against the fence.    It looks like wood mostly, to me.   JJ points out that both litigants have sheds too close to the property line, 2 ft. by plaintiff, and 5" by defendant.     Plaintiff has noticed the junk piling up for several years.     Defendant says there is nothing along the fence line now.    Defendant didn't remove anything pushing on the fence until the police were called.  This was when plaintiff wanted to put up a vinyl replacement fence, and defendant only moved.  

Plaintiff built fence in 2011 to 2012.     Plaintiff says the fence is inside his property line, and JJ won't give him a penny.   It will cost $1050 to replace fence with the fence being done by professionals. 

I don't like what JJ is doing.    I bet if you touched her fence, JJ would call in an air strike on you.   

Both moved their sheds to the legal distance.  However, defendant claims the fence was always leaning, and it's not her problem.     (My view, the fence was never on her property, and she should never have touched it, or piled junk against it).  

$1050 to replace the fence to plaintiff.   (The way JJ was picking on plaintiff, I was sure she was going to dismiss his case, and allow the defendant to get away with trespassing, and ruining the plaintiff's fence.)

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
9 hours ago, Carolina Girl said:

I've noticed that a lot of "new" episodes are the first case is in COVID mode and the second case is often pre-COVID, which makes me wonder if these are either cases they didn't use in their "original" years for one reason or another or old cases just put in as filler.  There's 12 days left I think - last first-run broadcast is June 26?

I noticed that today too...and thought the same thing since JJ had her "new" pulled back hairdo that she introduced this season.

Share this post


Link to post

Last episode is Friday 25 June.     I actually recognize a lot of the older ones that are being run with the new Covid episodes, from years ago.     I can't find some of the air dates, so I suspect a lot of the titles were changed over the years.     I definitely remember the awful mother one with the car repo, and the CPS report.  

4 p.m. episodes-

First (2018)-

Baby Formula for Disaster! -Plaintiff Alfreda Stone is suing former friend Ackinga Fulks  .      Defendant is accused of posting nude pictures of plaintiff's daughter online.   Plaintiff and defendant had issues caused by plaintiff's brother, and baby mamas.   Plaintiff is suing because defendant filed a false police report against her.  

Plaintiff went to defendant's job, complained that defendant who was working at Food Lion, said mean things to the grown daughter of plaintiff.   So, plaintiff filed a formal complaint with store manager, and defendant was suspended.   Then in retaliation, defendant filed a complaint against plaintiff, and that's what today's case is about.  

JJ is so right, these women have too much time on their hands.  

Plaintiff case dismissed.   

Police Fight Aromatherapy Crime! -Plaintiff/former tenant Kimberly Cox suing defendant/former landlady Karen Downey for property, return of rent,  and security deposit.  Plaintiff also says defendant made a police report accusing plaintiff of stealing her aromatherapy diffuser.   Plaintiff rented a room from defendant, for three months.   Security was $175, and was paid to defendant.   Plaintiff gets $175 security back. 

Plaintiff wants her aromatherapy diffuser, $51.     There is another renter in the house, plus defendant and husband.   No way to prove who swiped the diffuser.    Plaintiff wants the last week in November rent back, because of a threatening text from defendant's daughter.   Plaintiff made a police report alleging defendant stole her diffuser, and candles.   

JJ asks defendant how many times in the last five years police have responded to her home, and only when defendant made the charges against plaintiff.   

I can see $175 security to plaintiff.

Second (2017)-

Childcare Payback!-Plaintiff / daycare owner Julie Webb is suing defendant/former daycare clients Christina and Joshua Van Winkle for non-payment of childcare fees, overtime, and late fees.   

Defendants had two children (8 and 6) in the daycare operated by the plaintiff.   Defendant claims she was given four weeks free by plaintiff.   Defendant wife says plaintiff gave her four weeks free because 11-year-old boy at daycare showed porn from the child's phone (plaintiff had foster children sometimes) to one of defendant's children.     Plaintiff denies this ever happened, and she certainly didn't give a free month to anyone. 

 Defendant claims to have texts saying she's up to date on all payments.   The text from defendant to plaintiff says children won't be coming to day care any more, because they have family taking care of their children, with zero notice.   

$470 to plaintiff.        

Expensive Phone-Throwaway Boyfriend?!-Plaintiff Elsy Macay suing ex-boyfriend Adam Peters, for an unpaid loan to buy an iPhone.  Defendant is suing for harassment.   Defendant says after they broke up, plaintiff came to his job demanding her money. 

The litigants were romantic through high school.   They broke up, rekindled this year, 2017, and she gifted him with a phone.    Then after the 'present' of the phone, they broke up within a month.    Phone was $788 according to defendant, but plaintiff says phone is $740.   

The story by defendant is so stupid that I can't even figure it out.  Defendant took phone to another company, and plaintiff wanted to be paid for the phone, after they broke up.

Plaintiff gets $739 (Why is it almost always an iPhone?). 

Telephone Pole Crash- Plaintiff  Nunas Barros is suing defendant Deon Harris and  for crashing her car into a pole.  Defendants were living with plaintiff at her home.   Defendant man drove girlfriend to work, and he drove car home, and fell asleep, and hit a Verizon pole.  $4262 is the price for the Verizon pole plaintiff will have to pay.  As usual, defendant man has no driver's license.     Defendant also hit a house, but plaintiff never got a bill for that.  

Defendant is blaming plaintiff for the accident, because she didn't take his girlfriend to work.   

Plaintiff gets $4261 for the Verizon pole. 

Edited by CrazyInAlabama
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
23 hours ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

Drug Arrests and Friendship-Plaintiff  Cheyenne  Verbish  suing her former friend Jenny Benzon for a loan for bail, after defendant was arrested for selling drugs.   Defendant was arrested more than one time, for drug sales in a short period of time.    One needed a co-signer, and that case defendant took a plea, she also served jail time too.

I want to comment on the coloring of the Plaintiff ... her pale skin color and her eyes ... her make-up, and THEN the beautiful shades of blue/lavender in her hair.  STUNNING

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
6 hours ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

No way to prove who swiped the diffuser.    Plaintiff wants the last week in November rent back, because of a threatening text from defendant's daughter.   Plaintiff made a police report alleging defendant stole her diffuser, and candle

So, did her majesty et offended and remind them she didn't go school for6787 years to bother with  diffuser/   [ actually would agree with her].

  • Laugh 3

Share this post


Link to post

5 p.m. episodes-

First (2014)-

Bites, Barks and Bruises! -Plaintiff Christy Dillon, and boyfriend, Stephen Lindstrom are  suing defendant  Denny Chandler, for medical and vet bills after defendant's dog attacked plaintiff and her Mini Schnauzer.    Plaintiff says defendant's Pit Bull attacked her dog, and bit her also.   Defendant is a renter, and doesn't have renter's insurance.   Defendant has a Cairn terrier, a Chocolate Lab, and a Pit Bull.   

Plaintiff was walking her dog, on a leash, and while crossing the street, the Pit Bull attacked her dog, and plaintiff.    $348 was vet bill, and the medical bill for plaintiff was $304.   Photos of plaintiff's wounds are bad.   

Defendant claims plaintiff dog was in his yard, attacked his Cairn terrier, when plaintiff's dog attacked, and the Pit Bull broke his chain, and attacked the plaintiff and her dog.   Defendant claims to be a "Dog Whisperer", and his little dog wanted 'to say hello' to plaintiff's dog.  Then, defendant says plaintiff dog bit the plaintiff's dog on the ear, and defendant's pit heard the defendant's little dog cry in pain, broke the chain, and bit the plaintiff and dog defending his brother dog.   (I'm not drunk, or drugged, or nuts, that's what defendant said).    Defendant said he would pay plaintiff's medical and vet bills, but didn't.    (Defendant's story is even more ridiculous than defendant from the Verizon pole case from 4 p.m.).

Defendant claims plaintiff was mean to him after the attack, and got up and shook her finger at him.    Personally, I wish plaintiff had a Taser on her, and used it.  

Defendant claims plaintiff got angry, and vandalized his car. Witness Mitchell Hankins (roommate of defendant) claims in the middle of the night, he saw plaintiff boyfriend vandalizing the defendant's car (kicking the car), flattened all four tires.   No police report was made.  

Plaintiff receives $652.  Defendant ridiculous claim dismissed. 

Breast Pump Custody Battle! (older case )-Plaintiff/grandmother Anna Rosenberg is  suing defendant/grandson’s mother Belinda Barragan for the return of a borrowed breast pump.  The breast pump case was filed when defendant, and grandson's father, plaintiff's son, was in a custody dispute with defendant. 

Plaintiff loaned the breast pump to defendant when she was about to deliver, and after the custody case was filed, the plaintiff wanted the breast pump back.    Plaintiff actually gets snippy with JJ, saying JJ will listen to her. 

Pump was purchased 14 years ago by plaintiff for almost $400.

Plaintiff case dismissed. 

Second-

Felony Suspect Surprise? (2020?  pre-new hairdo, so before Spring 2019 filiming. ) -Plaintiff /former roommate Mitchell von Puttkammer suing defendant/former roommate Benjamin Sigholtz over an attack after a pickup basketball game.    Plaintiff made a police report, and defendant claims there isn't a report, and report says there is a warrant through the D.A.'s office for a criminal case.   

JJ will call police officer, and if there is a criminal case pending case can't be heard in JJ's court.   It would incriminate defendant, since testimony would be against his interest, and without an attorney in court. 

Case dismissed, because it's criminal, and can't be heard in JJ's court. (litigants just disappeared after JJ said she couldn't hear about an ongoing criminal case, so I guess the warrant was out, and criminal charges pending). 

Mother and Son Rock Fight! (2021-this was filmed pre-RBG hairdo so before spring 2019, and Covid, and not aired ) -Plaintiff Raven Stuart (sister) is suing defendant /brother Vernon Jackson, for throwing a rock at her through a window, and hitting her in the head. The rock fight started over the welfare of a baby.  "Tanning" is what the defendant and baby's mother was arguing about, some kind of government assistance.    He was talking about TANF, temporary assistance to needy children. 

Defendant says mother threw a rock at him, he picked it up and threw it back at the mother.      

Defendant's sworn statement and testimony in court are dramatically different.  

$1500 to plaintiff. 

The Case of the Missing Furniture!(date? older)-Plaintiff/home buyer Jeffrey Pesarik suing Judy Blanchard defendant/house seller for furnishings in house plaintiff bought from defendant. Plaintiff is suing for house damages, and missing furniture.     House contract was over phone, not written, and included eight rooms of furniture including all furnishings, and kitchen gear, for $18,000.    However, when plaintiff arrived at house after closing, many items were gone from the house.  

Plaintiffs sold everything in Dallas before moving to new house bought from defendant.  There were pictures of home before the sale.    

Defendant claims missing items were actually left in the home.   Defendant claims much of the lights, etc. couldn't be reached without a scaffolding, including wall sconces, and lights. 

Plaintiff claims the master bedroom bed was originally a $1400 pillow top, and it was switched out for a much inferior mattress. 

Plaintiff case dismissed.  Defendant counter claim dismissed. 

My view:  There was no explanation of how long between move out of defendant, and move in of plaintiff.   Anyone who had access for moving, or doing repairs had access, and the defendant had a good point about not being able to reach the sconces.   I wouldn't want to sleep on someone else's mattress anyway, so I wouldn't give the plaintiff anything for that either.   

 The agreement to sell furnishings did not equal, "fully furnished", where the seller only takes their clothes, and other small personal items, but leaves everything in the kitchen.  Plaintiff couldn't prove who took the lights, and that statue on the mantle, and other things, so defendant was off the hook.   

I live about 90 miles from the Florida Panhandle, and I know many people who bought a furnished property, but not 'fully furnished' and had to go shopping for kitchen good, and other items.  Also, who expects the seller to leave her silver items?   Was there any proof that the exercise equipment included a Bowflex?    I think if defendant was going to take the exercise equipment, then she wouldn't have left so much of it with the house.   I think if the seller was selling off exercise equipment, then all of it would be gone, not just the Bowflex.   

Plaintiff should have had a written contract with defendant, and video of every room in the house.   Plaintiff had zero proof of what was agreed to, and there wasn't an inventory of what was staying with the house, and what defendant was taking with her. 

  Who does a real estate contract for the furnishings, with an oral contract?    A lot could have been avoided by a firm contract, and inventory, in writing, or video taped.   

 

Edited by CrazyInAlabama
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
12 hours ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

The Case of the Missing Furniture!(date? older)-Plaintiff/home buyer Jeffrey Pesarik suing Judy Blanchard defendant/house seller for furnishings in house plaintiff bought from defendant. Plaintiff is suing for house damages, and missing furniture.     House contract was over phone, not written, and included eight rooms of furniture including all furnishings, and kitchen gear, for $18,000.    However, when plaintiff arrived at house after closing, many items were gone from the house.  

I don't understand why JJ just right off believed the defendant just because she denied the accusations?  

  • Like 4
  • Useful 1

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