All Episodes Talk: All Rise

[CrazyInAlabama]

4 p.m. episodes-

First (2014)-

Dog Barking, Cat Poisoning -Plaintiff Ticia Tinder (plaintiff actually has a married last name), suing defendant Cynthia Hill for spraying her laptop with water, and vandalizing her car.  Defendant broke her lease and moved, losing her security deposit for lease breaking.   

Defendant says she never touched plaintiff’s laptop or car, but claims plaintiff vandalized her car.  This started with an anonymous complaint about a barking dog, and HOA sent a complaint about barking dogs, (three Shih Tzus).     Plaintiff claims the ‘anonymous’ complaint was blamed on her by defendant.   There is a witness, Kerry Charles, another tenant who claims he saw defendant hitting plaintiff’s car with a hammer.    Then, plaintiff filed a police report, and filed for a restraining order against defendant.  

Plaintiff’s car cost $1513 to fix.    Next act is cats were poisoned, and then plaintiff was on her patio working with her laptop, and claims defendant watered her laptop and patio.   Plaintiff owned the two cats, and one died, they were indoor/outdoor cats.   Plaintiff claims the vets at the humane society blamed snail and slug poison. 

Defendant denies poisoning anything, vandalizing plaintiff’s car, and doing anything to the laptop.   JJ believes the witness for plaintiff.   JJ refuses to believe letters from previous tenants who moved because of harassment from plaintiff, who is in charge of the HOA board. 

I believe the defendant, and think plaintiff and her witness are just as evil as defendant says they are.  

(This was posted by someone else on page 13 of this forum “but post-episode research reveals that  plaintiff Ticia was, in 2008, stripped of her Registered Dental Assistant License for practicing dentistry (and posing as a dentist) without the proper credentials.”  Ms. Tinder is no stranger to the local courts as a plaintiff either).   

Plaintiff receives $5,000 for harassment, and for everything else she claimed.

(Maybe a good policy would have been to look at the court filings of litigants before the TV case.   Plaintiff has a lot of filings, and the 2008 charge). 

Give me Back My Ring! -Plaintiff Jessica Roberts suing defendant Tim Bambery over a $3,500 engagement ring.   Plaintiff claims she paid for the ring with her credit card, and wants ring back that defendant took with him when they broke up.   Balance is $958, and defendant paid most of the money for the payments, but plaintiff still has the $958 on her credit card.    

$958 to plaintiff, defendant keeps the ring.

Second (2014)-

Verbal Contracts 101 -Plaintiff /car buyer Jackquealyne “Jackie” Hall suing defendant/car seller and former friend Nicole Horton for either the return of money paid for the car, or the signed car title.   After plaintiff agreed to buy the car, defendant raised the price by $1,000, but this was a verbal contract.    Plaintiff bought car from defendant for $3200, gave defendant $2,000 down and plaintiff had the car then.    Balance of car price, $1200 was paid to defendant.   Defendant accepted the money, and admits car was paid off, but still has the title.   Plaintiff wanted the signed title after car was paid off, but defendant wants $1,000 more because plaintiff paid over time.   

JJ has title from defendant signed by plaintiff.   Defendant says she only agreed to $3200 if plaintiff paid car off then.   After defendant raised the price, she tried to repo the car twice and failed.   JJ has to explain contract law to defendant, because modifying the contract wasn’t legal.

Plaintiff gets the title signed over to her, so she can register the car.

Shut That Dog Up! -Plaintiffs/former tenants Eldon and Rosa Berry suing ex-landlord/defendant Megan Rosales for illegal eviction, and security and moving expenses paid for, after they rented defendant’s condo for two years.   Plaintiffs claim defendant illegally evicted them by using a barking dog complaint against them.

Defendant says HOA/condo association had issues with plaintiffs, and she sent them a lease termination notice.    Complaints were dog weeing on the patio, loud outside parties.  Defendant presents the HOA emails about plaintiffs’ issue.   Complaints were that plaintiffs chained the dog on the patio all day, with the dog barking constantly, loud parties, a total of three complaints about plaintiffs.   Plaintiffs say they were harassed from the day they moved in, but they renewed the lease and intended to stay there for two years.    Plaintiff says the dog wasn’t their dog that was barking.  Plaintiffs never explain who owned the dog chained on the patio either. 

Plaintiffs get $1800 security back, but other stuff is dismissed, including their demand for moving costs.    Defendant told plaintiffs to leave and wants rent for the remainder of the lease, and that’s dismissed. 

Annoying Roommate Rant -Plaintiff Jennifer Gibbs suing defendant/former roommate Frederick Schmidt for the lease breaking fee, which was her security deposit, $685.    Defendant says he had to move because plaintiff was very annoying to live with.

I'm finding defendant, and his innocent act very annoying.  

$685 to plaintiff. 

5 p.m. episodes-

First (2017)-

Lifetime Protective Order Against Neighbor?!-Plaintiff Orville Moiten suing neighbor Arthur Sutton for purposely damaging his gate.   Plaintiff says this is the fourth time the defendant ran into his gate.   The litigants have been neighbors for about 20 years, and live across the street from each other.    The start of the fighting was seven years ago, when defendant did some unsatisfactory work on plaintiff's roof, and defendant's contractor license was suspended. 

There was a criminal case against plaintiff, and he plead guilty, and defendant has a lifetime protective order against plaintiff.     This all happened in Dorchester, MA.   Plaintiff Moiten's order of protection was only a temporary one, and is gone now.  Mr. Moiten was arrested twice for the restraining order violations, but both were dismissed.  

Plaintiff says defendant backed out of his driveway, and hit plaintiff's gate.   A police reports is submitted from the second gate bashing.   Gate is a double, five-foot high gate of chain link, and the gate really gets hit solidly.    Plaintiff says the gate has been bashed four times by defendant.   

The video of the gate being hit by defendant is submitted, by plaintiff.   Police report doesn't say who hit the gate, but video shows defendant's pickup truck hitting the gate.    Defendant fixed the gate the first time, but not the other three times.   

No receipts are submitted by plaintiff for the gate repairs he paid for.   Defendant claims the plaintiff beat up defendant's wife, and children five years ago.   Plaintiff's order of protection was temporary, and has expired, and subsequent attempts to get another order against defendant have been unsuccessful.    (My question is, have either one of these people thought about moving?) Plaintiff says he will never move, and my guess is defendant never will either.  

Defendant's wife has been unsuccessful in getting her husband to stop this garbage.

Plaintiff also complains that defendant throws bread on plaintiff's side of the street, and it's causing issues with birds that it attracts, and defendant thinks that's funny.  There is a video of defendant tossing a lot of bread across the street in the direction of the plaintiff's house, and right on the sidewalk and front yard of plaintiff's house. 

Gayle Taylor-Sutton (defendant's wife) testifies, and claims both men are childish, but that plaintiff is worse.    Plaintiff has been arrested twice for violating the restraining order, and both cases were dropped. 

I decided I like the plaintiff a lot more than the nasty defendant.  JJ decides the defendant is nasty, and provocative, and his counterclaim is dismissed.    

Plaintiff receives $800 to fix his fence.   

Second (2017)-

Defective Doberman?!-Plaintiff Donna Seeker (Georgia) (Kennel is Shady Grove in Dublin, GA) suing defendants Lana and Oleg Pilipovski (Kennel is out of The Colony, Dallas TX),  over the plaintiff’s purchase of a Doberman Pinscher puppy with a genetic disease, purchased for $3,500, with $1,000 for vet bills, a DNA test,    The disease is Vonwillebrand , which is easy to test for, and puppies need to be tested even if both parents tested negative for VWB.   Defendant supposedly gets the puppies shipped in from Europe for $3500 transportation.     

Plaintiff is a large-scale Doberman breeder, and defendant is a small-scale Doberman breeder, and trainer, and has dogs mostly for show and training.     In March 2016, plaintiff found the defendants dogs online for $3500, to be a part of her breeding operation.  Then second dog was purchased (she wanted a dog to breed immediately), and also wanted the puppy.   Part of the defendant's business is importing, and resale of dogs (apparently, most of defendant’s business is importing Dobies from Europe.  There’s a big kerfuffle in the Dobie community of European imports, vs. U.S. bred dogs).    

Second dog was not on defendant's property, and plaintiff claims defendant said he could get the dog shipped to plaintiff.    Defendant had the puppy shipped to the plaintiff, but plaintiff said dog was defective, and she wanted a refund.   Defendant wanted puppy shipped back to him, and he would get another puppy from the original puppy breeder, but she would have to pay shipping, $3000.   Plaintiff has had second dog for a year, and she still has it.  

Defendant harassment complaint dismissed.   Plaintiff case dismissed. 

(I found this on an animal hospital website:

How common is von Willebrand disease in Dobermans?

Which breeds are most commonly affected by vWD? At least thirty different breeds are affected, but the Doberman Pinscher is the breed with the highest incidence of vWD. Of 15,000 Dobermans screened in a research study, more than 70% were found to be carriers of the disease.

The disease is a bleeding disorder that is lifelong, and can be treated but never cured.)

Minister Mischief?!-Plaintiff Anthony Saucier suing defendant/minister James French for unpaid loans, an unpaid trip to Las Vegas ($2500), and for car registration, traffic tickets ($1,000), and another loan for ($4,000).     Defendant was going to pay the loans back to plaintiff out of grants he was going to receive for the prison ministry, the grants never happened.  Then defendant was fired from the ministry, and never paid the loans back.   Then it gets really strange.   Defendant's Vegas trip was with his soon to be ex-wife, to prevent the separation (it failed).    Defendant says he didn't lose his salary, but had to get more credentials.  

Defendant is now a social worker, in Arizona.  His religious career goals changed, and he changed jobs.

$5,000 to plaintiff, and defendant still owes $500 more (defendant actually made some payments). 

Edited August 19, 2022 by CrazyInAlabama

[parrotfeathers]

2 hours ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

he disease is Vonwillebrand

That's interesting.  The dog show people I know are most interested in having a dog negative for dilated cardiomyopathy (DCM).  I didn't get to see this episode darn it.

Apparently there was no written contract on genetic disease testing?

[CrazyInAlabama]

11 hours ago, parrotfeathers said:

That's interesting.  The dog show people I know are most interested in having a dog negative for dilated cardiomyopathy (DCM).  I didn't get to see this episode darn it.

Apparently there was no written contract on genetic disease testing?

The dog parents were supposedly VWD negative, but since the dog was imported from Europe originally, who knows.   Also, even a dog with double negative parents can be positive (recessive genes maybe?).    So, it was in the contracts and emails that the parents were not carriers, but apparently the puppy was.    My guess is either the testing wasn't done on the pups, or the parents weren't the negative ones as advertised.    Sometimes, unethical breeders lie about who the sire, or even dam of a litter is, because they can say sired by champion so-and-so, or mother is champion so-and-so, and one or both parents are not the real ones, but othe listed ones are because the champion parents bring more money. 

I'm glad plaintiff kept the dog, because I'm wondering if the dog could have been resold as a pet to buyers who would have either no idea about the Dobie's medical issues, or not care, and bred him anyway.   

[DjamillasMan]

Defective Pug Puppy? (2017)

"That's what the lady on the phone at the AKC told me!"- Rachel Kiser

LOL. I kinda mixed up some episodes today just to give a bit of variety. I watched two episodes and gave the most interesting cases from those two to review. It’s probably going to be somewhat disjointed, but go with me here. This is sort of like a dry run. Everyone have their favorite drink ready? Let’s go.

Plaintiff: Rachel Kiser from somewhere. Rachel bought a male pug puppy from the defendant. She was hellbent on getting a female pug puppy. Her determination was so unflappable, that she got the Attorney General’s office involved in her beef with the defendant. Apparently, Rachel has no life outside of being a ‘Karen’ and longing for a female pug puppy. Her issue with the defendant stemmed from what she believed was a piss poor trade, as the dog had an undescended testicle, which neutering would fix.  She is currently happy with her male pug puppy, but she wanted a female one; because damn it! Don’t question Rachel’s mission to get a female pug puppy. I think her real reasoning is that ‘Toby’ The Pug went up to her and told her to get him a female companion. Rachel aspires to become a pug breeder herself, but only with 'Toby' the Pug.

Defendant: Penny “The Pug Breeder” Strasser. Penny is some grandmotherly looking type who breeds pugs. She sold the plaintiff a pug for $1250. Penny is rocking some sort of purplish gilet with a darker outfit underneath. Penny claims that random people are showing up at her house after her beef with the defendant and will have you to know that the defendant sent them there to screw with her. Penny is soft-spoken, but don’t let her grandmotherly demeanor fool you, because she will fight like hell to defend herself and her reputation as a pug breeder. Penny will take out a restraining order on you in a heartbeat. Penny also waddled into court.

The Complaint: Rachel claims that Penny sold her a defective pug puppy. She also wants damages from a false restraining order.

What Does He/She want: Rachel wants $1625 for a partial refund and punitive damages.

Countersuit?: Penny has a $1000 countersuit for harassment.

Puppy Multiplier: Take 1x shot. (See, the way this works is if the case is about a dog, take a shot, if said dog is in court, take two shots. So, for example, the case involves two dogs and they are both in court, you have to take four shots. If a video of the dog is played in court, you have to take a shot (and then two more shots because a video was played in court)).

Driving Around Without Insurance: N/A

What Went Down:  The case begins with JJ asking if a child witness for Kiser did in fact witness anything. Rachel says that the boy was with her when she bought the dog. JJ then has the minor wait outside (take a shot). Byrd escorts the kid out of court. Byrd does speak a bit to the child (take a shot) as he is escorting him out. JJ then begins to try to tackle the facts of the case.

Penny explains that she can produce three litters of pug puppies a year. Penny is registered with the AKC, so you know her ass is legit. Rachel purchased a pug puppy from Penny on March 16th, 2016. When asked about her contract, Rachel denies that she and Penny ever had one. Penny says that she gives out written instructions on how to follow up with medical care on your very own personal new pug puppy (she does a lot more than some breeders I have dealt with in the past).

Rachel admits that the puppy was $1250. She also admits that this is her first dog since she was a child. Therefore, the answer would be ‘Yes’. I mean, her parents bought her the dog when she was a kid, unless she was earning $.60 cent an hour working in some sweatshop and it took her 5 years to be able to purchase the dog. It gets annoying when people try to add superfluous details into their answer. Just say ‘Yes’ or ‘No’, especially if it’s not a loaded question.

The puppy was 10 weeks when Rachel bought him, and Penny confirms that he has had his first shots. Rachel, acting far more rational here than what we see of her later, took the puppy to the vet on March 18th for a verification/wellness check on her recently purchased dog. The puppy was in great health. It was 5 months later where Rachel claims that she e-mailed Penny about how she wanted a female pug. She goes on to say that ‘Toby’ the Pug “needed” a friend. She had considered breeding, but then thought better of it. She then asked Penny the Pug Breeder for a female pug. She wanted to have Penny breed ‘Toby’ the Pug for a female pug (which would be his daughter, how cute) because she “paid a lot of money for Toby and didn’t want to pay that much again”.  Rachel testifies that Penny ignored her request.

Somehow, ‘Toby’ the Pug ate a Reese’s Peanut Butter cup. I don’t give a damn, Reese’s Peanut Butter cups are so good. I haven’t had one in a hot minute because Djamilla claimed that she doesn’t want my fat stomach hitting her stomach, so I laid off of eating anything crazy. She’s over here making me eat all this healthy shit, while she’s allowed to eat pizza. Apparently, we’re having blue crab for dinner tonight. All my people from Maryland know steamed blue crab with a ton of Old Bay is the best.

Regardless, you can’t give a dog chocolate, and I’m not sure how ‘Toby’ got into contact with said chocolate, but you can seriously mess a dog up like that. Rachel took the dog to the same vet she took him to on March the 18th. The vets kept him overnight for observation. When Rachel picked him up, she found out that ‘Toby’ had an undescended testicle. JJ says that it is hearsay, but allows it anyway. Rachel says that the vets let her know to have ‘Toby’ neutered. Rach was devastated that she could not breed him. Rachel claims that she didn’t want to be a dog breeder, but wanted to breed Toby to get a female dog. JJ keeps pressing the question on why Rach needed a female dog. Rach claimed that Penny the Pug Breeder told her that boy pugs get along better with girl pugs. Rach also claimed a little while ago that Penny never responded to her e-mail inquiry. So I’m not sure what’s up with that lapse in the story.

Rach thinks that Penny should give her back her money for the pug or half the money. We finally get to the crux of this case. Rach feels as though Penny screwed her on the deal. Rach called Penny back for a refund. It is then revealed that Penny would give her her money back. This was only if Rach returned ‘Toby’ back to Penny. Penny has the texts, and declares that she would have given Rach a full refund if Rach brought the puppy back. She stated this four times, and all of her cries to Rach fell on deaf ears. Penny keeps trying to explain the situation, but JJ just wants to see the text where Penny offered her a full refund if she brought the puppy back.

As JJ is reading the texts, she asks Rach why she contacted the Attorney General. Rach claims she did so because on the AKC website, it suggested that she contact the Attorney General. Rachel is just being a ‘Karen’ at this point. JJ wants to see, in writing, where the AKC advised her to contact the Attorney General. Rachel can’t produce this, but instead claims that the website “told” her to do that. She also claims that some lady on the phone told her to do this as well. 

JJ just sort of rants at Rachel for a bit and calls her ‘ridiculous’. Rachel and her son both love the puppy. JJ then just asks Rachel what she is doing in court, does she not have anything else going on in her life? Penny is all agreeing with JJ during her rant.

Rach exclaims that she paid $1250 for breeding rights to the dog. JJ is all “Show me!” (take a shot). JJ reiterates that Penny was willing to give Rach back her money, but Rachel had to return the damn dog. Rachel doesn’t comprehend what JJ is saying to her and responds back that Penny wanted the dog back. Well, Rachel, you idiot, what do you think was supposed to happen? That Penny will just give you something for nothing? Moron.

I don’t know why Rach didn’t just give the dog back if she was so unhappy and get her refund and go about her business. Like her entire argument is so full of logical fallacies, it’s insane. Rachel is coming off a bit entitled and unreasonable. Rachel wanted to have her cake and eat it, too. She wanted the money back and the damn dog. Like, Rachel, quit being a selfish lady. It’s one or the other.

JJ then moves on to the false restraining order of the case. JJ asks Rachel one last time if she wants to return the dog back to Penny the Pug Breeder, and Rach declines (again, WHY are you in court, then?). JJ then says that’s what Rachel should have done from the beginning and not get her panties in a twist about this whole situation. Damn. JJ is a savage old bird.

JJ wants to know why Penny filed a restraining order against Kiser. Penny explains that Rach was filing more and more papers with the Attorney General. She had to respond to all of those inquiries from the AG’s office. Penny also begins to tell the strange tale about people showing up to her property claiming that they were “lost”. Penny says that that’s the basis of her countersuit; that more and more people started showing up to her property and Rach was the last one there. JJ doesn’t believe her, stating that people coming on her property isn’t actionable. JJ then gives us a lesson on the Yiddish word “Strasher” (take a shot), which means someone is giving someone else the “business”. JJ then tells Penny that Penny was annoyed and wanted to get Rachel back.

Naturally, Penny denies this, but claims that she had to defend herself due to random people showing up on her property. Um….aren’t you a dog breeder? I don’t know. Something about Penny’s story doesn’t add up, either. Yeah, Rachel may have been the only person who had a complaint, but there could have been someone else who did it, as well. JJ tells Penny that it’s a giant leap. JJ gets Penny to admit that the courts threw out her restraining order application.  JJ tells both women that they were wrong with their silly actions. Unlike Penny, who is older, wiser, and had enough sense to keep her mouth shut, Rachel continues to defend her position on why she contacted the AG’s office. She maintains her story that the AKC website “told” her to do that. JJ tells Rachel that the AKC is not the Wizard of Oz. Again, JJ asks for a document that specifically states the steps one takes to file a complaint within the AKC and then to the AG. Once again, Rachel doesn’t have it.

JJ has had enough and after calling Rachel ridiculous one last time, kicks them both out of court. Their suits both dismissed.

During the Hall-Ter-View, Rachel acts like neutering her dog is the most horrific thing ever. I’ve had several dogs that were neutered. Hell, the dog we have now is neutered because he had an undescended testicle. I’m not sure what the big deal is. Rachel says that she has a girl dog now, so she’s happy. Meanwhile, Penny sticks to her story on how Rachel turned down the refund 4 times because she’s greedy af and wanted the cash back and the dog. Listen, Rachel, if you want a refund on a product, any product, you have to give back the defective product and you should get your money back. End of fuckin story. I had to return a defective Bose system for my bedroom back to Amazon to get a new one. Do you think Amazon let me keep the defective one? Hell no. They were ready to charge my credit card for the other one that was refunded if I didn’t return it by July 31st. So shut the hell up, Rach. Ridiculous.

Verdict: Case dismissed. Plaintiff and defendant get nothing.

Did Auntie Judy say anything fucked up to anyone?: {to Rachel}: “…Great! That’s what you should have done in the beginning. Not got yourself-your panties all in a twist!”

Gunplay and Knife Fight? (2017)

"I was in the kitchen, preparing a meal..." - Adam Yomtov

Plaintiff: Adam Yomtov from Canoga Park, California.  Adam looks kinda sketchy/mentally unbalanced. Adam looks a bit like Michael Myers on the first Halloween, whatwith his weird face. He’s apparently a security officer that has an open carry license. He and the defendant were former roommates who would get on each other’s nerves. Adam wanted the defendant to stop using his kitchen utensils, or at least clean up the kitchen utensils after using them. Adam brought the lovely Miss Wendy to court as his witness. Apparently, she saw everything go down on that fateful evening. Adam has a weird sense of entitlement. He seems like he’s one of those dudes who goes to a bar looking for a fight. He claims the defendant goes to AA meetings and had the hots for Wendy.

Defendant: Jeff Koester. Jeff is rockin a Men’s Warehouse suit as if he is about to go on a job interview. He also looks a bit like Jud Crandall from the 1989 Pet Semetary movie (“You bury your own”) Jeff explains that he does not go to AA meetings despite the plaintiff’s testimony, but rather he merely goes to school at night. Jeff called the police on the defendant after the plaintiff allegedly drew a gun on him. The gun wasn’t loaded, and it seemed like a prank the plaintiff was pulling. Jeff was not amused and informed the police after the incident. Jeff claimed that he could see the chrome barrel of the plaintiff’s gun while having a “life flashing before your eyes” moment. Jeff still has trauma to this day about his supposed near brush with death.

The Complaint: Adam is up in court suing for damages resulting from a false arrest.

What Does He/She want: Adam is seeking $5000 for damages. If he gets it, we gotta down the whole drink.  

Countersuit?: Jeff has a $5000 countersuit for being traumatized by the whole ordeal.

Puppy Multiplier: N/A

Driving Around Without Insurance: N/A

What Went Down: JJ starts the case by laying out the facts. Adam and Jeff were roommates, wherein Jeff, the defendant, had Adam falsely arrested for threatening him with a gun. JJ also states that Jeff has a counterclaim for being traumatized by the whole experience. Both men state that this is accurate.

This whole gun brandishing incident stemmed from a car that Jeff wanted to purchase. He did indeed purchase the car in August of 2016. Jeff got the car through someone that Adam knew. Adam, ever the opportunist, decided that he wanted to get a cut of $250 as a finder’s fee. Adam is a hustler lol. JJ really doesn’t care if that’s true or not, but merely set the stage to segue into the difficulty between the two roommates, as Jeff stiffed Adam on the $250 commission.

JJ moves on to the incident in question that caused the false arrest. Adam states that he was in the kitchen, just chillin, preparing a meal. Wendy the Witness was in their bedroom taking a nap. All of this action took place on September 1st. Jeff states, in his answer, mind you, that Adam was in the living room. When Jeff spoke to both Adam and Wendy the Witness, Adam flipped the script and said “Don’t talk to my girlfriend! I’ll kill you.” Well, that shit escalated quickly. Like, chill out Adam. I’m sure Wendy the Witness isn’t interested in dumpy, depressed lookin old men. She’s only into guys who look like Rocky Dennis, apparently.

Adam states that all of that is hogwash, that Adam would never pull a firearm from his left pocket, when he is right handed. That would make sense. JJ then establishes if Adam has a license to carry a firearm. Adam states that he is armed security. He states that Jeff saw him coming home from work in his security gear including the pistol. JJ then tells Adam “No, no, don’t tell me what he noticed!” (take a shot).

JJ then reiterates the question, saying it more directly this time, if Adam has ever shown Jeff the pistol. Adam denies this. So in a way, Adam evaded JJ’s original question, as he just left it up to speculation.

JJ then tricks Adam about the purchase of the car where Adam claims that he doesn’t remember the exact date on when the car was purchased, so therefore he wouldn’t know how long Jeff owned him this supposed $250. (JJ says “kerfuffle”, so take a shot) JJ asks for the police report, but Adam doesn’t have it. Adam does, however, have the detention letter on when he got locked up. JJ wants to have a look at that. Adam tries to talk (and what he was about to say was hearsay anyway, so I guess we can take a shot for that, too), but JJ shushes him before he can get it out. His arrest date was September 1st, and his release date was September 2nd, so both sides have the date of the incident together. The police took Adam’s gun when he was arrested.

After some prompting from JJ on exactly what lead up to the gun being drawn, Adam states that in the morning that he and the defendant were “going at it” and cursing. JJ begins getting impatient and slams her hand on the desk (take a shot) and reiterates her question to Adam. At this point, I’m sort of leaving Adam’s side and thinking that he may be guilty. It’s like, if this really happened the way it did, you should be able to tell a cogent story from beginning to end. JJ starts admonishing Adam on his waffling to make him get his act together.

Adam again states that he was in the kitchen preparing a meal while Wendy the Witness went into the room to take a nap after work. We keep getting shots of Wendy the Witness looking forlorn and shit. Like, is that her only expression or something? She looks like she just got saved by Batman from The Riddler and Batman’s voice soothed her and got her motor going and she’s looking at him as he ziplines away. I bet Wendy the Witness thinks Adam is a great fuckin catch or something. Her yearning glances are starting to get annoying quick.

Anyway, Adam states that Jeff started cursing him out after he came out of his room and went into the kitchen. JJ picks up on the fact that Adam may be lying (it’s sort of obvious that he’s making this up as he’s going along, just the pauses and the time it took him to get his story together). He says that Jeff threatened him, but can’t describe the threats that Jeff supposedly used. JJ then flat out admits that she doesn’t believe Adam. JJ just finds Adam’s story BS because Jeff owes Adam money, not the other way around. That makes sense as well, because if I owe someone money, I’m going to duck and dodge them for a bit, not flat out curse them out. Ask one of my friends about the Ravens' game last season that got them knocked down to 4th in the division against the Steelers. I owed him like $200. I didn’t go around cursing him out and acting a fool.

JJ states that if something doesn’t make sense, it’s not true (take a shot). JJ is trying to make Adam understand that his story makes zero sense. “Don’t tell me what you advised. Let’s go,” JJ exclaims to Adam. Adam says that he told Jeff to stop using his kitchen utensils and his kitchenware because Jeff couldn’t keep it clean. JJ and Adam then get into a weird battle of wits for a bit before Adam returns to his testimony on what happened on September 1st. Adam says that Jeff told him if he doesn’t like him using Adam’s kitchen utensils, that he needs to keep that shit in his room. Once again, JJ has to get Adam back on track after he tried to go off on a story about how his room was small. Jeez, does Adam have ADD or something? He can’t focus for shit. I would hate to be in a situation where I’m at a bank or DMV or the damn Shoprite and Adam is the armed security and the bank/DMV/or ShopRite is held the fuck up. Adam would be focusing on the robbers with his gun drawn, but pass by the Skittles and be all “Oh, they have a new flavor out now! I want to try that. I wonder what the mango raspberry tastes like. Oh, they brought the lime flavor back?”

Adam also states that he did not appreciate Mr. Koester paying special attention to Wendy the Witness, that Jeff would make meals special for her. So Adam told him to keep his distance from her because it made him and Wendy the Witness uncomfortable. Jeff states that the argument escalated to the point where Jeff grabbed a kitchen knife (why would he do that?) and took two steps towards Adam. Adam says that he took two steps back and also grabbed a kitchen knife to protect himself. So either this kitchen has a ton of knife butcher blocks or Adam backed up, and then reached in front of Jeff to grab a knife from the same area Jeff grabbed his from. I don’t know. In my kitchen, we keep knives in one main area, but that’s just us, I guess. Adam also notes that that was around 5:45. While Adam is telling his story, JJ is just looking around, seemingly disinterested.

Adam states that Jeff then just abruptly left because he had an AA meeting to get to. I guess the whole knife thing was water under the bridge when it came down to it. You know, you’re in the heat of an argument, you grab a big ass Halloween knife, and then you say “Oh, damn, I gotta get to my AA meeting, see ya,” you know, one of those situations. All the yelling and drama woke Wendy the Witness up, as she yanked Adam into their room. Adam says that Jeff came home around 10 pm and then called the police, stating that instead of picking up a knife, Adam pulled his firearm. The cops show up, placing Adam under arrest. I like how Adam tried to clean it up by saying that the cops didn’t know what to do until their superior told the cops to arrest him. JJ isn’t buying any of Adam’s testimony.

Jeff begins his somber testimony. He claims at 5:45 in the evening, Jeff was in his bedroom. He then corrects Adam on where he was going, saying he has college, not AA meetings. Jeff left his bedroom, about to merrily go to school, where he told Adam and Wendy the Witness that he was off to class. Wendy FINALLY changes her expression to one of disdain and mutters “Not true,” as Jeff is explaining that he never actually went into the kitchen, but was by his bedroom. Jeff testifies that Adam screamed at him “Don’t talk to my girlfriend, I’m going to kill you!” Not gonna lie, but Adam does seem like one of those overprotective, insecure, alpha males. This is when Adam pulls the gun out of his left hand pocket, while taking a step forward. Jeff claims that he could see down the barrel. Jeff says that he could see the shine from the barrel. Adam then pulled the trigger. Jeff says that it all happened very fast. Apparently, Wendy the Witness got the hell out of Dodge when it happened (we then get a cut to Wendy the Witness lookin all suspicious at Jeff). Adam just laughed after pulling the trigger in a “GOTCHA!” kinda way, before he, too, bailed into the bedroom and just left Jeff standing there.

After the commercial break (featuring a commercial with Shaq as the Spokesman for The General Insurance. Like damn is Shaq the spokesperson for EVERYTHING? Icy Hot, Papa John’s, The General Insurance. I’m not hating, Shaq, make your coins), we get back to the case.

Adam says that Jeff’s testimony was not true, prompting JJ to lash out at Adam and say the contrary. She then tells Adam that he deserved to get arrested. JJ says that the only reason the DA didn’t press charges is because Wendy the Witness covered for her man.

JJ dismisses Adam’s case and awards Koester with $1500 on his counterclaim. Jeff tries to speak after the ruling, but JJ screams “WE ARE….DONE!” as she spins around in her chair to exit the bench.

During the Hall-Ter-View, Adam continues to lie (take two shots), making up all these excuses on why he was arrested. Then he starts kvetching about how it cost him money, a lawyer, moving costs, etc. Adam claims that he is frustrated (just don’t point a gun at someone unless you intend to use it, and don’t point a gun on someone out of frustration, either, Adam). Jeff meanwhile says that Adam “banished” a gun at him (take a shot). Jeff goes on to say that Adam is a menace to society and he still has anxiety and trauma over the incident. Jeff was extremely impressed that JJ was able to figure out what happened as fast as she did. Well, Jeff, it was pretty obvious that Adam was full of shit.

Verdict: Plaintiff gets nothing. Defendant gets $1500 on the countersuit (FINISH YOUR DRINK!!!)

Did Auntie Judy say anything fucked up to anyone?: {to Adam}: No, no! (slams hands on desk): You’re not following me, Sir! “I woke up on the morning of September 1st. My girlfriend was sleeping. I went out to the kitchen. The defendant was in the kitchen. I said to him, he said to me, I said to him, he said to me. Do you understand? Alright, now let’s go.”

Anyway, I'm out. I have some blue crabs with Old Bay I gotta tear up. 

Edited August 21, 2022 by DjamillasMan

[CrazyInAlabama]

4 p.m. episodes-

First (2014)-

Dead Tree Catastrophe -Plaintiff Albert Slechten suing defendant Terry Rogers for a tree branch falling on his vehicle, when defendant trimmed the tree.  Plaintiff was taking down a tree, had a rope stretched across the road to pull the tree down.   Rope stretched across the street, and tied end of rope to his son’s pickup truck, around a good tree, and use it to leverage the dead tree down.   Defendant claims he put cones out to stop traffic, but there is no proof of the cones.   Defendant’s son gunned the pickup, and the falling tree fell on plaintiff’s Silverado pickup truck.   

Defendant claims he and his son stopped traffic, then son hopped in pickup truck, gunned it and tree fell on plaintiff’s truck.   Plaintiff stopped when he got to the chain/rope across the street, and the tree fell on him. 

Defendant’s son didn’t come to court.   Defendant’s witness, neighbor Stephanie, took a video of the entire incident.  Defendant claims plaintiff went around stopped traffic, and traffic triangles, and cones.  Defendant didn’t have a permit to stop traffic.  Plaintiff says he was the only vehicle going in either direction on the road at the time of the accident.    Plaintiff did see a triangle.    Defendant witness Stephanie, lives on the property with the dead tree.    The video shows a huge tree, very rotten, being taken down.    Defendant is a part-time tree trimmer.    

$1748 to plaintiff.

Ex-Lover Battle- Plaintiff Devin Harris suing defendant/ex-girlfriend Jasmine Penn for a rental car and loan.  Defendant is counter suing for unpaid rent, and lease breaking fees (she couldn't afford the rent by herself).     Defendant moved into apartment intending to get a roommate, but never did, then plaintiff moved in.     Litigants were living together, in defendant's apartment, but plaintiff didn't pay rent or utilities.    Plaintiff claims he made a loan to defendant, and he rented a rental car for defendant that was damaged, for $1500.  They only lived together for two or three months.   

When defendant broke the lease, both litigants moved to his parent's house.  Defendant didn't mention the shacking up at plaintiff's mom's house after the lease was broken.   Defendant also had a young child in this messy relationship.   

$200 to defendant for utilities.  This is crossed out, because she was supposed to pay his mother for utilities, when defendant and child lived with his mother, but only paid for one month.     Rental car was for three months, used by defendant while they were at plaintiff's mother's house.  Defendant claims she was just an additional driver on the rental, and plaintiff drove it while his was in the shop.   

Plaintiff receives $1510 for the rental car.

Second (2014)-

Tummy Tuck Trials -Plaintiff Jesse Cornelius suing defendant/ex- Elizabeth Hicks, for non-payment of a loan for a tummy tuck for the mother of eight (only one child between the litigants), and for a false CPS report by defendant.   Her children arrange from 3 to 18.    Plaintiff had a child with defendant, he was just over 20, and she is almost 15 years older, when they had the child.   Defendant only had custody of the 18- and 15-year old, and the 2- to 3-year-old kid, the other five children are with their father.     Plaintiff is a realtor, and his grandmother watches the baby when he does house showings.    Plaintiff agreed to loan the money to defendant, and would receive $250 a month from defendant.  (This happened in Elk River, MN).

Defendant pays child support for the five children to her child’s father who has custody.   Plaintiff has full time custody of the youngest child, and defendant is supposed to pay child support to the plaintiff.   When they broke up, defendant paid a partial payment.   After October’s partial payment on the loan, defendant stopped paying on the loan.    Defendant moved out from plaintiff’s place, and is now married to another man, and has two sons living with her.   

Defendant says she didn’t have money to pay the loan after her son went to rehab, and then moved home with her.   Defendant moved in with her mother (I think I got this wrong, defendant and son lived with someone), until the homeowner said it was too crowded in her house.  So, defendant, Mother-of-the-Year candidate, moved out and dumped her 17-year-old son at a homeless shelter.

At the time of the surgery, defendant couldn’t get a Care Credit card because she had bad credit, because she owed back child support.  The entire cost of the surgery after deposit was $8,900.   Defendant only paid $500 deposit for the surgery.

Balance is $5,697.   

CPS charges by defendant were disproven, and he has full custody of the child.    Defendant claims the plaintiff is still in love with her, but yet she moved out and married another man two weeks after she broke up with the plaintiff. 

$5,000 to plaintiff.

Salvaged Motorcycle Woes -Plaintiff/motorcycle buyer Kevin Czyrny is suing defendant/motorcycle seller Kristen Carpentierii for a title to a motorcycle he bought from defendant for his girlfriend.   Defendant says motorcycle has a salvage title.   Plaintiff said the title needs to be signed and produced by defendant, then motorcycle can be inspected, and a title and registration.  

Salvage title is in New York state, and held by her insurance company.  

So, plaintiff gets a refund, and will return the motorcycle to defendant. Defendant told to get a good title before reselling the motorcycle.  JJ has to give the address of the defendant to plaintiff so he can return the motorcycle. 

Motorcycle back to defendant, money back to plaintiff.

5 p.m. episodes-

First (2017)-

Roommate Cat Fight?!-Plaintiff Paige Morgan is suing former roommate Natasha McClendon for rent, bills, stolen possessions, a broken bed, and an assault.    Defendant was staying at a motel, and could no longer afford it ($1300 a month extended stay).  So, co-worker plaintiff (they're both servers) wanted to have defendant move into her apartment and split the rent, and bills.   Rent was $650, $325 each.     Defendant stayed from mid-September to the end of December 2016.    Defendant claims she paid her rent for the three months.  However, defendant only paid the $325 for two of the three months.   

Also, plaintiff's boyfriend was in the apartment a lot of the time, and defendant wanted to pay only a third of the rent, even though the plaintiff and boyfriend shared the same bedroom.    Defendant didn't pay her half of the utilities, so plaintiff took her name off of the cable bill.   

On 20 or 21 December, there was another fight, and defendant moved out, and plaintiff found the bed in the room was disassembled, and piled in the closet in pieces.     The bed issue is gone, the cable bill is gone.   Plaintiff claims defendant took the towels, sheets, and the bedding.   Defendant is counter claiming for missing clothes, during the fight over nonpayment of rent.    JJ only will pay $325 for one month's rent.   Plaintiff wanted defendant to pay half of the cable bundle, but defendant claimed she should only pay half of the internet fee. 

Defendant claims the plaintiff rammed the door open, like a football tackle.    Defendant left, and then called the police for an escort to pick up her stuff.   There are no pictures of damage to defendant, case dismissed. 

$325 to plaintiff for the month's rent.  

Pink Eye, Stink Eye!-Plaintiff Linda Booker suing makeup artist Debbie Grant (Oh So Natural is her business name according to plaintiff's postings) for refund of fee, medical expenses, and damages.   Plaintiff went to defendant to get permanent makeup tattooed on her eyelids.   

The defendant is certified for the makeup by her teacher, and some organization I've never heard of.    Since it tattooing, not classified as cosmetology, many states don't require a cosmetology license.   Plaintiff claims she got pink eye at the defendant's house during the procedure (since when does pink eye require hospital visits?)

Plaintiff claims the defendant's child had pink eye, or eye infections, and that's what she caught.    Defendant says her child didn't have any eye issues on that day, or around that time.    Plaintiff paid $200 + for the procedure, and less than $50 for medical and medication costs.    However, plaintiff is suing for $862.  

Plaintiff called the defendant a couple of days after the procedure, and the medical visit.    There are a lot of reasons that you can get an eye infection after tattooing your eyelids. 

JJ throws out the defendant's harassment counter claim.   JJ doesn't care about the waiver plaintiff signed refusing an allergy test.   

 (I think JJ was wrong.  Plaintiff could have used older mascara, or some other issue, causing the infection, has an allergy, or caught pink eye after the tattooing).

Plaintiff receives her $862.   

Second (2017)-

Ex-Lover Restraining Order?! -Plaintiff Eliza Salazar suing former boyfriend Agustin Villegas over a care card dental bill, rent, a phone, property damages, and an assault.   Plaintiff had a care card, and defendant spent $2100 at the dentist on her account, and is also suing for rent, property damages, and an assault on her.    They lived together for two years.    They split the rent and utilities, except when he was out of work.    Defendant claims he paid $4700 for the dentist, and legal bills, but has no proof.

Defendant would give plaintiff cash, and she would decide how much goes to the dental accounts.    Plaintiff wants rent and utilities she paid when they were living together, and defendant was out of work, thrown out.   Plaintiff loaned defendant $2500 for a divorce lawyer.  There was also a huge credit to the dental bill by defendant's health/dental insurance. 

Plaintiff submits a police report of an assault.    However, plaintiff only applied and was granted a temporary restraining order, and never went to court to get a final order, or testified about the assault.   Defendant says after the fight, as he was leaving plaintiff stabbed him in the back. 

JJ will give plaintiff $2,099 for the last of the dental bill, and a phone.   

Don't Show Me the Money! -Plaintiff Zeola Belchen suing former friend Christopher Glynn for a loan to pay his rent.  A year before this, the defendant's mother was behind on rent (he lives with his mother when he's in town working), and plaintiff loaned defendant $ .     Plaintiff only has her disability payment ($1400 to support herself now), but at the time of the loan she had a job, and was applying for disability, and received a lump sum of $9800 back payment.  The defendant mentioned he needed $900 for mom's rent.   

Plaintiff has a money order for the money, made out to Mayfair Apartments.

(My question is why so many litigants on this show mention to relatives or anyone else that they're getting a settlement, or other lump sum payment?)

$900 to plaintiff

[CrazyInAlabama]

4 p.m. episodes-

First (2014)-

Landlord Laundry List -Plaintiff/landlord Saeed Kanwar suing defendant/former tenant Amy Hansen for rent, and damages to the property.   Defendant counter claims for her security deposit, and quadruple security deposit, and claims any damages were normal wear and tear.    Defendant doesn’t want to pay for November rent, $1546 with late fees for the month.    Defendant claims security was $2250, plaintiff says security was $1700.  Lease says $2250 security, so that will be considered paid. 

Pictures of house after ‘move out’, show a lot of trash.    Defendant lived in house for five years, with up to three other tenants.     Damages include carpet and paint that had to be done anyway.    Dented doors are shown, never changed furnace filters, broken garage doors.   JJ doesn’t shop for microwaves too often, you don’t get a micro hood, or big microwave for $100.  

(JJ absolutely hates landlords.  JJ’s attitude through this case was disgusting).

Plaintiff gets $1546 for the month’s rent.  Damages and rent include $1731, and leaves $519 back to defendant from security deposit.  So, landlord gets nothing, but since the show pays the awards, he loses nothing.  So, JJ screws over another landlord.  Counter claim for quadruple damages from the security is dismissed. (The unchanged furnace filters would have made me give the landlord $5k, that will ruin a furnace/heat pump over five years.)

Ice Cream Shop Stalker -Plaintiff Diane Comres suing defendant /former friend Cynthia Bryant for repayment of a loan.   Defendant’s hair shop was a few doors down from plaintiff’s ice cream shop. Defendant did pay back $350, but still claims the money was a gift not a loan, and that cancels out that idea that money wasn’t a loan.  Defendant says plaintiff threatened to kill her, and stalked her when she couldn’t repay the loan for $1,000.

Plaintiff gets her $1,000 loan, minus any payments defendant can prove.  Defendant claim dismissed. 

Second (2014)-

When Childhood Friends Fight -Plaintiff Cieara Rogers suing defendant/former friend Shatan Hayes for the balance on Infiniti A5.  Plaintiff sold car to defendant, for taking over the payments, and plaintiff claims she loaned money to defendant, $1825.   Plaintiff repo’d the car.   Defendant claims both litigants, and the boyfriend drove the car, and defendant says she was supposed to pay expenses for when she drove the car, not take over payments.

Plaintiff repaired dents, mechanical stuff to car, and she wants defendant to pay registration, taxes, tickets, etc.  

Car was originally $1800.

Plaintiff went to sea (Merchant Marine), for several months, and defendant and boyfriend both drove the car.   Plaintiff repo’d car one time, and eventually let defendant have car again.  Then, defendant repo’d the car again, and is selling it on Craigslist.   Defendant says when plaintiff went to sea, that defendant was supposed to pick up cash from someone else, and pay the car note.   However, other person only had $150, but car note was $328, and defendant put money in plaintiff’s bank account.  However, plaintiff claims she couldn’t write a check for her car note. 

Defendant claims plaintiff gave her text messages with her account information, so defendant could make the deposit.  Plaintiff could have done a check and had it mailed to the car payment bank.  Plaintiff claims she loaned $1100 to defendant, and defendant was supposed to pay it back and make the mortgage payment.

Plaintiff case dismissed.

Sci-Fi Costume Battle -Plaintiff Tristan Moriuchi suing defendant  Zach Kinnard over Star Wars mold maker for unreturned helmets, and costumes.   Both litigants are Star Wars fans.  Both have extensive Star Wars art and memorabilia collections.  Each litigant says the other has some of their properties, and defendant claims plaintiff owes him for making molds.    Because of trademark and copyright, no photos and memorabilia can be shown in court or on TV.   

JJ sends the two litigants outside for five minutes to try to come to a solution to their problems.   The litigants can’t come to an agreement, and JJ suggests they should talk to a mediator. 

Defendant claims he dropped the plaintiff’s property off in plaintiff’s carport.   There is no proof that defendant dropped the items off in plaintiff’s carport.  Defendant dropped off two helmet props.

There is no contract for the mold making.

JJ dismisses the case to go back to small claims locally, or a mediator.

5 p.m. episodes-

First (2017)-

Adoption Turmoil? -Plaintiff Matthew Giaba suing his adopted son's sister/ defendant Karina Hernandez for unpaid car payments, tickets, and damages on a car plaintiff co-signed for with the defendant.   Adopted son, and brother to defendant, is witness for the plaintiff.   

Plaintiff has co-signed with his son, and son has paid his car off, and defendant wanted a car, and plaintiff co-signed for defendant's car.    Defendant stopped making payments, because car was repossessed, over the parking tickets that accumulated (defendant claims the brother was responsible for the tickets), and car was impounded for the amount of the tickets.    (If defendant says 'tooken' again, I'm going to scream).  

Defendant quit her job, and stopped paying for car.   She claims she was paying on the car.     Plaintiff will have to pay the remaining balance on the car, after the repossession for non-payment, and the car is totaled.    Defendant claims her brother received so many traffic tickets on the car, that it was impounded.   

However, car was wrecked by defendant three months before she stopped paying on the car, and she had no insurance on the car (insurance required by the car loan, and state laws).      Plaintiff didn't even know about the car accident by the defendant, until finance company sent him pictures, and bills.  The interior of the car is totally trashed, and that didn't happen in an accident.  

The amount owing on the car is over $9545, plus fees equaling 10,4450, and car is totaled.    $5,000 to plaintiff, leaving him on the hook for over $5,000 more. 

Harassment and Deception? -Plaintiff Rasheena Phinisee (I like that name, I've never heard of either part of it before), suing her friend's mother for money she paid for a car, and harassment and deception.  Plaintiff bought car from defendant, Mary Williams, taking over the payments.    Plaintiff paid money for the car note, and insurance (she was assuming the loan), by paying the defendant every month.   Then plaintiff found out insurance wasn't being paid for by defendant, and defendant refused to give plaintiff the insurance card.  Then plaintiff stopped paying.    

Plaintiff claims she was told by defendant there were a few months left on the loan, but claims it was three years.   Car is now parked in front of plaintiff's friend's house, since she had it towed on the night she got it back from the defendant.  Defendant will get the car back (via tow truck), and plaintiff will get a partial refund, because she drove the car for three months.   Rasheena wants every penny of the $2100 she paid defendant back, and that's not happening.   Defendant claims the plaintiff assaulted her, and harassed her.  Defendant says she saw plaintiff, and two friends vandalize the car. 

$2148 was paid to defendant, and $1398 will go back to the plaintiff, (that's minus the car rental), and defendant will pick up her car.  

Second (2017)-

Agoraphobic Dog-Owner Heartbreak!-Plaintiff Sarah Bauer  is suing Mary Mcleod /defendant for money she paid defendant for a dog, and punitive damages.    Plaintiff purchased a dog from defendant, to train as a companion animal, and get it certified.     The dog was a Boston Terrier, French Bulldog cross.  Defendant found dog roaming the streets in July, took dog to vet for a spay, and shots, then vet checked for a chip, and vet didn't find a chip. 

Two months later the dog was scanned by the vet at the ASPCA, and a chip was found, and the owner contacted.  Owner lived in Mississippi, and dog was found in Florida, dog escaped on a trip to Florida, and defendant found dog, and kept dog for six months.   Six months later the defendant couldn't keep the dog, because of housing reasons, and advertised the dog for adoption

Original owner never arrived, and defendant advertised the dog for adoption.   Plaintiff paid $200 for the dog to defendant, and because of the chip the vet wouldn't give the dog back to plaintiff.     The original owner finally showed up, and picked up her dog.   

(How does someone with Agoraphobia fly to California from Florida for JJ's show?  How could plaintiff go without a dog for five years, if she has to have a dog at all times?    Plaintiff wants the original $200, and damages to her psyche.  Any place I've dealt with the Humane Society or SPCA, have rules about how long the original owner has to claim a stray dog, and it's not over a week.  Plaintiff wants animal's contact information from defendant for original owner, to keep trying to get the dog back.  There is a text from plaintiff to defendant that she knows the dog has a chip, and the owner.  I hope plaintiff never found out the actual dog owner's name, or I bet she'll show up at their house.)

There is a text from plaintiff admitting she knew who the owner was, but she still gets her $200 back.  (I wouldn't have given the plaintiff a penny back.)

Sob Story Payday?-Plaintiff Yadira McNair suing her ex-boyfriend, Carl Amones, for an unpaid loan.   Plaintiff is unemployed, and has been for months, after being fired.    Plaintiff received $128,000 for her half of the marital home after the divorce.    Plaintiff moved in with her parents with her two kids, and then met defendant.   Plaintiff claims the two litigants were dating, but defendant says they weren't.    

Litigants met at the gym before, and during her divorce, then he moved, but then their relationship started.     Plaintiff gave defendant $5,000.    Defendant says plaintiff left the check in his glove compartment, but says he didn't ask her for the money.   Defendant says they were just friends, and never dated.   Plaintiff now says they were dating, or 'talking' after her divorce was final.   

Plaintiff says defendant was out of work for disability, but has since returned to work.  His disability was for anxiety and stress, for 18 months.  

Unfortunately for defendant, there are existing text messages from defendant calling the $5,000 a loan.

$5,000 for plaintiff

[CrazyInAlabama]

4 p.m. episodes-

First (2014)-

Yoga/Gym Merger Mess! -Plaintiff /yoga studio owner Lauren Rovira suing defendants Wendy and Charley Robinson for defrauding her in a business deal.   Plaintiff claims after she invested in the yoga/gym, that she was kicked out two months later, after defendants sold out to another person.  Plaintiff owned the yoga studio for two years, and defendants offered to have her move to their gym location, and have a combined operation.  

Plaintiff claims after she invested a lot of money with the defendants for improvements, that the defendants sold the gym, and never paid her a penny.   Plaintiff claims new owner tossed her out of the yoga/gym operation after two months.   Plaintiff submits the contract with defendants. 

Defendant wife claims the sales agreement is forged, and she had the real contract.    JJ doesn’t believe defendant wife’s lease is real.   The terms of the lease that defendant claims are legit, is ridiculous.   Defendant wife keeps claiming plaintiff forged the agreements. 

Defendant wife claims a written agreement / contract was modified orally, not happening.  

Plaintiff paid $3,000 for the attorney, and was evicted in July.      Plaintiff’s witnesses are the proposed buyer of the property with plaintiff, and the witness was a renter of the property.    Then. the prospective buyer who was a renter, bought the gym from defendants, and kicked out plaintiff.    Plaintiff is suing the buyer of the gym in small claims case after this case aired.

Plaintiff receives her money, defendant case dismissed.  Defendant wife claims plaintiff sent inappropriate texts to defendant husband.

Ex-Fiance Fight -Plaintiff /ex-girlfriend Deanna Stratton, suing defendant /ex-boyfriend Victor George over unpaid debts, for investments in his restaurant for equipment.   Defendant says equipment in restaurant was leased for his restaurant by plaintiff, for $26,000.    Defendant claims he paid Citibank for the table and chair purchase, but has no proof.  

Plaintiff claims she invested over $5,000 in the business, in credit card debt for tables, chairs, and other furnishings.     All of the bills for furnishings are delinquent, and in collections.   Table bill was $5800+, and that’s over the court maximum.   Defendant claims he made the monthly payments.   Defendant claims plaintiff quit the business, and his parents stepped in making payments, but has no proof.

If plaintiff wins the money will go directly to Citibank.  Defendant claims the money was an investment that went sour.

$5,000 to Citibank for the plaintiff.

Second (2014)-

Mother-Daughter Rift –Plaintiff /mother Debra Brown suing defendant/daughter Amber Wynn over a car sale.  The litigants lived together at mother’s home, defendant suddenly moved out, and kept the car.   Defendant didn’t pay for the car for the seven months she lived with her mother, but car suddenly became a loan after daughter moved out.   Car was already paid for, and mother sold car to daughter for $5,000, but daughter says car was a gift.    

Plaintiff claims daughter suddenly moved out, but daughter says mother told her to get out. 

Before this, daughter was in an accident, her car was totaled, and she sued for injuries, and mother thought daughter would pay for the car when she received the settlement, minus attorney fees.

There was no sales contract for the mother’s car.  (This happened in Alpharetta, GA).

Daughter only received $1000 for the accident settlement, and JJ will either give the mother $1,000, or daughter can give $1,000.

JJ sends the litigants to go out of court and settle this.

Raccoon and Pit Bull Attack -Plaintiff/dog owner Robert Cherry and (husband) John Berge suing defendant/Pit Bull owner Patricia Pasco for vet bills.  Defendant says Pit Bull was having a bad day, he was attacked by a raccoon under her house that morning.    Then, hours later, both dogs were being walked on leashes.    Defendant says the two dogs were on the same sidewalk, going opposite directions, when defendant claims plaintiff Robert had the Chi on such a loose leash that the Chi was barking and charged defendant’s leashed Pit Bull/Boxer mix, and so everything was plaintiff Robert’s fault.  Nice try of defendant to claim her dog was so sweet, and calm, and rolling around on the UPS store floor.

Plaintiff Robert says he did have a retractable leash, but never has it longer than long enough to have the Chi comfortable.     Then, Robert says the Pit Bull lunged across in front of other pedestrians, and picked the Chi up in its mouth.   Defendant seems upset that to rescue his dog, plaintiff was kicking and punching the Pit Bull.  

Vet bills were $6990, minus $500 defendant paid.

Defendant is still delusional in the hall-terview.

$5,000 to plaintiffs.

Pawned Albums -Plaintiff Michael Robles suing defendant/ex-girlfriend Tara Beougher for selling his album collection to pay the bills for his animals while plaintiff was in jail for a DUI. There were about 500 albums, and she sold them to a record store for $600.   Defendant also says his ‘short time’ in jail was about four months.  

Defendant claims plaintiff told her to do what she had to do to keep the animals safe.

Plaintiff went back to record store after his unfortunate incarceration ended, but he went back to jail after this.  Record store would only sell the records back to him at retail.

$600 to plaintiff.

5 p.m. episodes-

First (2017)-

Don't Steal My Little Sister's Money-Plaintiff Melana Greer suing her sister's guardian Jodi Lorta (a former family friend) for transferring money from younger sister's Corey Greer bank account to her own.   Younger sister claims defendant assaulted her, and defendant claims plaintiff assaulted her.  Defendant was guardian/foster parent for a brother, who aged out, and younger sister, who now lives with plaintiff sister.    Plaintiff sister claims money was stolen out of her work wages, in a bank account in both names (sister was a minor).   Defendant is suing over house damage, while the younger girl was her legal ward, so that's dismissed. 

 Then, the defendant claims ward was driving her van, and it was towed.    Defendant's van was parked at plaintiff's father's house, and didn't have current license, and registration.    (I totally believe the plaintiffs, and can't stand the defendant.  I don't believe there was no money coming in for the brother and sister that defendant was guardian for those years).

The younger plaintiff's wages were from working at Culver's (for those who don't have a Culver's, it's the home of the Butter Burger, which is supposed to be wonderful) for four full months, and submits her bank statements.   Her take home pay was $3655 during that period.   

Plaintiff would put in money in the account, and defendant would transfer money out, to pay the cable bill $75 a month (for the entire household, woman, plaintiff, two grandchildren, and defendant's husband).   There are a lot of transfers from plaintiff's account, to defendant's account, and withdrew a lot of money.  Defendant claims she made her own deposits to plaintiff's account, and then transferred back to her own account at the same bank (No, that makes zero sense).   (On a tacky personal note, defendants bad dye job makes her look like a Muppet).

Plaintiff woman says she never withdrew a penny from the account.   Defendant received no money from any source for the plaintiff's care.   Plaintiff would cash her checks, and give the cash to defendant to put into the account.    Plaintiff did keep 25% of the cash for herself.   The plaintiff's cell phone was a prepaid cell, and cost the defendant nothing.   Plaintiff loaned $100 to defendant, and bought Christmas presents for with a December check.

JJ doesn't think defendant stole money, but covered bills for household.   Defendant took care of two children for five years, without any money paid to her (at least the defendant says she wasn't getting any money for the two children she was guardian for.).

$1500 to plaintiff.  (Defendant's hall-terview is "it is what it is", the guilty party's usual statement).

Second (2017)-

Mobile Home Towing Nightmare- (actually it should be Mobile Home Park Towing Nightmare, since no mobile homes were moved)-Plaintiff Donna Brannen suing tow operator Steven O'Grady for towing her car, and damaging her fence.    Plaintiff has been living in the same mobile home park for 24 years, and tow operator (the towing company had a two-year contract with the mobile park) to tow vehicles violating park rules, or state laws.    Plaintiff's car had no registration, and missing license plate. 

Plaintiff took defendant to mediation twice without settlement, and that is still in process, and went to small claims.    She also received a default judgment against him in small claims for the first two tows, but defendant has filed to have the summary judgement dismissed, and the case reinstated.  Then plaintiff's car was towed the third time.     

Counter claim for $1200 is the defendant says when plaintiff came to his tow yard, with a companion, she blocked the entrance, and her companion chained himself to the tow yard fence preventing him from opening for the day. (I want a video of the chaining to the gate by the geezer in the mobility scooter).     

On all three tows plaintiff's car was in violation of park rules, by having no valid car license or registration.      Plaintiff is told to show a valid registration, and tag for the vehicle.    The submitted insurance is for another vehicle, and the insurance date is four days after the third tow.  There is no registration proof on the Nissan Rogue, just a previous vehicle, a Dodge Journey.    (This happened in Florida).   

So, the three tows were legitimate for no registration, no car license, or insurance.  Plaintiff doesn't even have a driver's license, because of bad eyesight.   She claims there were no rules when she moved to the park, but she certainly knew after the first tow.   JJ wants a valid registration for the period in question, and proof there was a license plate.   Then plaintiff gives JJ a Dodge Journey registration, not a 2012 Nissan Rogue.   The insurance was bought four days after the third tow, and registration is never found by plaintiff.  There was no valid registration, insurance, and license plate. 

Plaintiff claims she was grandfathered in.  No, state laws about registration, licensing, insurance, and driver’s license can't be grandfathered. 

Defendant counter claim is being heard.   After the third tow, plaintiff's friend in a mobility scooter chained himself to the tow yard gate, and plaintiff screamed all kinds of nasty stuff at employees.  While geezer was chained to gate for 90 minutes, and plaintiff was screaming at the personnel, tow yard couldn’t operate.    There is proof of loss of revenue by tow yard.   Police were called, and they had to threaten to taser him.  (I think the defendant should have won his case).   It was $427 for each tow to get car out of tow lot.    I think the defendant should have won his counterclaim for lost business. 

Plaintiff case dismissed.  She claims she has a valid driver's license now, and also claims she can see now.   

Defendant case dismissed too (I hope he wins in his local court for the other two tows).

Bed Bug Head Board-Plaintiff Cheryl Chivers is suing grandson's step grandfather Casey Anson over a bed bug infected head board.  Plaintiff says she heard the defendant had furniture from his former job (he's a retired furniture salesman, or store owner).   Plaintiff bought the head board from defendant, and a mattress.   Plaintiff claims there were bed bugs in the wooden corners of the head board, but not the mattress (not really).

Plaintiff is a beauty operator, and consulted a client that is also her doctor (for bed bugs, you consult a very expensive, specialized pest control company, not some random doctor).     She notified the defendant of the bed bugs, but not until 10 days after the furniture was delivered.    Plaintiff has an exterminator's report. 

Plaintiff claims the day after furniture was delivered that it was infested, but didn't tell defendant for 10 days.   

Defendant had the furniture at his home for a year, and then sold it to the plaintiff.  Defendant says he's never had any report of bed bugs in his home. 

Plaintiff says the 'bed bugs' were very large, but bed bugs aren't large.   

Plaintiff case dismissed.   

[CrazyInAlabama]

4 p.m. episodes-

First (2014)-

Camper Trailer Battle! -Plaintiff Zena Lewis suing defendant Ray Stankewitz for the return of a trailer.   Defendant came into possession of a travel trailer that the plaintiff once owned.   Defendant claims he can’t return the trailer, because he sold it for $1,900.  JJ threatens to eviscerate the defendant.   Defendant says there was a storage lien on the trailer, and when the lien was cleared, he sold the trailer.  The trailer is a 24 year old travel trailer.    Trailer was parked in front of property, when plaintiff was incarcerated.  

Person who owned the property (Robert "Bob" Seavey, the defendant’s witness) got sick of the trailer being parked on his property, and he told defendant to get it off of his property.  Defendant fixed up trailer (bad axles, and other issues), it cost him over $500 for the axles, and a year after this defendant sold the trailer.  (This happened in Apple Valley, CA).

(Defendant is slurring his words so badly that they are subtitling his testimony).  

Defendant’s sworn answer to court bears no resemblance to his testimony in court. 

Defendant says the first time he came to JJ’s court, plaintiff didn’t show up.  Plaintiff thinks it’s funny she was incarcerated again, and that’s why she missed court the first time.    Bob the witness, said he financed everything while the plaintiff was in jail twice, including a $1500 kennel bill for her dog.   Plaintiff also had several trailers on her property.    

Plaintiff was release from jail the first time in December 2012, and got two trailers back.   Then a few months later she went to see defendant about the travel trailer.   Plaintiff showed up at defendant’s house at midnight to ask where the trailer was, after defense witness Robert told her where the trailer was.      

 Travel trailer is titled in plaintiff, and her husband Robert’s name, in Oregon.    Plaintiff claims defendant paid former landlord $500 for the trailer, and she told him the trailer was stolen.   Former landlord was stuck with plaintiff’s things when she went to jail.    Then, when plaintiff went to police about the travel trailer she was arrested and jailed again (probation violation).  

JJ calls defendant a thief, but plaintiff is pretty shady too.   JJ won’t give defendant storage fees either, no contract with the plaintiff.   Defendant says the registration papers weren’t with plaintiff when she came to his house.  How did trailer buyer get a title to the trailer without the title?

Plaintiff gets $1,900.

Second (2014)-

Speedy Cupid -Plaintiff William Hornbuckle suing defendant/ex-girlfriend Arquesha Parker for unpaid credit card purchases, repairs to her house she was renting, and appliances he bought for her house.   They moved in together in her house, two weeks after they met.   Plaintiff moved in with defendant, and her three kids.    She was renting for $1,000 a month, but he didn’t pay any rent during his six-month tenancy, but paid electric and water bills, and claims he had to pay her past due utilities.  

As usual, defendant says appliances were gifts, and repairs to house were plaintiff’s idea.  

Plaintiff will get his merchandise, that’s portable back, a refrigerator and dishwasher.  No money for house repairs, or other money. 

Frat House No More! -Plaintiffs /landlord Andrew Grundman and girlfriend Kelly Punzel suing defendants/ former tenants Jaime Johnson and girlfriend Angel Brown for unpaid rent property damages to a garage door, and an assault.    Plaintiff Grundman’s photos of his damaged face are bad..     Defendants rented half of the duplex owned by plaintiffs, had a one-year lease.   Defendant man lost his job, and Angel was going to cosmetology school, so no rent.  

In August, plaintiff man came to rental property and told non-paying tenants to pay up or leave, and put items like a motorcycle in the garage and locked it.    So, defendant man broke down the garage door and took his stuff back.   That’s when plaintiff Grundman claims defendant Johnson assaulted him. 

JJ’s right, you can’t just take someone’s property.

$3150 minus deposit $525, so plaintiff gets $2625.  JJ again proved she hates landlords.

5 p.m. episodes-

First (2017)-

Get Me On Oprah?!-Plaintiff / small business owner chiropractor Dr Donna Skerry is suing her former marketing manager, Matthew Steffen she claims he did not deliver the publicity for her business he promised, she's suing for breach of contract, harassment, hacking and stalking.     The Chiropractor has nutrition services too, and she wanted the defendant to get her on Oprah. 

Plaintiff claims the $900 defendant was paid was wasted.   Plaintiff wanted market research, and online marketing, and to expand the nutrition part of her business.   The proposal was submitted, but there was no signed contract.   

Defendant filmed three videos for the business, and one is on the plaintiff's website now.    There is a portal that included the three videos, and articles written from the videos, and articles were approved by the plaintiff's daughter, Yekaterina "Kate" Shoykhet, the office manager for her mother's business.     The fee paid was $899 one time fee, for the videos, and portal.   

Plaintiff's breach of contract is thrown out, because contract terms were fulfilled.  Plaintiff and daughter claim they never had access to the web portal and videos, but they downloaded the one video, and that's the only place that the video they're using is available.  

Plaintiffs posted a Google 1 star review about defendant's company, and someone changed the review to a 5 star.    A volunteer buttinsky from Google claims the defendant must have hacked plaintiff's account to change the review.  Buttinsky claims the 5 star was from a phony account not belonging to plaintiff.    Defendant claims plaintiff first posted a 1 star, then a 5 star, and then another 1 star.  

A few months later the plaintiff's daughter office manager Kate Shoykhet , apologizes for the first bad review, and claims the lack of communication between the litigants was the plaintiff's fault.     

Plaintiff also wanted the defendant to get her on Oprah, but Oprah's afternoon show ended years before this, and I can’t see Oprah doing a special interview with plaintff.   If defendant can produce the email from plaintiff saying the Oprah demand, and saying she will show a negative review, but he can't produce that.  

Both cases dismissed. 

Second (2017)-

Double Salary Snafu?-Plaintiff Greg Martini suing former employee, Henry Plantz, for return of wages that were double the defendant's normal wages.   Defendant opened, and shut down the ice rink daily, checked the register, and prepared the bank deposits for the plaintiff's business.    Defendant was an hourly employee, for $10.00 an hour.   Defendant went from hourly to salary in January.   This was actually a pay cut for defendant, to eliminate overtime costs to the company.

A month later the plaintiff told defendant that there would be a raise in store for him, and after a few paychecks that were a mistake, the defendant quit.    The paycheck went from  $951 to $1700, for four paychecks.    

JJ thinks someone who was told he was getting a raise, worked seven days a week, with long hours should expect to get a smaller paycheck?    JJ thinks the defendant should have told the plaintiff about how much money he received.

Plaintiff receives the overpaid amount back, $4,321 minus the money taken out of the defendant's paycheck, so plaintiff gets the $3,457.   

Edited August 25, 2022 by CrazyInAlabama

[CrazyInAlabama]

4 p.m. episodes-

First (2014)-

Caught on Tape! -Plaintiffs /former tenants Carrie and Derek McNerney suing defendant /landlord Annette Hancock  for breaking their lease and harassment.  Lease was for 1-year, signed by both parties, with security and first month, rent due date, and rent amount, so it’s valid. Plaintiffs and four kids moved in 1 June.

Then, defendant called wife and said as of 1 September that defendant and family would be moving back, and they should move to the small side of the house. Two days after tenants moved in, police showed up looking for defendant, because she didn’t have permission to leave the state (probation I guess).    Defendant refused to give 30-day notice to plaintiffs to move, and the end of September defendant showed up at the house.    

Plaintiffs say in the middle of the night, defendant was doing donuts in the yard, cutting off the house power. Tenants say landlord was a nightmare, and tried to drive them out of the house.   Police told defendant she had no right to get into the house, and if she broke in that they would charge her with home invasion.   Defendant agreed to live in the pole barn until she could give notice to tenants, and she could move back into the house.  

Defendant had no right to evict, since she hadn’t given 30-day notice to quit, and tenants were up to date on rent.    Plaintiffs received a HUD/VA voucher for Section 8, and defendant’s harassment kept up.  Defendant was living in the pole barn without water or electricity.   Plaintiffs have police report and video of strangers trying to cut the power off again.   The video of defendant doing donuts on the lawn, and is shown on camera threatening the tenants.

Defendant told to submit before and after photos, defendant told to stuff it.

Plaintiffs receive $5,000 for harassment and illegal eviction.   

Sucker Punch – Plaintiff Regina Larrie suing defendant Darren Harrington for assaulting her, after she pushed him away.  The litigants were at a small gathering at a friend's place, and plaintiff claims defendant touched her butt, and she pushed him away and told him not to touch her like that again.   Plaintiff claims defendant punched her in the face.   

Defendant says he never touched the plaintiff, but claims she was drunk and shoved him.   Defendant claims everyone at the party was drinking heavily, and he was the one assaulted, not plaintiff.   

$1500 for plaintiff for medical bills.  

Second (2014)-

Bonfire Damage -Plaintiff /father Rickey Foust Sr. is suing defendants (wife) Alyssa and Christopher Foust (son of plaintiff) were renting part of plaintiff’s house with wife, and their combined kids.    Plaintiff wants money for sold appliances, and back rent.    Plaintiff says defendant cut down a tree for a bonfire, and they used a log splitter that broke the sidewalk.   Defendants wanted to save money to get their own place.   Plaintiff says son didn’t give him any money from the multiple appliance sale. Plaintiff’s first wife, mother of Christopher, was a roommate with her husband, of plaintiff in plaintiff’s house.   So, first wife wanted son, wife, and children, to live with plaintiff in the house to save money.    

Plaintiff is doing odd jobs, and hasn’t worked at a truck driver for three years, and is applying for disability for mental issues.   However, plaintiff redid an entire kitchen for the plaintiff’s witness, so JJ says he’s not disabled.

Witness Robin McNew is a kitchen client of plaintiff’s handyman services.  Witness says defendant son wanted to sell appliances stored in father’s basement, and father agreed son would sell the appliance.    Plaintiff and others were moving out of the plaintiff’s house, and house was about to be foreclosed on.  Plaintiff claims son should pay for the sidewalk repairs at the house he no longer owns, but sidewalk was never repaired, and plaintiff can’t say how defendant is responsible for fixing the sidewalk.    

Plaintiff case dismissed.

Grand Dreams Disaster -Plaintiff Donna Carper suing defendant Bruce Kucera for a loan to move to Missouri.    Plaintiff lived in California, defendant lived in Nebraska, moved to Las Vegas, and then moved to California with her, and then she loaned defendant money to move back to Nebraska.

Defendant says it wasn’t a loan, for $2800, but an investment in his auto glass installation business.   Defendant says plaintiff was going to move to Nebraska to be with him, but only if he had a place to live, a permanent job, and other requirements.   Plaintiff did fly to Nebraska a couple of times to visit with defendant.

Plaintiff receives $2800 for the loans.

5 p.m. episodes-

First (2017)-

Grandparent Custody Shuffle-Plaintiffs Daniel and Beatrice Dela Rosa suing the father of daughter's child, Jose Martinez, for an unpaid loan for lawyer's fees.    Grandparents claim a loan to the father of their granddaughter, so defendant could get custody of child away from their daughter.  Daughter ran off with another boyfriend, and plaintiffs tried to get custody, and lawyer told them that they had no chance of getting custody, but the father of the baby did.   Plaintiffs gave defendant $3,500 for the attorney, and he received temporary custody of the baby.   The entire idea was to use the defendant, grandchild's father to get custody, and visitation.   Defendant offered every other weekend visits to the grandparents.   

Daughter broke up with the new boyfriend, and now has custody.    Daughter, and granddaughter must live with the grandparents for two years, and grandparents now want the money for the attorney back.      The entire custody issue was a scam by plaintiffs to get the grandchild.

Plaintiffs claim defendant signed a promissory note, and JJ tells the grandparents to stick it, and take it to Small Claims locally.    How is a dishwasher going to make $3500 to pay back the plaintiffs?

I'm hoping the local court tells plaintiffs to stuff it too. 

Dog Owners Must See TV! Warning!-Plaintiff Amy Hanna suing former friend, Tara Olson, for a loan to pay vet bills.    (Two litigants that need a good hairdresser for corrective dye jobs).     Plaintiff saw a social media posting about the defendant's dog being deathly ill, but had no money for vet bills.   Plaintiff said defendant should go to UC Davis vet school, and she would loan her the money for the 24 hour Vet Clinic there.    

Dog cost $350 off of Craigslist, and dog also had shots, at defendant's expense. Defendant finally took dog to vet   They tried one clinic, and plaintiff paid $250 at that one. Then they went to another vet.   The dog was  taken to plaintiff's regular vet, and had surgery.     It turned out the dog had many fragments of smoked cow bones in her stomach (the cow bones dry out and fragment in time), and had to have emergency surgery.     Defendant did tell Petco about the cow bone issue, and they didn't care, and now with national publicity they have to do something.

Plaintiff used her Care Credit for the surgery.  Vet bill $250 for the second vet, and $3181 for the surgery.     There are text messages from defendant saying she would pay back the plaintiff.    Defendant says she would put the dog down instead of pay over $3,000 for the dog's surgery.    The text messages say exactly the opposite.  

Plaintiff also watched the dog after surgery while the heartless defendant went on vacation (I wonder who paid for that trip?).

Plaintiff receives $3,300 for the two vet bills.   

Second (2017)-

Going, Going…Gone! -Plaintiffs Joseph Lackay, and friend Antoinette Baysah  suing defendant Lawrence Cassell over car they bought from defendant for $1,000 down, and $1200 owing. Defendant can go to car auctions, and was going to buy a vehicle for Ms. Baysah for $2200, with $1,000 down to defendant.    Plaintiff Lackay took possession of the car, on 26 or 27 December, and paid $1,000 first, and $2200 when he picked it up from the defendant.   Then Mr. Lackay took the car to a mechanic, and mechanic said car needed new transmission.    Plaintiff Lackay said defendant told him to leave the car keys with the mechanic, and defendant would pick it up, and find another car at the auction for plaintiff Baysah.   

Defendant says he has title for car, but doesn't have the car, or know where it is.  Defendant says car was towed off by mechanic, and went to impound.   Defendant says plaintiff Lackay paid the first $1,000 on the car after he already had the car, and defendant drove the car to plaintiff's house.   Then plaintiffs had the car, and paid the $1200 to defendant.    Defendant says plaintiffs had the car for a month, plaintiff says only two weeks, but the car was in plaintiffs' possession for a while.   Plaintiffs will not get $2200 refund.   Defendant purchased car at auction for $1800 plus fees.    Defendant offered a second car to plaintiffs, but they didn't return the first car.  However, defendant paid $1257 for the car at auction, but he purchased rims and paid state fees for the car.   

Plaintiff receives

Grandmother Payback?! -Plaintiff Melissa Daniels (SSMOT-Sainted Single Mother of Three) suing defendant Segonia Bradley (her son is father of plaintiff's three children).    Defendant took care of the plaintiff's three children for two months, and claims that should cancel the $700 loan from plaintiff for defendant to pay on a car, and there's another $1100 owed to plaintiff too.   Defendant had car for a year, but never paid on it, and she claims she took care of the three grandchildren for two months.

Defendant sold the car. 

Plaintiff receives $1800.   

[jww]

If a company promotes a worker to "supervisor"/"assistant manager" as a way to get around paying overtime, the workers duties have to actually match his job title.  Supervisors supervise and according to federal labor law cannot spend the majority of their time doing the same work of those who they supervise. They also have to have managerial duties such as hiring/firing workers.  In this case it is  hard to be a supervisor with no workers to supervise.  If it were not for this law a restaurant could make all their  workers  Assistant Manager of French Fries... and  work them 60 hours and not pay overtime.

[CrazyInAlabama]

4 p.m. episodes-

First (2014)-

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

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

Case was delayed from two weeks ago, because there was an outstanding warrant in Tennessee against the defendant over this case, but defendant lives in Indiana.    Plaintiff dropped the charges between two weeks ago, and court.   Plaintiff claims the local D.A. wouldn't pay to extradite the defendant, and he can get money from JJ and Officer Byrd.   

Defendant claims they didn't leave the plaintiff behind at the bar, and plaintiff was in the limo, crying and wanted to go home (That would cost $100 more, so they said no).  Defendant’s defense is that plaintiff touched or shoved him twice, and he barely hit the plaintiff.  (Defendant was previously arrested for aggravated DUI).

Plaintiff says defendant didn’t punch him, but put him in a headlock and broke his jaw in two places that way.  

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

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

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

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

$1100 to plaintiff for car

Second (2014)-

Baby Daddy Payback -Plaintiff/mother of child, Rachel and Barbara Fox, grandmother of child, suing defendant/father of child Robert “Price” Ricketts over a credit card bill.   The litigants have a child together. Plaintiff won’t let defendant see the child anyway, and says that’s her right as mother of the child.   

The three litigants were living together in the same house, and charges were on Barbara Fox’s credit card, while everyone was living together.  There is no statement that defendant ever saw showing zero balance on card.   The only time defendant had the physical possession of the credit card was when he spent $352 at the dentist for a broken tooth.    Every other time, Rachel Fox had the physical possession of the credit card.   

JJ rules that there was no contract for defendant to pay the bills, and separate 15 months of credit card statements to see who charged what at Burger King.

Plaintiff Rachel won’t let defendant see their child until he pays the credit card bill.   JJ tells plaintiff Rachel to take defendant to court for child support, and that she’s not getting the credit card bill paid.

There is also a dispute over a car motor, so plaintiff bought the motor, and after defendant put the motor in the car, plaintiff wanted to return the motor.   There is no contract between the litigants over the car motor.   

Litigants never married, so there is no marital debt.  

Plaintiff case dismissed.

Car Mileage Fraud? -Plaintiff/car buyer Brittany Jenkins suing defendant/car seller and mechanic, Justin McFalls over a car sale.   Plaintiff says ‘as is’ car croaked a few days after purchase, and defendant says that he sold the car for a friend, Ryan.    Plaintiff also says mileage was fraud, and car had a lot more miles on it than the odometer showed.   Plaintiff says because of the mileage fraud she can’t even register the car.   Advertised mileage was 92,000 miles, but plaintiff claims the mileage is many times the advertised mileage.   Car is a 98 Honda Civic EX, the ad says 92k miles, for $2500.  

Plaintiff says Carfax shows 311k mileage.    I’m wondering if that is before an engine change?   Since when is Carfax accurate?

Plaintiff gets her $2500 back, and defendant gets the car back if he picks it up in five days.

5 p.m. episodes-

First (2017)-

Take Your Anger Management Classes...or Else!-Plaintiff Crystal Benavidez bailed defendant /ex-boyfriend Richard Grieve for bail repayment, and her windshield.   After his arrest for $2815, after his arrest for disorderly conduct (plea bargained down to that).  Plaintiff felt sorry for him after his arrest after their fight.    Since defendant never took the anger management class, and so plaintiff's bail money is forfeited.   Defendant was seen banging on the car hood, and broke the windshield, and this is in the police report. 

Plaintiff claims the defendant broke her windshield.  Defendant admitted in police report that he grabbed the plaintiff by the shoulder and pulled her hair.    Defendant didn't realize that not taking anger management (now said on national TV, in front of 10 million of us), that the judge can issue a bench warrant, and have him arrested.  ( I need anger management, I want to take a big pair of pliers and rip that nose ring right out of his nose).   

Another witness that was driving by, that neither litigant knows, says he saw the defendant yelling at the driver in the car, pulled her hair, and punched the victim several times in the car, with his fists three to four times.   Defendant still says it's all a lie.  

Bail is $2815, so plaintiff gets that. 

Don't Let Friends Drive Your Car-Plaintiff  LaTrae Sarden bought a car, lost his license (either before or after he bought the car, he's very unspecific), and his mother wanted the car gone, so he stored it on defendant's mother's property.   Car was never titled by defendant.   Defendant Jonathan Williams agreed to have car parked on his mother's property for a while, but defendant was driving the car, had an accident, and paid plaintiff $1300 for the car. 

Defendant's mother got sick of car being there, after five or six months, so defendant sold the car for $300 to someone for parts, so he didn't need a title. 

Plaintiff gets $300 for the parts.  

Second (2017)-

Deployment, a Dead Dog, and a Crash? -Plaintiff Jesse Deleiko  rented a car for defendant/ex-girlfriend, Jerrica Duncan  because she couldn’t rent a car in her name (bad credit, and I bet, bad driving, plus she's 24, and you have to be 25 to rent a car), and he wants her to pay the lease breaking fee.    Plaintiff claims defendant wanted to move in with him so she would pay the break lease fee, but plaintiff says defendant would pay the break lease fee.    Defendant claims a miscarriage, that plaintiff's dog killed her dog, and then she moved out of the house right before court.  Defendant brought a child into this disgusting excuse for a relationship.    

Defendant is still married to her former/current husband, and tried to use the military deployment of her current husband to break the lease (it's legal, but not to lie about it, and the husband never lived in the apartment).   So, plaintiff is a disgusting Jody (ask someone who is military about that.   It's the guy (or girl) who's boinking your spouse while you're overseas fighting for your country). Rental car dismissed, because plaintiff didn't come to court with clean hands, by leasing the car for someone who couldn't qualify for the car rental.   This all happened in St. Louis County, and a few weeks ago, defendant moved to Florida.   Defendant owed $2,000 for the break lease fee on her previous apartment, and claims plaintiff would pay it.    Plaintiff negotiated the $3700 break lease fee down to $3000, and he paid it.  Defendant claims plaintiff broke into the son's toy room window, no police report. 

$3,000 for plaintiff.

Good Samaritan or Social Security Thief?!-Plaintiff Cindy Wilde has known defendant Ronald Cupp from grade school and high school, and she's suing him for stealing her social security money.   Plaintiff said man would hold her money for her, to avoid government limits on savings.    She finally received two lump sums, $2668, $2668, and $1,300, totaling $6500+.      Defendant has a letter stating he paid the attorney $500 to help with the process.   

Plaintiff gave the defendant $2400 to hold for her, so she could keep her bank accounts below the limit for SS (coming to court with dirty hands for the plaintiff).   

Woman was in a recovery center after surgery, then a shelter, then a rented room.      Defendant paid an attorney $500 to fight the woman's eviction (eviction happened).    Defendant bought a bed for the plaintiff, a computer tablet, a couple of burner phones.    

There is a $2,000 CD that will be transferred to plaintiff.   Defendant claims the $2400 was for the CD, and for the attorney.   Defendant tried to take care of plaintiff, but I think he's also a crook.   Defendant is an attorney too.  So JJ will give plaintiff money for hiding money from the government to qualify for social security payments.   (I'm confused, plaintiff says she's on state social security?  Maybe some kind of disability on a state pension system?   I never heard of that). 

$2,000 to plaintiff from the CD.  

Edited August 29, 2022 by CrazyInAlabama

[CrazyInAlabama]

4 p.m. episodes-

First (2014)-

Father Protects Drunk Daughter?  – Plaintiff /father Ron Pendley suing defendants daughter Rachel Penley and boyfriend Stephen Latting for unpaid damages, rent, and over an assault.  Plaintiff claims daughter was assaulted, and choked by boyfriend.      Defendants have a 2-year-old, and a 1-year-old together, during the drinking and argument, grandchildren were with Stephen’s parents.    This all happened on boyfriend’s birthday, they were both drinking a lot, and Rachel was drunk.    Then, plaintiff father claims defendant boyfriend assaulted the daughter, but boyfriend claims Rachel was very drunk, fell, and he was picking her up, not assaulting her.  

Rachel claims she was so drunk that she doesn’t remember the fight, just the father interceding.  

Plaintiff put up the security, utility deposits, and other expenses for the rental house defendants live in.

Assault is downplayed by defendant Latting, and plaintiff claims it was a violent assault.   Defendant Latting admits to shoving plaintiff, and putting him in a headlock or choke hold.   Photos of plaintiff after the assault are awful.  

Plaintiff receives $1,000 security deposit, $2500 for the assault, so $3500.   

Car-Kicking Tantrum    -Plaintiff/driver Scott Mason, and (wife and also on car title) Mary Mason suing defendant  Briana Gomez for a fender bender.   Plaintiff was driving, parked at a parking garage, defendant was driving a rental car, and defendant didn't take a damage waiver.   Defendant claims she was terrified of plaintiff, and plaintiff's little son was there too. 

Defendant was backing into the parking space next to plaintiff's car, and when plaintiff returned to his car there were two notes, one from Santa Monica Police department.  Plaintiff was cited for parking by backing into the parking space.   Defendant also backed into her space, then a passersby told her not to back into the space, or she would get a ticket, so reversed, and parked front way in.     Defendant is counter suing saying plaintiff threw a tantrum, and kicked her car.    

Defendant says plaintiff started screaming filth at her, in front of another police officer.  Defendant only had her Maryland car insurance, so that didn’t cover her in California.  Defendant didn’t get the damage waiver for the rent.     Plaintiff did receive a ticket for backing into the space, not parking front into the space, which is required.   

Defendant claims she didn’t hit the plaintiff’s car, and was terrified for her life, scared  of the plaintiff’s tantrum when she returned to the parking lot, and this was all right in front of a Santa Monica police officer.     If defendant is so innocent and didn’t hit the plaintiff’s car, then  how did the police officer, and plaintiff know she was driving a rental, had no damage waiver insurance, no valid insurance in California, and hit the plaintiff's car?      Defendant claims that in front of a police officer, that plaintiff kept calling her the b-word,

Plaintiff receives $1,096.  Defendant’s ridiculous claim dismissed. 

Second (2014)-

ATV Hit and Run -Plaintiff/home owner  Michael Kellem suing defendant/father Donald Reed of  two delinquent children for the children hitting plaintiff’s house, garage, and car with their ATV, and took off like little cowards.  There were two little boys on the offroad size ATV, and two other kids on a red Barbie car that stayed in the street.    The day in question the kids were alone on the ATV, and the others in the Barbie car.  Plaintiff was looking out his picture window, kids missed the cul-de-sac turn, slammed into the house right below the window plaintiff saw the event through.  Plaintiff was worried about the children being injured.     After the children ran the ATV into the house/garage/car, plaintiff saw the father sneaking up to the ATV, and telling the kids that they’re getting away now before they get caught.    Defendant dropped his jumper cables in plaintiff’s driveway, and plaintiff brought them to court to give to the defendant.  Plaintiff said he saw the defendant’s kids ram his garage door, which damaged the garage door, and the car inside the garage.     Then, plaintiff and a neighbor saw the defendant load the ATV into a F-150, and take the ATV away.  Garage door is a total loss.     

Plaintiff witness Loyce, didn’t know the plaintiff before this, she saw the ATV hit, saw the entire get away with defendant and his kids.  

Defendant lies to JJ, and says his kids weren’t home that day, and didn’t do it, he has three boys, ages 7, 6, and 5.  Defendant claims the plaintiff is a racist, his kids weren’t home that day, and everyone is out to get him.  

$1250 to plaintiff for garage door, and car damages.  (I really wish we had a video of this, it would have been so entertaining). 

Sugar in the Gas Tank Threat - Plaintiff Tameka Turner, is suing defendant /cousin Aliciea Davis, for repossessing her car.   Defendant let her sister-in-law drive her car, no license, and car was impounded.   Plaintiff would get car out of impound , and plaintiff would drive the car until defendant paid the impound fees off, but never did.   

Defendant took her car back, without paying the impound fees.  Defendant says plaintiff sugared her gas tank that night.   Plaintiff says car was impounded, and repo'd at the same time, because plaintiff says defendant was behind on car payments.   Impound fees, and two payments equaled $1198.

Defendant says because she argued with plaintiff the night before, that plaintiff put the sugar in the gas tank.    Defendant's witness is such a liar, and was the accomplice to stealing the car back.  

$1198 to plaintiff.  For the impound and car payments.

5 p.m. episodes-

First (2017)-

Daisy Duke Spin Out! -Plaintiff Brett Dejong suing his ex-girlfriend Trena Roberts over the damages to his truck, and punitive charges for false charges.       Plaintiff painted the defendant's car (while they were still a couple), and he wants $700 for the paint job.   Before the car was painted, the two were still in a relationship, and she says he painted the car because he threw rocks at her front and rear window, and chipped the paint with rocks.   However, the plaintiff says he threw the rocks, because when she leaves his gravel driveway she hauls out like Daisy Duke, on the Dukes of Hazzard.     Defendant filed a domestic battery complaint against plaintiff, which became a protective order.   The rock throwing happened months before the repainting.   So if she was so afraid of him, why would she want him to paint her truck?  

Plaintiff says she sprayed him with gravel from the driveway, and he threw the rocks, and admits he broke her back window.   Also, plaintiff says she assaulted him, not the other way around.  Plaintiff posted ten flyers around the neighborhood saying defendant is a felon, with her picture.   Plaintiff claims the nasty text messages were actually spoofed by the defendant.     Plaintiff claims he gave the car buffer back to defendant.     

There was an outstanding warrant, so the police arrested the man, right as he finished the paint job.

The stupid cases by both litigants are dismissed, because they're ridiculous. 

Vacation Nightmare-Plaintiff Pamela Palitz  suing vacation landlords Jack and Michelle Dockery  for appliance repairs, the cost of groceries, and lack of peaceful enjoyment of premises.   Property is in Ocean City, NJ, and is a vacation rental.     Plaintiff says she paid to fix the refrigerator in the rental.   

Plaintiff rented for a week, for nine people to stay in the vacation rental.    Also, the defendants only own the bottom floor of the duplex, and plaintiff is complaining that the upstairs unit was being remodeled, and ruined her peaceful enjoyment for the week.    Plaintiff didn't tell the defendants about the 7 a.m. construction start for the upstairs unit, so how were they supposed to talk to the upstairs owners to please start later in the morning?    

Peaceful enjoyment is dismissed, because the upstairs unit construction wasn't known to the defendants, and they had no knowledge it was going on, or control over it (upstairs unit is owned by another family, and they were remodeling it).     

Plaintiff says when she went to the unit, she put everything in the fridge, and by the next morning her food was spoiled.   Plaintiff called a refrigerator repairman, he said it would come to fix fridge for $416, cash only.   Fridge repair was $482 total.     Defendant husband finally texted back, and said pay for the repair, and we'll reimburse you.   

Also, there was supposed to be another fold out bed (I think it was one of the foldout chair type), and it was missing, so defendant husband told woman to get an air mattress, and he would reimburse her for that.   (Do the defendants ever talk to each other?).

$482 for the fridge repair, and groceries.  Don't know why JJ didn't give the woman money for the air mattress, unless plaintiff took it with her. 

Second (2017)-

Introducing...the Attacking Chiweenie!-Plaintiffs Bridget Mack suing defendants Michelle and Frank (Francisco) Herrera over their Chiweenie (Chihuahua/Dachshund mix) chasing their child, and biting him.   This is immortalized on video.   However, why was plaintiff's kid in the defendant's yard, and why isn't the yard fenced?    Unless the mobile home park doesn't allow fences?    Defendant has one Chiweenie, a mutt, and two Chihuahuas.   Plaintiff mom's left arm tattoo is blurred. 

Plaintiff kid Malick comes to the witness chair of Justice, to tell JJ about the attack, but he doesn't remember the attack.  

Defendant's son Skyler Herrera, is testifying, and says he was out with one Chiweenie, and the mutt (he keeps looking to Mom to be coached).  Defendant says he was walking the two dogs in the back yard, and the Chiweenie escaped.    Video shows three dogs chasing Malick, and chasing him home, and him running, and trying to climb the trash cans by his own porch, then out of camera range a dog bites him, and the kid escapes and runs home.

Defendant also says the plaintiff kid was teasing her dogs, in her yard, and that's why the dog bit him.     Defendant mother is such a liar.  

Medical bills are submitted by plaintiff.   Plaintiff had no health insurance.   $821 are the medical bills, and defendant said he would pay the bills, and then refused.    Defendant says she never saw the video before, and she's disgusting.   I hope the mobile park evicts the defendants.  

Plaintiff says defendants never said anything about her son teasing the dogs every day, so maybe if they were so worried about the dogs being teased defendants would have complained to plaintiff.  Plaintiff also says her son doesn't go into defendant's yard or around the dogs any more.  

Plaintiff receives $821 for the medical bills. 

Expensive Hobby, Supportive Wife-Plaintiff Gerrud Greaux suing mechanic John Gonzalez for the money he paid to repair an old VW bus, $6,000.  This is his hobby, but it's his money (JJ was saying his wife must be very supportive of his hobby, I bet he makes a bundle on redoing, and flipping vintage vehicles).   Plaintiff buys antique VWs, restores them, and sells them.     

Plaintiff gave $6,000 to defendant to restore the VW Bus, after seeing the work the plaintiff did (The total bill to restore the outside, sand blast and repaint and other work was supposed to add up to $11,000).      Defendant lost his shop, and the VW bus disappeared.    VW was sent to sand blaster shop, and defendant claims he told the plaintiff where to pick it up, but he's lying. Defendant's phone was stolen, so he has no proof of anything.   

Then the van disappeared, and plaintiff sent out an alert on Facebook, looking for the van, and it had been sold by the sand blaster, because they didn't know who owned it, for $3500.  Someone told him who bought the van, and plaintiff had to buy it back for $3500. 

Plaintiff receives $5,000 (still short 4500).  

Edited August 30, 2022 by CrazyInAlabama

[CrazyInAlabama]

4 p.m. episodes-

First (2014)-

Child Support Sleuth -Plaintiff Destinee Edwards suing defendant Steven Oaks over property he took with him when he moved out.     Plaintiff kept a bunch of defendant’s property, and wants property she claims defendant stole from her when he moved out.    Defendant took the bedroom set (left the mattress), dining set, washer/dryer, TV, couch, loveseat, and other furniture, but left the baby’s crib.    They had a joint bank account.

Defendant admits he took more than half of the furniture, but he claims he sold the stuff he took on craigslist.    JJ doesn’t believe defendant sold everything he took with him. 

JJ gets plaintiff’s social security number, and employer for the child support proceedings.

Defendant lives with his uncle, plaintiff’s witness is defendant’s aunt, married to the uncle.  Aunt throw’s defendant under Officer Byrd’s bus, and says a bunch of stuff was moved into the uncle’s shed, but it’s gone now. 

Foolish plaintiff also paid the down payment on defendant’s 2013 Chevy Cruz.   

Plaintiff gets $1500 for the stuff defendant took, and sold on craigslist.

Maltipoo Attack!  -Plaintiff Toni Carranza suing for damages from defendant/dog owner Mara Foley’s Maltipoo attacking her.   Plot twist, defendant brought a black dog to court, and claims that’s the dog that barely touched plaintiff.   Plaintiff says it was a white dog that bit her. 

Plaintiff says defendant claimed her dogs had their shots.  Defendant claims it’s plaintiff’s fault that her dog will be put down after another bite, and says plaintiff put her family through emotional distress.  

Plaintiff still has a scar.  Three weeks later the puncture wound still hurt.   Defendant refused to keep in contact with the plaintiff, or respond.    The defendant claims the plaintiff was trespassing on defendant’s property, attacked the dogs, and got bitten. 

The attacking animal was just recently adopted, so I’m wondering about a previous attack record?  Plaintiff made an animal control report, and biting dog was quarantined.   

$1500 to plaintiff.   

Second (2014)-

Expert Car Crasher -Plaintiff/car owner Terrea Hardin suing defendant/ex-boyfriend Alan Younger for damages to plaintiff’s car when he allowed another woman to drive it.   Defendant is accused of crashing three of plaintiff’s cars.   

They were together for three years, and defendant totaled plaintiff’s Lexus, second car was a Chevy Impala, also totaled.    Third car was also totaled, it was a Jeep.   Defendant driving to get food for plaintiff’s six-year-old, at 11:30 p.m.    So, defendant left in plaintiff’s car, to go to McDonald’s, and defendant saw a friend, and picked her up from her house.    Plaintiff was asleep, and defendant left a 10-year-old and 6-year-old alone, to go to Mickey D’s.   When defendant went to THOT’s house, he claims girlfriend was going to buy it, so he let her drive the car, and she totaled it.  

In the police report it says defendant’s friend was driving it, and now he tries to tell JJ he was driving the car.   However, defendant’s police statement says girlfriend was driving the car.  

Plaintiff and defendant broke up after this.  Defendant says he did a lot of Dad Work at the house, and put gas in the car, so that’s just like he owned the Jeep.

Plaintiff gets $4500.

Wedding Rush   -Plaintiff/former roommate Chelsea Roberts suing defendant /former roommate Sylvia Jackson, for not repaying a loan to go to defendant sister’s last-minute wedding, car damages, and unpaid rent.    The two women were on the lease, with a third roommate, plaintiff and her witness still live in the apartment, defendant moved out early.    Defendant owes two month’s rent, $650 each month, and $325 for January and February (so she could vacation in January, and two friends of plaintiff lived in the fourth bedroom).   $1950 unpaid rent, total.    The loan wasn't a lump sum, so that's dismissed.  Defendant was saving up for a vacation, so she shorted the rent. 

Plaintiff had friends coming to visit, and defendant offered to be the designated driver, in plaintiff's car.   Defendant went driving the manual shift car, drove around to practice, then defendant rammed the parking stop at the apartment, and the oil pan was ripped off.

Sorry JJ, but in my opinion, defendant drove the manual shift for 30 minutes before this happened, she knew how to drive it.  I bet defendant mixed up the brake and the gas. 

Sister's wedding loan was $98.00 to defendant.   Defendant blames the wedding trip on the plaintiff.    

Plaintiff receives $1950 for unpaid rent, plus $98, for a total of $2017 with the wedding loan.  

5 p.m. episodes-

First (2017)-

Suicide, Sadness, and Life Insurance?  - Plaintiff Neva Miller suing her late grandson's former fiance Shelby Morrison for the cost of her grandson's headstone.   Grandmother is suing because she wants some hideously expensive, elaborate headstone.    The grandmother didn't even see grandson very often.   Grandmother took out insurance policies on all of her grandsons, and grandmother paid the premium, with herself as beneficiary.   Then grandson became engaged to the defendant, and the grandmother made the defendant the beneficiary.    

Grandson died, policy paid $10,000 in the first payment, and two years later there will be $5,000 more.   However, fiance received $10,000, and paid for the funeral for $6300.    Defendant says the second payment won't be applied for, because there’s too much upset over it.    Grandmother wanted defendant to pay for some extra headstone to make grandmother happy.   

Grandmother claims she told the defendant that defendant would pay for the funeral, and headstone that grandmother wanted, out of the funeral payout defendant received.   Grandmother says the headstone was paid for by a family friend, and misspelled the last name of the deceased.     Defendant submits pictures of the original, and the corrected one (Siebenmorgen is the last name, I've never seen that last name before).     There is a headstone on the grave now.   Grandmother is whining because headstone was gifted by someone.  Maybe no one told the Grandmother you don't put the headstone down until the ground settles.    Plaintiff denies the tombstone was corrected, but she only went to the cemetery once after the funeral.   

The headstone was corrected but and grandmother still wants another one.  Grandmother denies the headstone is corrected.  Grandmother still wants the headstone corrected, but the mistake was fixed, the full name is one there, but grandmother wants all kinds of additional stuff on there. 

Defendant in hall-terview says she's had death threats, all kinds of nasty remarks from the grandmother, and some of her relatives. I hope the defendant is doing better since this case aired. 

Case dismissed.   Case is pointless. 

Move to Ohio Fail!  -Plaintiff Sydney Woods suing former boyfriend Sean Smith over move expenses, truck fees, and lease breaking fees for a move to Ohio from North Carolina.   The litigants have a baby, and both had good jobs in NC, but moved to Ohio for a better job for defendant, and he had move fees paid to him by the employer ($5,000).     Then everything went boom, and they split up.   Move costs were $550, but plaintiff claims defendant paid none of it.    Plaintiff paid the $300 security deposit, and $250 for the U-Haul.

Plaintiff was only in Ohio for six weeks.   With the $5,000 move bonus ($3,000 after taxes), defendant paid first month, security fee, and other costs.   They moved in 1 November, officially, and when December came around no one paid the rent.    Defendant paid the truck payment, bought a washer and dryer, paid the utility deposits, and paid off another bill he had.

Plaintiff also wanted her own car, and they argued about that.   This was so they didn't have to share one car.  However, defendant says plaintiff doesn't have a driver's license.     Plaintiff says defendant told her to leave, and she arranged with a family friend to take her back to NC.    After plaintiff left, defendant moved out because he couldn't afford the townhouse on his salary alone.    That leads to the issue over the lease breaking fee.  

As JJ says, the lease breaking fee will be garnished from both litigants' wages.

$550 moving fees to plaintiff, and that's it.

Second (2017)- In my opinion this is one of the most bizarre cases ever on this show. 

Dial 911 for Murder?!-Plaintiff Ashely Jensen suing defendant / former landlord Eula Compton for unlawful eviction, harassment, one month's rent returned.      One time, landlord called police, and said tenant had been murdered.  When police came to check, tenant was fine, and landlady was smelling strongly of alcohol.      Plaintiff moved in July, and in September landlord claimed plaintiff stole a laptop (iMac) that came in the mail.   In November, plaintiff was accused of stealing some Halloween decorations.    Landlord says she never asked the tenant about thefts.     On December 7 plaintiff's boyfriend stayed overnight.   On December 7 they had a minor verbal spat, over Mr. Grady (boyfriend) watching too much porn on his phone.   David Ridenhauer, defendant's boyfriend adds nothing to the case. 

On December 8, at 7 p.m. defendant called the police, and said tenant was murdered (plaintiff's witness is a Sheriff's Deputy), however, police records say defendant called police about 9:30 a.m., and first officer came at 10 a.m., and witness came second at 1 p.m.    Police report says plaintiff hadn't paid her rent for that month, hadn't been seen in weeks, and her boyfriend had killed her, and defendant said there was a lot of blood in the apartment, and a dead body.    Police found defendant drunk at the 1 p.m. visit, and the plaintiff was fine, and at work.   

Plaintiff moved out after the police visits, and wants her rent back. because of harassment from the landlord.   Landlord denies drinking in the morning, which is obviously a lie.  Plaintiff submits notes from defendant, after giving her a 30-day notice, and rented to another person that already wanted to move into plaintiff's apartment.   Defendant also claims plaintiff's boyfriend broke a chair in the hall, which he denies.    Plaintiff didn't get $25 check fee from security deposit.    

Plaintiff receives the $30 from security back, and the last month's rent.   $425, plus $1450 including $1000 for harassment. 

Unfit for Children?! -Plaintiff Erica Prater suing defendant Miranda Grasper for four month’s rent, and property that was destroyed ($3,000).    Plaintiff and child or children, moved back in with her mother.  Plaintiff left the townhouse, but still paid defendant four month’s rent, but defendant wasn't paying the rent.  Defendant was evicted for non-payment of rent.   Defendant moved back in with her mother too.    

Plaintiff left furniture behind, instead of getting a storage unit.  But when defendant was evicted, the furniture disappeared. 

Case dismissed for lack of proof, and credibility.

[CrazyInAlabama]

4 p.m. episodes-

First (2014)-

Babysitting Danger -Plaintiff /former nanny Kara Simpson suing defendant/father of kids Matthew Ellwood for unpaid babysitting fees.     Plaintiff was nanny/babysitter for defendant’s two children.   Children are 5 -years-old, and 20 months-old.    When defendant’s ex, mother of kids, she smelled pot on nanny, she reported it to CPS.    Plaintiff only babysat for five days total, for $100 a day.   Plaintiff claims she babysat for 8 days, which turns out to be 6 days.          Defendant claims plaintiff was reported to CPS for smoking Weed by his ex-wife, mother of kids.    Defendant claims after he fired her, she called and texted over 40 times to demand her money, showed at his house high on meth (or is it stoned?).

The last day the plaintiff was supposed to get paid, she didn’t take her $20 stroller.  But both CPS, and police showed up after she left because of the CPS report about Weed use.    Later, when plaintiff showed to get her money, defendant says she was high on meth, and claims she admitted it. 

$140 for plaintiff. 

Horse Lands in Pool -Plaintiff Deborah and John Adent suing defendant /horse owner Howard Delaney over defendant’s horse ending up in plaintiff’s pool after a bad wind storm.  Defendant says the previous owners at plaintiff’s home took down the chain link fence, and put up a privacy fence instead, and the wooden fence was the one that failed during the wind storm.   So, no fence around the pool, or on the fence line, means horse ended up in the pool.  

Plaintiff’s privacy fence was the one that failed, and blames defendant for the horse wandering.    This is in Washington, which is a fence in state, meaning the animal owner is responsible to fence their animals in.  However, plaintiffs made no effort to fix the wooden fence, and after fence was blown down, they did nothing.     The fence failing was an Act of God, and not defendant’s fault, or his fence.    However, I think defendant should put up a fence slightly on his side of the property line, to keep his horse or horses in, so one doesn’t get out on the road, or fall in the pool again.  

Defendant in the hall-terview says the plaintiffs actually took down his temporary fence when he was building a permanent fence, and didn’t bother to tell him they were removing the fence, so horse got out again.  Defendant also says plaintiffs are suing the neighbor on the other side about something also.

Plaintiffs’ case dismissed.

Second (2014)-

Property Held Hostage -Plaintiffs (partners) Clinton Casidy and Brandon Bach, suing defendant James Casidy Jr (Clinton’s Cousin), for selling their truck and its contents without their permission.  Defendant sold truck for $500, and wants his property back.  Counter suit from defendant is for his property back, that Clinton has it.   Clinton went out of town, and added defendant cousin James to the title, and that legally made truck defendant’s property to sell.   All three litigants have a storage unit, with all of their property in the unit, and it’s in Brandon’s name, and it’s been rented for 11 months.    The truck in question is a 1986 model. 

Defendant sold the truck, and will only give the information about the buyer or the money for the truck, after he gets his property in the storage unit back. 

JJ says for plaintiffs to get the $500 for the truck, and then defendant will get his stuff back from the storage unit.   Or plaintiffs will sell defendant’s property.   

Defendant claims his property is worth more than $500.   

Decision is $500 for truck to plaintiffs, and they all go storage together, and defendant gets his stuff.

Defendant refuses to agree to this, so plaintiffs are told to sell defendant’s stuff that is in the storage unit.

Brothers and Bail Money -Plaintiff/brother Jamerson Ferrell suing defendant/brother Chammoco “Chaco”  Ferrell for repayment of bail money for a domestic violence charge.

Plaintiff wired the money to the defendant’s girlfriend, because you had to pay in person at the jail.   Girlfriend Jennifer is not the mother of any of his five children.   Bail money was taken for back child support, so plaintiff brother had to pay $2676 to get defendant out of jail.  Charges were later dropped by the victim.   Plaintiff would have received the bail money back, except for the back child support owed by the defendant. 

In his lying sworn statement, defendant swears the plaintiff brother paid the bail in person at the jail, but plaintiff lives 1500 miles away (this happened in South Dakota).

Plaintiff gets his $2676 back, and not even a thank you from his rotten brother. Plaintiff swears he done with defendant, and he’ll never talk to him again.

5 p.m. episodes-

First (2017)-

Tree-Killing Mystery-Plaintiff William Giboyeaux suing defendant/landscaper Richard Gutierrez, Sr for chopping down the plaintiff's two huge trees.  Defendant was hired to trim Crepe Myrtles (hopefully not butchered in the way we call Crepe Murder in the South).   Plaintiff has a 'before' picture of the front of his house with two big lovely trees (Crepe Myrtles) that need trimming, and there is also one tree in the back yard that needed trimming.   Litigants agreed to $150 to trim the two trees in front.  The plaintiff wanted the two trees trimmed, but instead the defendant chopped the two trees down.   Plaintiff denies he wanted the trees chopped down, or ever said anything but 'trim' to the defendant.  

Receipt says $150 to trim and stack (put branches in the back yard for later removal), instead the defendant chopped the entire trees down to the ground, and defendant wrote cut down to the ground.  

The after picture is awful, the two trees that were taller than the house, are now two stumps, barely above the ground.   (No one would take down, and stack two trees of that size, and call it anything but 'tree removal'.    A lot of places you have to get a permit to remove trees, and you would have to pay a lot more than $150 total for two big trees to be removed.)  

JJ simply doesn't realize that at worst, bad landscapers chop Crepe Myrtles back to a central, naked trunk (called Crepe Murder), but should trim them back a foot or two, and remove the lower branches.  

JJ says it was miscommunication, not incompetence.   It will cost a lot of money, and take many years for two new Crepe Myrtles to grow to that size.   So, getting someone who was working on the neighbor's yard to do your trees, and trying to save some money, backfired.    

Case dismissed.  

You Just Don't Get it!-Plaintiff Arlena Jones suing former friend Kristen Garcia for unpaid car payments, ruined credit, and car damage.   Plaintiff wanted a bigger car, so she sold the car to defendant for taking over the payments.  Defendant only made one payment, didn't pay the next two months, so plaintiff repossessed the car.   Car still had payments left on the note.   Defendant owes $638 for two months payments.    Car would have been paid off in a year.  

Plaintiff's mechanic witness is her husband, so he's dismissed.   Plaintiff claims she had to replace the motor in the car.  

Defendant claims she pre-paid six months of insurance, and wants that money refunded to her, and claims she was harassed.  Defendant claims she made one of the missed car payments, but has no proof.

$638 to plaintiff for two missed payments.

School Bus-Driving Mom Sues Son!?-Plaintiff Leslie Liston suing her son Marcus Cardoza for a loan made to buy a truck.    $1400 remains on the truck loan, which the defendant/son stopped paying.  Defendant was unemployed at the time of the truck purchase, and defendant lived with her, and he's still unemployed.     Son and mother argued, and son moved out and is couch surfing now.    

$1400 for plaintiff mother.   

Second (2017)-

Kennedy Assassination Translation fail!  -Plaintiff / translator Jose Carneiro suing defendant/author David Nolan Sr. for not paying him for translating the defendant's Kennedy assassination book into Portuguese.    Defendant's book is fiction about Lee Harvey Oswald surviving Jack Ruby's attempt to kill him, and the trial that would have happened.    Defendant claims plaintiff would be paid 50/50 from the profits of the book sales for the Portuguese edition.   (Book is titled Trial of Lee Harvey Oswald, and is available in English on Amazon, and maybe other sites). 

There are no other translations, and defendant said the translator should publicize the book too.  When plaintiff finished the translation, he sent defendant the bill, and defendant refused to pay ($4828 was the bill for the translation). 

JJ says there is no contract between the two men.    Interesting, because defendant is a former attorney in the Reagan Administration, so no contract is bizarre.

JJ says since defendant doesn't have the Portuguese translation, then plaintiff should sell him the book he translated, if the defendant wants the book.   Defendant says he doesn't want the book, so plaintiff did this for nothing.  

Case dismissed.  

Boiling Water Fight-Plaintiff Angel Navarro is suing his brother, Jose Sanchez, for medical bills, and punitive damages, from a fight a year ago, when the plaintiff claims his brother threw boiling water on him.    Plaintiff and defendant had an argument over the plaintiff's missing cigarettes (plaintiff says the defendant's friend stole cigarettes, and other items from the home).  Plaintiff, and the litigants' mother live in the house together.   Plaintiff went to take a nap, then defendant decided to boil some eggs, and plaintiff gets up from his nap, goes in the kitchen, tells defendant his friend isn't welcome at the house where plaintiff and their mother live.   

Plaintiff told defendant to leave the house after defendant was threatening him.    Then, when plaintiff went to open the door, defendant threw boiling water on plaintiff's back, and he was taken to the ER, and released a few hours later.   Plaintiff had second degree burns on his back, and now has medical bills coming in from the ER visit.  Defendant says that brother attacked him, and he pushed him away, and the plaintiff hit the stove, and when he hit the pot of boiling water, it turned over on plaintiff's back. 

Defendant says they argued, and plaintiff grabbed his wrists, (demonstrated on a very unhappy looking Officer Byrd), claims the brother caused the water to turn over.  So how did that turn into boiling water on the back?   Plaintiff says when he turned his back on defendant, that defendant threw the boiling water on his back. 

$5,000 to plaintiff.

[CrazyInAlabama]

4 p.m. episodes-

First (2014)-

Dehydrated Defendant -Plaintiff Pearline Williams-White suing defendant/ex-boyfriend Tommy Hughes for return of their two cars, that are both in her name.   The litigants are now split up, and fighting over two cars.  Cars were put in plaintiff’s name, and she wants both cars, but defendant paid for both cars, and plaintiff has the title and tags to both cars.   Defendant wants the titles to register the cars in his name, and defendant has the two cars.   2006 GMC Envoy, and a Honda Accord are the vehicles in question.  Defendant keeps chugging the “Water that Should not be Drunk”.

Defendant says he already has three cars in his name, but still wants the other two cars.

JJ tells the defendant which of the two cars each one wants.

Plaintiff wants the Mercedes, not the Honda, but she’s getting the Honda, and defendant gets the Envoy, if plaintiff gives the signed title to defendant.

Plaintiff gets the 1999 Honda, and $1500.   Defendant will put plaintiff and her daughter’s clothes in the Honda when he turns it over.  (A complication is plaintiff lives in Virginia, and defendant lives in Alabama, so defendant will figure out how to get the car to her).

Lethal Lemon -Plaintiff /ex-girlfriend Jessica Tidwell suing defendant/ex-husband Ed Sprague and his former employer Kenneth Schoeff over a lemon car they sold her.   Car was defendant Schoeff’s car, and 13 years old, and had 147,000 miles with a rebuilt engine in it.    Ex-husband isn’t really a proper defendant, just Schoeff.    

Plaintiff thinks a 13-year-old car will never have an issue.    JJ is upset that Schoeff doesn’t work, but he has kidney disease, heart disease, and a few other things.   There is no written guarantee on the car. Plaintiff doesn’t have a bill of sale for the car, and didn’t have the car evaluated by a mechanic before buying the car.  

Plaintiff case dismissed. 

Second (2014)-

Ailing Uncle Going Blind -Plaintiff /uncle Richard Granado suing defendant/niece Mellisa Wada for illegal eviction, and theft of property she kept after she evicted him.   Uncle lived with niece for over a year, and paid nothing.  Defendant is counter suing uncle for invasion of privacy, unpaid rent, and damages to her property.   

Uncle moved in with niece when he found his wife was screwing niece’s mother’s husband (niece’s mother is plaintiff’s sister, to put it better, uncle’s wife was screwing his sister’s husband), and the wife was divorced.    Plaintiff is on disability, for about $700 a month.   

Defendant says agreement was $250 twice a month rent ($500 a month).   When niece found out that uncle couldn’t pay the rent, and so she wanted $200 or $300 a month, and use his EBT card (food stamps on debit card), to help the household. 

Defendant did not do a legal eviction, even though uncle didn’t pay rent.  

Defendant says plaintiff took all of his property with him when he moved out.  However, an email from niece says she’s storing items for uncle. 

Plaintiff gets $0, and will pick up the stuff in bins at defendant’s house, in the next five days or it can be dumped.

Bahamas Cruise Crisis -Plaintiff Ginny Faint suing defendant Kim Smith for $478.30, over a trip plaintiff paid for to the Bahamas.  Defendant belongs to a travel club, and plaintiff was going to pay for both of their trips, and did.  

However, defendant says she paid all of the expenses, and wants her money repaid.   Plaintiff didn’t go on the trip, and so both tickets were paid for by plaintiff, and defendant never paid for her ticket.   Defendant says the trip was $69 each, but there were port fees, and other items.  

However, defendant went on trip with her fiance, but plaintiff didn’t go.  

Plaintiff paid $69 to defendant.    Plaintiff claims price of trip went from $69 to over $200, claims she paid defendant $478.

Plaintiff case dismissed. 

5 p.m. episodes-

First (2017)-

Duplex Confusion-Plaintiff Nicole Edwards suing former roommate/defendant Wendy Halligan-Douglas, for security deposit from a rental they shared two years ago, and money paid towards a bill.  Plaintiff, her mother, and one child lived in the duplex for 2 1/2 years, then defendant moved in.    Plaintiff's mother was the signatory on the lease, and paid the security deposit.   Defendant moved in during June, and but went on the lease two months later.  Plaintiff's mother moved out, and defendant was living in one or two bedrooms of the duplex.    A year later plaintiff moved out, and defendant stayed, with her husband, and child.    

The damages are each blamed on the other litigant.   When plaintiff moved out, she claims she had a walk through with the landlord, but has no paperwork.     At that point plaintiff should have asked for her security back, and defendant would have had to pay the security deposit.    The utility bills are submitted, and plaintiff claims she put bill in her own name, after defendant didn't pay.     However, defendant has utility bills in her own name, or husband's, to keep the utilities on.  Plaintiff doesn't have a bill for utilities in her own name, or any proof of payment.  

Defendant called CPS about drunken, drugged plaintiff, and her child neglect.

Plaintiff is told to go back to her local court (Sacramento, CA) for the security deposit.  

Uber Roommate Argument-Plaintiff  Rami Shawjrawi suing former roommate/defendant Feras Babeyeh for a loan to pay off credit card debt, and utility bills.    Credit card was paid off before defendant moved into the apartment.   Defendant paid off $1165 for the credit card bills, but defendant claims he was letting plaintiff use his car for Uber (only for three weeks).  Plaintiff bought beds for both when they moved into the house.  Defendant claims he was going to let the plaintiff use his car for six months, but it turned out to be three weeks.   

When defendant moved out, he left the bed behind that plaintiff paid for.   Plaintiff admits he had the bed, that costs $558, and plaintiff left the bed behind   Plaintiff paid off the defendant's credit card debt, so the defendant could refinance the car loan, and in return plaintiff would drive the car for Uber.    Plaintiff was also put on the defendant's car insurance.   

Plaintiff is a grad student working on his Ph. D.      However, he's never been an Uber driver. 

$1165 for the credit card pay off.  

Second (2017)-

Home for Eight Children-Plaintiff/landlady Deborah Evans is suing former tenant Pauletta Davis for damages to rental property, utility bills, and a stolen phone.   Defendant moved in with her eight children, and husband, and blames the damages on the children.   $1595 was rent, $1595 was security, but only paid a little over $1200 (It was under Section 8, but defendant has to pay the security deposit).      

 There are giant holes in the walls, lots of trash in the house.   Defendant says the plaintiff had a problem with the kids, ranging from 4 to 15.     Defendant says plaintiff would come to the house at 6 a.m., and lock the children outside all day.    Plaintiff bought the house in 1991, lived there until 2009, her son lived there for a while, and then she rented it out after remodeling the house.   Plaintiff says she bought for $41k and sold in 2017 for $190k, (reduced from $200k for the damages), and rented it out for seven years.  

As JJ says, plaintiff was getting the full rent from Section 8, but still told defendant to leave.   Plaintiff wanted the defendant, husband, and eight children out because of damages to house, fence, yard, etc.    There are tons of junk outside the garage, and in the yard, including tires.   Interior damages are huge holes in the walls, and the pictures of the yard and house trash are appalling.     The children regularly played basketball in the house.     Defendant claims she had to fix all of the damage to qualify for another Section 8 home.    

Defendant says she didn't have any supervision for her eight kids, so they destroyed the house.   Tenants only lived in house for 14 months, and claims she was homeless when she moved out, and pays $1500 a month for her children to stay in a motel room.   Plaintiff did not bring receipts to fix damages in the house.  Plaintiff's husband fixed the damages in the house.   Plaintiff sold the house after this, and had to reduce the sale price by $10,000 to the buyer for damage repairs.    

Case is dismissed, there were few repairs done, and no receipts.    Plaintiff has utility bills she paid that defendant didn't pay (but no receipts for payments).   Plaintiff wants to be paid for a cell phone she claims defendant, or her children stole from her. 

Both cases are dismissed.   Plaintiff sold the property, and defendant trashed the place, so she's not getting her security deposit back.   (I hope plaintiff's new landlord saw this show, and where ever her out of control kids are staying).  Defendant's moving fees aren't getting paid by Officer Byrd either. 

(Why do landlords ever come on this show?  Or The People's Court either? They must think it will be the one time the judge sides with the landlord, but it very rarely is.)

Widow Payback?!-Plaintiff Karen Midthun suing her late cousin's widower, Dillon Staley for an unpaid car loan.   Defendant's late wife was diagnosed with a terminal disease at 19 or 20, and died not too long later.   Plaintiff co-signed on the loan (defendant, and his late wife are both young, and had a child) for a car, and after the wife died, the defendant couldn't pay for the loan.     

Defendant couldn't afford the payments, so dropped the car at the bank, and it was sold at auction, with a deficit.     Defendant was the primary, and the bank (it actually was a repossession) should have garnished the defendant's wages.     Defendant had the car for 2 years, and he and his new girlfriend have an F-150 (apparently, he has the one truck, and there are more).     The bank notice came to the defendant's address, and he ignored it, and the bank went after the co-signer plaintiff. 

In the hall-terview defendant says he's not in contact with his wife's aunt because she doesn't come around, and doesn't like his new girlfriend.  Plaintiff says the defendant certainly found a new girlfriend quickly, and she disapproves of the way they're carrying on. $5,000 to plaintiff.     (I hope this was the total shortfall). 

Edited September 5, 2022 by CrazyInAlabama

[CrazyInAlabama]

4 p.m. episodes-

First (2014)-  

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

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

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

Plaintiff receives $5,000. 

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

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

Plaintiff receives $2350

Second (2014)-

Handshake Deal Gone Bad -Plaintiffs /former roommates Bradley VanBindsburger and Alexandra Baker-Murray suing defendants/former roommates Matthew Boles and McKenna Pettyjohn for identity theft, unpaid utilities.    Plaintiff owned a house, defendant male rented a room, then the girlfriends moved in, so defendants moved to the back house.     Defendants were supposed to pay utilities for the back house, defendants claim they paid, and plaintiff man says they didn’t and owe, $4365.

Utilities when defendant moved into the back house, $1600 past due owed.  (I don’t know if back house is separate from plaintiff Bradley’s house, or a guest house arrangement). 

Plaintiffs Bradley, and defendant Matthew were roommates for years, then in May Bradley bought the house, and in November defendants moved out.   Baker-Murray says Pettyjohn stole her identity, and she received a letter that she took to police, and with a video, against Pettyjohn, so JJ can’t try this part of the case.   There is a pending investigation, so plaintiff Baker-Murray will have to come back after case is dismissed, or Pettyjohn is convicted.   

Bradley’s mother keeps chiming in.  

I’m glad Officer Byrd is close by, and security, when plaintiff Bradley starts losing, he is very angry, and glaring at JJ.  

Baker-Murray’s case is dismissed until after a legal decision is made.  

$406 for plaintiff.

Disability Debit Card Craziness  -Plaintiff Shannondoah Baker suing former friend/ defendant Cynthia Wagner for stealing money from her, kicking her out, and refused to return her belongings.   This was after plaintiff was in jail for possession of stolen property, and violating probation.  Plaintiff claims a man she was dating put the items in her home.    Plaintiff took a plea, so pled guilty.   Plaintiff claims multiple disabilities, and diagnoses, and gets disability. 

Plaintiff was supposed to pay $300 a month rent to defendant, and gave her disability debit card to defendant.    Instead of $300, plaintiff claims defendant charged over $900 on the debit card.  Plaintiff mother/witness chimes in and claims she took care of incarcerated daughter's Rottweiler/Pit cross.   Defendant is counter suing for rent, dog sitting, utilities, etc.    

Defendant says the sweater plaintiff is wearing in court, actually belongs to the defendant.  I love this, I wish the defendant retrieved her sweater right in court.  

Defendant submits a signed, witnessed contract with plaintiff. Plaintiff denies signing the contract.  Plaintiff claims defendant kept her art supplies, clothes, and kitchen supplies. Plaintiff’s mother has a son and his family living with her, but not the disabled daughter.  I don’t think that because plaintiff has issues, that it means she doesn’t owe defendant anything.

Plaintiff claims dismissed.   Defendant counter claim dismissed. 

5 p.m. episodes-

First (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.

Second (2017)-

Hot Mess of a Long-Haired Cat-Plaintiff Renee Martin suing ex-boyfriend Dean York for an unpaid loan to pay vet bills.    Plaintiff used her Care Credit card.

Plaintiff claims defendant was uncontrollable, so JJ tells him to put down the Water That Must Not be Drunk, and he instantly does.     

The litigants were dating, but not living together.   Plaintiff has two cats, and defendant has one cat, and the loan was for vet bills for shaving because of mats, and catch up on routine shots.    Shaving was $70, and then exams, worming, shots, sedation for the grooming, and the total is now with interest, and late fees is now $576.   The original bill was almost $400, and interest and late fees were charged, so the total is now $576.    Defendant claims he didn't promise to pay the bill, so he didn't.  Plaintiff claims defendant promised to pay the bill off within the six months interest free period.     

Plaintiff claims man abused the cat, kicked the cat out of his way.    I agree with JJ, I find it hard to believe that the plaintiff who claims to be a cat lover, would continue to date the defendant who she saw abusing his cat all of the time.   Defendant had the cat for 2 1/2 years, and never took the cat for shots (totally indoor cat).     The vet bill was $576 after all of the interest, and fees.    JJ's parting remarks make me think she believes the desperate plaintiff's story about cat abuse, and I don't believe the plaintiff.     

$576 for plaintiff. 

Shoddy Bathroom Remodel-Plaintiff Donald Hall contractor is suing neighbor Laura Ranes for unpaid balance to remodel her bathroom.  Plaintiff is a licensed remodeling contractor.   Plaintiff was remodeling the bathroom in his neighbor's condo.    Plaintiff is on disability (I'm guessing law enforcement,) and SSDI or SSI, but claims he doesn't do heavy work, and limits his income to the amounts of his disability rules.  I suspect that's why he wanted partial payments, over a few months, to keep under the income limits.     He also subs out some work too. 

Bathroom remodel was $2100 left, and defendant claimed the work was faulty, shoddy, and she refuses to pay him.  Plaintiff received $1700, and worked over two months on the bathroom.    Defendant is upset about the quality of the work, and plaintiff's refusal to fix the problems with the bathroom.     Defendant paid another contractor $600 to fix the bad work, and complete the job.   The pictures from defendant's cell phone that the work isn't great on the drywall, and paint.  

Plaintiff claimed he would fix the last few items in one day, and wanted the money from defendant right then, $2100.   Plaintiff claims there is an email from defendant claiming she loved the bathroom, and how nice it turned out.   

Plaintiff contracted $3800 for the total job, so defendant will have to pay plaintiff some of the remaining $2100.

$1500 to plaintiff.  As JJ says, they deserve each other. 

[CrazyInAlabama]

4 p.m. episodes-

First (2014)-

Scooter Squabble -Plaintiff Kenny Boggs suing defendants Jody and Keith Gillespie for a scooter damaged by their daughter Abigail.   Plaintiff takes his son, Killan, to the bus stop every morning on his electric scooter every morning to meet the bus, and waits for the bus to arrive.   Plaintiff says Abigail wanted to ride the scooter, and only if she brought a note giving permission from her parents, and a helmet.   

Before she brought a note, she was sitting on the scooter, but the key was in it, and it was running.  Abigail gripped the handle bars, and it started to fall over, so she grabbed the throttle and the scooter surged forward.    The scooter was on the kick stand, when Abigail got on the scooter, and it fell over and was scratched.  As JJ says, plaintiff left the key in the scooter.  So, Abigail could have been injured or killed, and her parents would have owned everything plaintiff had.   Plaintiff was careless.

Plaintiff case dismissed.

Spit in the Face -Plaintiff / brother Athan Anagonye suing defendant /sister Christina Anagonye who broke his TV, and tried to have him arrested when they were living in the same house on separate floors.     

Plaintiff says sister came to his basement apartment to see her brand new washer and dryer delivered to the basement that day.   Sister wanted to do laundry in the basement in the middle of the night, so brother turned the washer and dryer off.  Then defendant spit in plaintiff's face, and she smacked his TV and broke it.   So, plaintiff took defendant's TV until she replaced his TV.   Then defendant called the police, lied about the assault, and police didn't believe sister.  

After police left, defendant took her TV back, and that's when the plaintiff decided to move out.  Defendant is counter suing for rent, bills, and dryer damage.  Defendant claims she loaned $700 to plaintiff, and claims she has a text verifying that. There is no due amount on the text that JJ can find. 

Plaintiff receives $250 for TV.   Defendant gets zero. 

Second (2014)-

Homeless and Happy -Plaintiff Barbara Borsodi 41 year-old plaintiff is knocked up by 20-year old defendant Harley Howell, and is suing defendant for half the cost of a washer and dryer, unpaid bills, and a broken lease.   Plaintiff claims she still has the washer / dryer, but defendant claims she returned the washer / dryer.    They met while homeless, slept rough, couch surfed.   Plaintiff says they were waiting for her to inherit her late father’s house, his 401k, and other money.   Plaintiff claims to have congestive heart failure, two back surgeries, a shoulder injury, and is on disability.    The other three of plaintiff’s children are the same age or older than defendant.

Plaintiff claims it was true love, they were going to be together forever.   She claims he came to her, said he would be her man, and they would be together forever.    Plaintiff claims defendant used her. 

The crocodile tears from plaintiff are despicable.   They were 40 and 19 when they first hooked up, and moved in together. 

Defendant is now working as a deli clerk.   Plaintiff also says defendant will never get to see their child.   What a B-word.

As JJ says, 10 million saw her acknowledge paternity to defendant.  

Plaintiff case dismissed. 

Insurance Scam or Practical Joke? -Plaintiff Kevin Williams Jr suing defendants Rufus and Michelle Dixon for the remainder of his car note, on a car defendant wife wrecked.    JJ knows it’s all an insurance scam, and a scam on the court.

Plaintiff got out of his car to mail something, and two or three people jumped in his car, and sped off.  He left the car door open, and the keys in the car. Then plaintiff called the police, and then the defendants, so wife came to pick him up.    They returned to defendants’ home.    There is a police report about the ‘carjacking’, but that only tells what plaintiff told the police.   Then, the fairy tale continues.    Plaintiff was driving wife’s car that was loaned to him, Rufus was following in his car, and wife was driving her car.   The next day wife sent a text to plaintiff about missing car.  A week later police called and the plaintiff’s car was found wrecked.  Then defendant Rufus Dixon told plaintiff that the ‘carjacking’ was a prank, and he wrecked the plaintiff’s car.   However, plaintiff didn’t tell police or his insurance company about the ‘prank’, and who the real carjacker was.  

Defendant Rufus says they invited plaintiff to go to church and then BBQ with them.  Then, plaintiff went to get a propane grill from his uncle.

JJ dismisses everything, because it’s a scam.

5 p.m. episodes-

First (2017)-

Custody Battle Chaos-Plaintiff Kristine Kraft SSMOT (Sainted Single Mother of Two) suing the father/defendant of her child, Christopher Kittel, over the return of her belongings.  Defendant claims they lived together for 3 1/2 years, but according to plaintiff she didn't live with him.       There has been an ongoing custody battle for over two years, and both have huge stacks of papers, and folders in front of them.    Plaintiff SSMOT hates that the defendant received 50/50 custody, and she sued for 18 months just over that part of the custody dispute. 

Son was two when the litigants separated.  Plaintiff claims she never lived with plaintiff, she always lived with her mother, and only left some property, TV, etc. at the defendant's house.     Defendant drove her to the hospital for the birth, drove her home from the hospital, with nursery for the son.   Plaintiff claims the crib, etc. was never at defendant's house.    Some of the custody testimony was from police officers who were called to a dispute at defendant's house, and he testified on the defendant's side.   Plaintiff's Order of Protection was dismissed by court, at the custody hearing.    Each has a child for a week at a time.    The SSMOT's older child lived at the defendant's house too. 

JJ warns plaintiff that parental interference can lead to loss of the 50/50 custody by plaintiff.    JJ also reads the court decision.   Defendant supported plaintiff, and the two children the entire time they lived together.     Property is left at defendant's home for when the child is at his house.  (My guess is that this custody dispute will never end). 

Plaintiff's case dismissed.  Defendant says plaintiff did $2,000 worth of damages at his house in retaliation over not giving up custody. 

Landscaping Grief-Plaintiff  Sreelesh Kozhiparambil is suing landscaper / defendant Kevin Gervasio for failing to complete a job, damaged and stolen property, lock changing fees.   Plaintiff and wife had to leave the U.S. because of a death in their family in India.    Landscaper was supposed to plant some greenery, maintain the front and back yard, seed the lawn, for a total of $3200.    Then defendant wanted more money, claiming the seeding wasn't working, and he needed to sod the outside edge of the yard, and hydro seed the interior part of the yard, and received $4,000 from plaintiff.  

The front yard picture is awful, and looks like no seed was ever put down, or sod.     Defendant also moved the plaintiff's car, and took it home to gain access to the garage.  The keys were left so he could move it in the driveway, not steal it.    Defendant admits he didn't hydro seed, never put in a full sprinkler system, that plaintiff had bought the parts for.  In the hall-terview plaintiff says the police got the car, and the wife's phone back from defendant.   Plaintiff paid $3200 to defendant, and $4,000 later, totaling $7200.   

$4,000 to plaintiff.     Plaintiff got the car back already, so that's dismissed.      The defendant also smoked in the car, and that won't be coming out easily, or probably will ever be gone completely.  

Second (2017)-

Caught Cheating?!-Plaintiff Tiffani Lefoon, SSMOO (Sainted Single Mother of One) registered nurse, suing former boyfriend, Brandon Maddox, father of her child for cost of a truck, property damage, and unauthorized debit card charges.     Plaintiff claims the police had to retrieve her house key, but defendant kicked in her front door.   When defendant's (professional musician) old car broke down he needed $2,000 for a truck, because he was sending money home to support his two other sons, 9 and 5.    Defendant claims the $2,000 for the truck was a gift, and he still has the truck.   They broke up right after he got the truck, and while plaintiff was 3 or 4 months pregnant.   

 There is no child support paid for plaintiff's child.   Plaintiff claims defendant is her last musician boyfriend, ever.  

Defendant never paid for the truck.   After plaintiff caught defendant cheating at the motel, the police had to get her key back.   Plaintiff went to work after catching loser cheating, and came home and door was kicked in, and TV was broken, two interior doors were broken also, and the front door.   At that time the only missing items were the clothes and shoes belonging to the defendant.   Defendant claims plaintiff was home when he came for his clothes, and shoes. 

There is a video filmed after that of defendant looking for his birth certificate, a month after moving out.    Defendant came in through the window.   Plaintiff's video shows the window being broken (it has a metal grid over it, with chains), and she says she didn't have his birth certificate, and other I.D.s.

$2,000 for plaintiff for damages. 

No Drinking, No Partying, No Random Boyfriends?!-Plaintiff Suzanne Hudak, suing defendant Sommer Lund, former room renter in her home for damages, not covered by security deposit.    Plaintiff moved in September, $350 a month, with two cats.    A friend moved into another room with one more cat at the same time.   Signed lease says no drinking excessively, no random boys, no partying, but that is written in later, on the written lease.   There are no initials from tenants about the added restrictions. 

Plaintiff disliked the drinking and partying, but that's written in later, so not binding.   Boozing it up, random boys, smoking on the property, etc.      JJ says you can't say that no one can smoke anyone on your property, so I guess the medical campuses that do that are wrong?     If it's in the lease, and signed by both parties, then it would be legal.   Writing it in yourself after the lease is signed is not legal.  

Landlord claims the cats from the defendant, and the other former tenant cats were in one room.     Landlady claims all of the carpet was new, but previous homeowner had cats in that room, but had cardboard on top of the carpet to protect it. (I bet the previous owners didn't sanitize the floor under the previous carpet, so the cats would be attracted to the carpet in that room)

No rent is owed by defendant, because the landlord drove tenants out.    No before and after pictures were taken.

Plaintiff case dismissed. 

[CrazyInAlabama]

4 p.m. episodes-

First (2014)-

Dying Cat’s Rescue -Plaintiff Tammy Poling (soon to be divorced from defendant’s husband’s brother) suing defendant Cindy Lantz for repayment of the $1736 loan for cat surgery.     Sisters-in-law are fighting over adultery, a dying cat, and the cost of emergency surgery.   Plaintiff gave or loaned defendant $1100, for the dying cat’s surgery.  Defendant paid for the cat's surgery, partly for the adult son's benefit, since he loved the cat and he couldn't get money because he was baby sitting his grandmother.  Also, defendant’s adult son was babysitting with the infirm grandmother, but he left her for a while anyway. 

Then, defendant husband told plaintiff’s husband (Dallas, husband of Tammy) that plaintiff wife was cheating on him (plaintiff husband, and defendant husband are brothers, I think, but maybe that’s wrong).  

Cat had a urinary blockage, and cat had to have surgery or it would die.      So, defendant wife called plaintiff for money, and plaintiff used credit card for the surgery, follow up vet bills, and a few other fees, so a total of $1736.       

After defendant husband ratted out plaintiff wife to her husband about the affair, then plaintiff wanted her money repaid.  Defendant husband refused to cover for plaintiff sister-in-law's affairs, with a co-worker and someone else also.   

Defendant husband says plaintiff wife wanted him to cover for her affair with a co-worker, and friend of defendant’s husband.     It was only after the repayment of the money came up that the affair was disclosed to plaintiff’s husband, by defendant’s husband. 

Plaintiff claims she was going to give the defendants time to get the money together, and plaintiff paid off the credit bills in full every month.   However, defendant only paid $200 on the cat’s bill at the vet’s and nothing to plaintiff.

JJ doesn’t think it was a loan, but a nice gesture from plaintiff to her nephew.  However, defendant wife said she would pay back the plaintiff.   JJ doesn’t think there was a contract with defendant at the vet office.

Plaintiff case dismissed.

Crashes and Lies -Plaintiff/sister Kaneshia Davis suing defendant/sister Shemeka Davis over totaling her car.   A Halloween night car crash leaves the litigant sisters fighting.  Plaintiff used defendant’s car a few times, and defendant is counter claiming for plaintiff leaving the car messy.

Defendant blames the accident on the heavy rain that day, and evening, but yet she took her two kids (ages 4 and 8) out in the bad weather.    What the hell kind of cheap, ugly two toned wig is on defendant’s head?  

Defendant claims sister wanted her money after plaintiff’s replacement car was repo’d.    There is no police report about fault in defendant’s accident. As usual accident was a mysterious truck on defendant’s side of the road, and they drove away.

$1500 to plaintiff. Everyone hugs in the hall.

Second (2014)-

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

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

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

Plaintiffs receive $2700 for the double fence installation. 

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

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

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

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

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

Everything dismissed.  

5 p.m. episodes-

First (2017)-

All Sales are Final!  -Plaintiff / furniture buyer Rocco Morelli  is suing consignment shop owner Susan Thomas  for the money he paid for furniture he never received.   Plaintiff was furnishing a house, and he bought furniture from defendant, for $8,215 total, and plaintiff has a receipt.  Receipt says all sales are final (the receipt is the contract).     The plaintiff changed his mind about a sectional sofa, and a king-sized bed, and wanted a refund, defendant said no, so he cancelled.   Plaintiff disputed with the credit card company, they ruled in favor of the plaintiff, then defendant disputed it, and money was eventually returned to defendant by credit card company.   

Plaintiff sent a mover to pick up the furniture after the final credit card ruling.   Defendant says plaintiff never picked up furniture after numerous attempts to contact him.   Plaintiff witness claims the mover (his witness), was told furniture was already sold.    Witness was sent to pick up 14 pieces of furniture, but claims 5 were already sold, so mover picked up nothing.  Then, American Express reopened the case, and ruled in defendant's favor again.    (I hate the plaintiff).     Defendant admits she did sell some of the furniture (including a silver giraffe) was sold, after waiting until March for plaintiff to pick up furniture.  

$5,000 to plaintiff.   Defendant has no receipts for the furniture she resold.   Defendant also claims plaintiff made 'advancements' on her. 

One-of-a-kind Hardwood Table Feud!  -Plaintiff  Ashley Tobosa  is suing artist John Breslinfor the return of deposit for a custom-made dining table.    This is the defendant's only source of income, making custom furniture pieces with live edge, and he's been in business for six years.    However, defendant didn't bring photos of the final product, and there is no written contract specifying completion date either.    

Deposit was $1500 down, which was paid, and $1500 more on delivery.   They agreed that 22 October was the finish date, and table wasn't finished, and plaintiff wanted the deposit back.   Defendant refused to refund deposit.     

As JJ says, there wasn't a final date of completion for the table.   The pictures don't show the completed work the defendant claims.   There isn't enough progress shown to prove that the table was actually progressing, or being worked on.     

Plaintiff receives $1500 back.    

Second (2017)-

Dog Smashes Into Car?-Plaintiff Yolanda Boatwright suing dog owner Christian Sementelli for damages to her car from defendant's dog running into the car.    Plaintiff was driving straight when defendant's dog ran out of a parking lot across the street, and ran into her car.    Defendant says dog wasn't out of his control.   

Defendant drove into the parking lot of a store, with the dog, and his girlfriend, dog got loose, and ran to the grass median in the parking row.   Then dog ran towards the road, into the path of the plaintiff, who was going straight on the highway, on the far lane from defendant, and something hit her car.   It was the dog that hit the car, dog had no leash or anything else.  Then defendant ran across from the parking lot, and then plaintiff saw the damage to her car.   Plaintiff's husband was in the car also, and is the witness.  

Plaintiffs told the defendant to go to the vet, but they would have to talk about car damage after the vet visit.   Defendant claims the plaintiffs were turning left from the road, into the parking lot, and ran over his dog.   However, plaintiffs were going straight on the far side of the road.  

Photos of the car are submitted by plaintiff.   Dog hit on the left side of the car, between the driver’s door, and wheel well.   Defendant is a jerk, and is trying to blame all kinds of medical issues with the dog on the plaintiff. Defendant is also claiming previous damage on the passenger side of the car was somehow blamed on the dog.  

$998 to plaintiff for car damages. 

Domestic Violence and the Paint Job!?-Plaintiff Robert Fitzgerald suing former friend, Derek Radburn for unpaid wages for painting.    Defendant claims plaintiff is just ungrateful.   Plaintiff was earning $100 a day, cash, working a day at a time for the defendant.    Plaintiff was charged with domestic violence against former fiance, and ended up in jail.     Defendant says plaintiff's girlfriend hit plaintiff, and that plaintiff should take photos, and press charges. 

Defendant put up bail, $1500 so plaintiff could get out of jail.  Plaintiff's fiance dropped charges, and defendant received his $1500 back (it took a long time for the bail refund).   Plaintiff's fiance keeps trying to chime in, and I'm hoping she gets booted.

Then plaintiff claims he worked 10 days for defendant, and is owed $1,000.  However, defendant claims plaintiff only worked one day for him, so only is owed $100.    There is no proof that plaintiff worked the 10 days, and all would have been 'off the books' and 'under the table'.   

Plaintiff receives $100 

Edited September 7, 2022 by CrazyInAlabama

[CrazyInAlabama]

4 p.m. episodes-

First (2014)-

Mother & Daughter Gang up on Ex -Plaintiffs Mariah Russom suing defendant/her mother's ex-boyfriend, Jason Kirkland, for loans.    Plaintiff and her 40 year old mother Danae Russom (plaintiff witness) were having issues with another sister, so moved in with defendant.   Plaintiff didn't pay any rent for the two months they lived there.    Plaintiff witness mother, claims she paid rent, but defendant says he paid mother/girlfriend's mortgage one month, and she paid his much lower rent.    Plaintiff bought defendant's son a bed, a lawn mower for the house, and says she has receipts for $346.   Mariah says the bed cost almost $1,000.     

When plaintiff and mother moved in, defendant did not get rid of any furniture.    Plaintiff says defendant sent his couches to plaintiff's sister, and plaintiff and mother put their couches in defendant's house.   When plaintiff and witness moved out they took their couches, but didn't return the couches defendant loaned to the plaintiff's sister.    Defendant has the text on his phone about the furniture, when he asked for his couches back, and witness says she would return them with a police escort, which never happened.       After the big argument, plaintiffs moved out, and took all of their furniture with them.   Defendant says his son offered to move into the smaller bedroom, so plaintiff could have a bigger room.   Defendant says TV in question that plaintiff claims she paid for, was free with her furniture purchase.   

The defendant doesn't dispute owing for the lawn mower.   Defendant is countersuing for car damages, by plaintiff, and furniture.    

Plaintiff also claims defendant stole her grandmother's ring.   Plaintiff mother moved in with boyfriend, before divorcing her previous husband. 

Plaintiff wants $386.   Defendant keeps the son's bedroom furniture, and loses the older couches.    Defendant says plaintiff ran truck into a pole, and she's a liar.   Plaintiff tries to submit some list of alias’ of defendant.     Mother/witness moved out in September, but Mariah lived there for two weeks without her mother, into October.  Estimate to fix defendant's truck is $1880.    

Ruling is $346 for lawn mower, but defendant gets $1880, so $1534 to defendant. 

Second (2014)-

Punch Drunk Love -Plaintiff Hollie Dowdle suing defendant/ex-boyfriend Zachary Storrs for an assault, and return of belongings.  Plaintiff moved into defendant's apartment, and she wanted him to leave the apartment (it was a loft/apartment above defendant's grandmother's garage).   

On the night in question, woman was watching TV while defendant was trying to sleep.   Then, the plaintiff's phone rang, so defendant answered it, and instead of her female cousin, it was some guy.    Plaintiff claimed defendant was wrong, and defendant says this was the third time she was cheating.   Then defendant says plaintiff called her grandmother, and took everything with her.  

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

 Plaintiff's mother wasn't involved in any of this, but did come on Officer Byrd's dime to come for a free trip to L.A.   The mother keeps trying to butt into the case.   

Plaintiff applied for a protective order, and received one. A Domestic Violence protective order, and both litigants testified at the trial.     The plaintiff doesn’t have the application for the protective order, or a police report.

Plaintiff claim dismissed. 

Pyramid Scheme – Plaintiffs Jeanette and Michael Kelly suing defendants, David Kennedy and his mother, Deborah Kennedy for ripping them off on a pyramid scheme.  Typical pyramid scheme, where plaintiff earns money by bringing in other suckers, which is often MLM-Multi-level Marketing. 

Plaintiffs bought into the defendants’ scheme for $135, plus $80 for signs.   Then, plaintiffs had to bring people into the business, and the people they recruited would bring others in, and they were foolish. Defendant son calls the company a network marketing system, but he owns no businesses, and I know an MLM and pyramid scheme when I hear about one. 

Defendant says plaintiff purchased a Bluehost domain name, not from him.

As JJ says, the defendants’ business is an illegal pyramid scheme, and then Officer Byrd remarks that it’s the American way.

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

Case dismissed. In the hall-terview plaintiff woman says she’s lost money in every MLM scheme she’s been involved in.  How stupid can you get?  The definition of stupidity is doing the same thing over and over, and getting the same outcome.   The picture in the dictionary next to "stupidity" is of the plaintiffs. 

5 p.m. episodes-

First (2017)-

Eyewitness to Hit and Run!- Plaintiffs owner Troy Daniels had a hit-and-run on his vehicle, and is suing his neighbor/owner Jessica Luckett, as she is the owner of the attacking car.      The witness, Nick Shallman, saw the hit and run happen in the early morning hours, after midnight, Witness says car came out of the darkness, hit a parked car, on the street in front of their buddy's house.   Attacked car was shoved across the street, up on the curb, and there were a lot of damages.     It was plaintiff's car, and witness looked until they found the owner of the car.   

They were looking at the attacked car, and the hit and run driver drove by, but didn't stop, and hit the gas and kept going.    Defendant Jessica Luckett says her brother-in-law was driving, told the police her car was hit when it was parked.   Defendant's brother, Jonathan Luckett, (in court) claims he was the car passenger (no, he wasn't, brother was driving, he is a bad liar, and so is the defendant car owner).   

Defendant's brother, Jonathan Luckett, stands and lies in court to JJ.   Witness can't look at JJ, keeps shifting around, and looks like he's about to cry (I would like to slap him until he cries, and the defendant too, they're both liars).    Brother says he was taking car to defendant's house, or his own house, he's really not sure.   Lying witness claims he was the passenger, and brother-in-law was driving, and a car was in the middle of the street, and it was the plaintiff's parked car in the middle of the street, and claims plaintiff backed into defendant's car.   

Defendant car owner called her insurance first, and the police after that, quite a while after the accident.   BIL has a driver's license, but I'm guessing he wasn't on the car insurance policy.   Plaintiff submits his copy of the police report, and lying defendant doesn't have one, even though she claims she made a report with the police.    Plaintiff's police report says defendant told them her car was parked in a parking lot, and was hit there, while car was parked.   Report also says car was in custody of family friend, omits the brother, and brother-in-law.   

2001 Buick Le Sabre was only a year old with plaintiff.   

$1200 to plaintiff for his totaled car. 

Botched Bridesmaid Dresses?!-Plaintiff Keitheisha Brooks suing seamstress Jeanne James for return of money she paid seamstress to make the 10 bridesmaids dresses, for $500 down, and $500 left.   Plaintiff also suing seamstress for ruining her wedding.    Plaintiff paid $500 bridesmaid deposit, flower girls dress, and vests for the young men, for $180 more.     Boy's vests, and flower girls dress were used in the wedding, and were paid for.     All ten bridesmaids wore the dresses at the wedding.  Defendant is counter claiming for money owed.  Plaintiff wants $3200. 

Plaintiff claims every bridesmaid dress needed help to make it down the aisle safely.   However, all of the dresses were completed, except another reception dress that wasn't completed.   There were two or three fittings for each of the bridesmaids' dresses.   $500 was all that plaintiff paid for the bridesmaids' dresses, and at $50 each for a fitted dress, it was a bargain.   Plaintiff paid $500 for bridesmaid’s dresses, and owed $500 more, but never paid the second $500.  

Defendant says in the hall-terview that she will never do an entire wedding party's various garments again.   

Plaintiff case dismissed.  

Second (2017)-

Dog Smashes Into Car?-Plaintiff Yolanda Boatwright suing dog owner Christian Sementelli for damages to her car from defendant's dog running into the car.    Plaintiff was driving straight when defendant's dog ran out of a parking lot across the street, and ran into her car.   Defendant says dog wasn't out of his control.   

Defendant drove into the parking lot of a store, with the dog, and his girlfriend, dog got loose, and ran to the grass median in the parking row.   Then dog ran towards the road, into the path of the plaintiff, who was going straight on the highway, on the far lane from defendant, and something hit her car.   It was the dog that hit the car, dog had no leash or anything else.  Then defendant ran across from the parking lot, and then plaintiff saw the damage to her car.   Plaintiff's husband was in the car also, and is the witness.  

Plaintiffs told the defendant to go to the vet, but they would have to talk about car damage after the vet visit.   Defendant claims the plaintiffs were turning left from the road, into the parking lot, and ran over his dog.   However, plaintiffs were going straight on the far side of the road.  

Photos of the car are submitted by plaintiff.   Dog hit on the left side of the car, between the driver’s door, and wheel well.   Defendant is a jerk, and is trying to blame all kinds of medical issues with the dog on the plaintiff. Defendant is also claiming previous damage on the passenger side of the car was somehow blamed on the dog.  

$998 to plaintiff for car damages. 

Domestic Violence and the Paint Job!?-Plaintiff Robert Fitzgerald suing former friend, Derek Radburn for unpaid wages for painting.    Defendant claims plaintiff is just ungrateful.   Plaintiff was earning $100 a day, cash, working a day at a time for the defendant.    Plaintiff was charged with domestic violence against former fiance, and ended up in jail.     Defendant says plaintiff's girlfriend hit plaintiff, and that plaintiff should take photos, and press charges. 

Defendant put up bail, $1500 so plaintiff could get out of jail.  Plaintiff's fiance dropped charges, and defendant received his $1500 back (it took a long time for the bail refund).   Plaintiff's fiance keeps trying to chime in, and I'm hoping she gets booted.

Then plaintiff claims he worked 10 days for defendant, and is owed $1,000.  However, defendant claims plaintiff only worked one day for him, so only is owed $100.    There is no proof that plaintiff worked the 10 days, and all would have been 'off the books' and 'under the table'.   

Plaintiff receives $100 

Edited September 8, 2022 by CrazyInAlabama

[CrazyInAlabama]

4 p.m. episodes-

First (2014)-

Hair Stylist Wars -Plaintiff Sharon Haynes (salon owner) is suing defendant Kamika Parker over unpaid rent, damaged property, and the return of belongings.    Litigants were classmates at beauty school.  Plaintiff opened a salon, wanted defendant to move into her studio apartment, with a child, and serve as manager without a salary.   Defendant moved from Victorville to Los Angeles.

 Defendant received no salary, but was on commission, later chair rent, and later left for another salon.  The studio apartment was too crowded with three people, so they got a larger apartment.  

Plaintiff says defendant broke apartment lease, that’s dismissed.   Plaintiff claims defendant and defendant’s aunt assaulted plaintiff.    Plaintiff claims defendant owed her booth rent, and after defendant moved out of the apartment, so plaintiff withheld defendant’s hair tools, license copy, and hair products.  

Plaintiff had defendant and her aunt arrested because of the assault, and claims after the release from jail defendant stole TV, and other items from the salon.  There are no witnesses or proof about who stole the TV, and other items.   Plaintiff claims defendant called the police on herself.

Plaintiff has a restraining order against defendant, and defendant claims she never pled the assault case out.  However, defendant did plead the assault case out, as a lower offense, and consented to the protective order for six months.

Defendant’s false arrest is dismissed, since defendant pled guilty.

Everything dismissed.

Daddy’s Good Deed Punished?  -Plaintiff Rick Fugate suing defendants Tonya Fugate (plaintiff's daughter) and Joshua Smith, (fiance) for damages to his RV.   Daughter graduated a year early, and worked full time, and moved out the day she turned 18.     Plaintiff bought an RV to remodel, and sell, for $1500.   Plaintiff let defendants live in the motor home, and he claims the trashed it.   Defendants moved after they say plaintiff unplugged the electricity, and defendants claim that forced them to move.  

Defendants did damage the mattress, and a few other parts of the RV.   Defendant claims the plaintiff slapped her.  Defendant daughter claims the dogs that damaged the RV weren’t her dogs.  So, daughter is claiming some other dogs did it?    I guess I should start worrying about marauding packs of dogs breaking into my house, and trashing it?

$1100 to plaintiff, defendant claim dismissed.  (In the hall-terview daughter says dad’s been married seven times, and lost nine children to estrangement).

Second (2014)-

Dream Car Rip-Off -Plaintiff Jared Sandoval suing defendant David Williams because defendant had a title loan on the Trans Am he sold plaintiff, plaintiff wants the title loan paid, and to register the car.  Car is a ‘99 Convertible Trans Am.  Plaintiff saved $3200 to pay defendant for the car, and defendant claims car was worth $8,000.    Plaintiff couldn't register car, because of the title loan.  

Lien is more than what plaintiff paid for the car, but lien company won't tell anyone but defendant what the lien is.   Plaintiff wanted a refund on car, but defendant had spent the money already.    JJ says plaintiff has to give back the car, to get his $3500 back, but plaintiff still wants the car, and he'll have to pay the lien off somehow.  Defendant says he sold car very cheap to plaintiff, and says paying the title loan is a bargain.    Car is worth $8,000, and was sold for $3200.   Lien company told plaintiff that lien on car is more than what plaintiff paid for the car. 

Defendant keeps saying he’ll only take car back if it’s in the same condition as when he sold it, JJ sets him straight.

Plaintiff gets $3200, and car goes back to defendant.  (I think plaintiff was just hoping there is a way he could keep the car.   However, I'm glad the title loan company couldn't tell him how much the lien is for, or he would probably have tried to round up the money). 

Scammer Denial  -Case of plaintiff David Williams (defendant in the previous case) against defendant/ex-girlfriend Ms.  Morris is dismissed, over the title loan on Trans Am plaintiff sold to plaintiff in previous case.   He's trying to say he didn't know his live-in girlfriend did the title loan.  

Plaintiff case dismissed.

Christmas Day Hit-and-Run-Plaintiff  Michael Copeland, car owner, and witness/fiance Andrea Jackson, are suing defendant Christopher Bailey  (car owner is his wife, Pennie Langston) over a hit-and-run accident on Christmas Day.  Plaintiff witness heard a collision about 9 p.m., and says she was looking at their car damage (Ford Taurus), when defendant climbed out of his ‘99 Ford Explorer SUV, looked at his car damage, and climbed back in his car, and left.   Plaintiffs got the license plate number.    When plaintiffs were still looking at the car damage defendant cruised by staring at the car and driving slowly, and then went by again.  Plaintiffs were talking to 911, and gave them the license number, and a description of the driver.

Defendant didn't get a ticket for leaving the scene of an accident.    Plaintiffs said defendant seemed to be impaired too.   

Defendant's wife, and car owner swears her husband, and car didn't do this.  Police report is submitted. 

(In the state I live in, hit-and-run auto is a total of 12 points, the same number of points needed to suspend your license, and where litigants live he didn't even get a ticket?) 

Police saw fresh snow tracks leading to defendant's garage, and no one answered the door at defendant's house.  JJ says defendants are a perfect match for each other.   (This happened in Muskegon, MI).

Plaintiff receives $3791. 

5 p.m. episodes-

First (2017)-

Man's Fuzzy Memory of Assault?!-Plaintiff Thomas Davis suing his ex-girlfriend/defendant Loretta Alexander for credit card fees, legal fees. and the return of property.   However, defendant claims plaintiff attacked her, and she claims she didn't attack him.   Defendant claims plaintiff's pastor is actually his side piece.    They have been in a relationship since 2013, shacked up 2015, and separated in December 2016.    Plaintiff claims they never lived together.   Plaintiff gave defendant a second card for his credit card account.     Plaintiff claims defendant made unauthorized charges on his credit card, after they separated (anything before that time is not unauthorized).   As usual. plaintiff has no bills to prove anything, but claims defendant went online and changed the billing address to her address, so he never saw the bills. 

Plaintiff wants legal fees over the credit card issue, and he's not getting that.  Property plaintiff wants back includes an old air conditioner.  Plaintiff also wants an old fridge/freezer he stored in defendant's garage.   Freezer is gone, dismissed.    Defendant wants items stored in plaintiff's shed.   Plaintiff claims everything he was storing for defendant is gone into thin air.  There is a storage unit that was mutual, but has been emptied.    The shed defendant is talking about is on plaintiff's property. 

No police report about defendant's assault, but medical record is submitted.    Plaintiff claims there was no assault by him.

The argument was plaintiff talking to his pastor girlfriend/fiance, so the couple split up, and defendant moved out.   That's when defendant does the dramatic explanation of the violent assault on her by the geezer boyfriend.   If her description was true, she would have been in ICU, not moving out.  Defendant claims she called the police, but didn't file the report.    I don't believe the defendant at all.    

Counter claim $2500 to defendant, and nothing for plaintiff.

Second (2017)-

Broken Jaw Party Foul!-Plaintiff Scott Richie, Jr suing defendant Jordan Nielsen for breaking his jaw, and choking him, for medical bills, lost wages, and pain and suffering.      Plaintiff went to a party at defendant's house, but was invited by the defendant's roommate, Dakota who plaintiff assaulted, but claims it was mutual combat.    Plaintiff went to pick up two other party goers, and when the plaintiff arrived at the party, he says everyone at the party was drunk.    Plaintiff was leaving to go home, when defendant assaulted him, and claims defendant's witness also punched him repeatedly.   

Police report is submitted by plaintiff.    Plaintiff says he met with police later too, but there is no further report, and no one was arrested over this assault.   Defendant witness Drew Manning was also in the fight. 

Defendant claims plaintiff wasn't invited to party, and was drunk.    Defendant claims plaintiff wanted to fight him, and he was only defending himself.    Defendant says plaintiff's witness is also his witness, Skylar.   However, the mutual witness says plaintiff, defendant, and defendant's witness were all drunk and fighting.   Start of the issue is that plaintiff had slept with a previous party host's girlfriend, and the boyfriend was at the defendant's party.    

The fight happened in Iowa, but plaintiff didn't go back there to finish filing charges, so police charges were never filed. 

Everything dismissed.   

Quick!  Hide the Pontiac?!-Plaintiff Charlene Moore suing ex-boyfriend Brian Theard, for money she invested in a car, stolen property, and punitive damages.   Defendant is counter suing for the return of a stolen car.     They lived together, and bought a Pontiac and a Mercedes.   Defendant says he paid for both cars, and plaintiff paid nothing for the cars.     When they broke up the plaintiff stayed at the original apartment, and kept the Pontiac, and she would take over the payments.     Defendant took the Mercedes.    Defendant was getting notices that plaintiff wasn't paying the last $2,000 on the car loan, and called the finance company, found there was actually only $500 more on the loan. 

Plaintiff had paid $1500 on the car, leaving the last $500, which defendant paid off.      When he went to take the Pontiac back, defendant found that plaintiff had changed the locks on the car.    Defendant claims plaintiff was paying on car, but fell behind, and plaintiff kept hiding the car with friends, in various locations.   Defendant claimed he paid for both vehicles, except for $1500 she paid on the car.   (This is obviously not plaintiff's first time hiding a car from the repo men).

Plaintiff gets the Pontiac back, and defendant gets $500 for the car loan he paid off.

[DjamillasMan]

I mixed up the episodes again just for your entertainment. Everybody have their favorite drink in hand? Let’s gooooooooo!!

Dial 911 for Murder (2017)

“You’re very right about that. It’s just embarrassing. I-uh-am a porn addict” – Dylan Grady  

 Plaintiff: Ashley Jensen from Butte, MT. Ashley was 24 years old at the time and has a boyfriend with a porn addiction. She was also branded a thief twice by the defendant. Ash leased an apartment from the defendant, Eula, who in turn reported to the police that Ashley was murdered by her boyfriend. Ash couldn’t have possibly been murdered unless she is in court as a ghost. This sort of strange behavior by Eula caused Ash to pack her bags and get the hell out of that situation. Hell, if someone reported me dead to the police when I was very much alive, I’d question their sanity and want to get the hell away from them, too.  Ash also had the common sense to bring one of the responding officers to court with her. Ashley works at ACE Hardware.

Defendant: Eula Compton. Eula is a retired attorney with either a drinking problem, a mental illness, or a very, very vivid imagination. She rents out apartments in her building at a very decent bargain. One night, Eula heard the plaintiff and her boyfriend having a domestic, which caused Eula to grow suspicious of them. Eula ended up calling the police and reporting Ashley murdered by said boyfriend. The police claimed she reeked of alcohol and she kinda looks like an old drunk. Eula has a boyfriend who came to court with her as a witness. A witness to what is anyone’s guess. Eula was guzzling that water as the case went on.

The Complaint: Ashley is suing for the return of rent, an unlawful eviction, and harassment.  

What Does He/She want: Ashley is requesting the court to give her $2400

Countersuit?: No

Puppy Multiplier: N/A

Driving Around Without Insurance: N/A

What Went Down: JJ kicks the case off with Ashley to establish the facts. Ashley claims that Eula’s harassment became so unbearable to live at the location that she had to pack up her shit and go. Ashley moved in into the apartment on July of 2016 and moved out on Christmas Eve 2016. Her rent was only $425 a month (damn, that’s quite a savings. I wish my rent were that low. I’d be ballin out of control). This was even on a month-to-month lease, which are generally far more expensive than say a 15 month lease.

Eula states that she has been the landlord in the building for over twenty years. Eula’s face just looks….tragic. I don’t know how else to explain it. She is wearing some type of floral sundress with the golden years “Dora the Explorer” hairstyle.

JJ turns her attention back to Ash and asks her was it Eula that she dealt with the entire time that she was trying to get the apartment. Ashley replies “Yep” and this causes JJ some irritation. You can sort of tell that Ashley is extremely nervous standing in front of JJ. With that out of the way, JJ really wants to know where the difficulty with Eula started. Ashley states that in September, Eula began her bizarre behavior with the accusation that she stole Eula’s iMac laptop that was delivered by mail.

Wouldn’t that be an Apple computer, technically? I don’t know, I’m a Microsoft guy myself. I had one Apple computer that I got for Christmas many, many moons ago and it just didn’t float my boat, but I have an iPhone, so what do I know?

Anyway, Ashley says that Eula told her that she was suspecting of “thieving” of said iMac computer. Ashley responded to Eula by saying that she does not steal. She also brought up the suggestion that Eula may need to install security cameras (Porch Pirates are real, y’all!!!).  Nothing else was brought up about this. Eula accepted Ash’s rent for September, and also for October and November. Ash says “Yep” to JJ again (take a shot) and JJ again has to correct her.

In November, Ashley says that Eula accused her of stealing a rat Halloween decoration. You know, for someone who doesn’t steal, Ashley sure does get accused of stealing a lot. I mean, I can understand stealing an Apple computer (those things are extremely expensive), but to go from that to stealing a Halloween decoration? Usually people steal things of value. You can go to Party City right now and get a rat Halloween decoration on sale for like $2 (I went to Costco today with the fam and holy shit, they have all the Halloween decorations out already). Either Ashley is a very inconsistent thief who borders on being a kleptomaniac, or Eula just likes to accuse people of stealing her lost items because she’s a drunk/maniac. I mean, there could possibly be another kleptomaniac in their midst. It can only be one of those three scenarios.

 Eula denies accusing Ashley of stealing the Halloween decorations. In December, there was an incident in which Ashley was at work. Ashley claims that she left for work at 9:45 am. The night prior, December 7th, JJ asks Ashley if she had any company over for the evening. Ashley answers “Um…” and JJ states “Um is not an answer!” (take a shot!).  Ashley admits that she had her boyfriend over on that specific evening. Ash has her boyfriend as her witness, some goofy lookin dope with a bad haircut and a Marshall’s dress shirt on. JJ asks if the boyfriend slept over, in which Ashley replies that he did. JJ then inquires if Ashley had an argument with him. Ashley again begins her declaration with “Um…” to which JJ again states “Um is not an answer!” (take a shot!).

JJ prides herself on Ashley not knowing where she was going with this (take a shot!) and asks what they were arguing about. Ashley claims to not remember, so then JJ makes the boyfriend begin his testimony. Dylan Grady begins by stating that he wants to be honest, to which JJ warns him that being dishonest with her isn’t a very good idea. Dylan admits that he’s a porn addict and that’s what caused the fight that evening between him and Ashley. He says that Ashley was on his case about it, but he denies that the argument had gotten loud. Ashley somehow begins to remember the issue, starts to speak, and then thinks better of it and keeps her mouth shut. JJ makes Dylan sit back down, while Eula helps herself to some of the refreshing water for the litigants.

JJ then turns her attention to Eula and asks her what time she called the police on the 8th of December. Eula states that she called the police at 7pm. Just the way Eula speaks and her lip motions just scream like she’s constantly dehydrated. Sheesh. Ashley then starts to speak, but again, thinks better of it and shuts up. JJ says that there’s some confusion on the call at 7 in the evening, while Eula doubles down on that. This prompts JJ to have the police officer, Officer Steve Honer, to give his testimony (take a shot for a cop in JJ’s court!).

Officer Steve Honer looks like he stopped living after 1998. He just has that late ‘90s vice cop look about him. Steve states that his undersheriff got a call from Eula Compton and that he was the second responding officer to the incident. He went to Ash’s place at 1pm while the first responding officers went at about 930 am. The reason why Honer went back is because that’s when Ash had realized that Eula had entered her apartment again. So this wasn’t the first time the old bat came into her apartment uninvited? That’s kinda creepy. Meanwhile, Eula is over there making weird faces.

JJ wants to see the write up of the case. Ashley exclaims that she has the police report and happily hands it to Officer Byrd. Honer states that the first responding officers went to Ash’s place for a missing person or a possibly deceased individual. Ash states that the police must have gotten there after she had left. Honer backs up Ash by saying that the call came in at 9:30 and the officers got to the Jensen residence at 10 am. JJ then turns her attention to Dylan and asks if they were still fighting in the morning. Dylan takes a little bit to answer JJ’s question, but he states that they weren’t fighting.

JJ asks Eula if Ash paid her rent in December. She confirms this and states that the rent is due on the 1st, but they have a grace period to pay it until the 5th.  JJ asks this to gauge Eula’s truthfulness, as in the police report, Eula claimed that Ash was behind in her rent. Eula denies this.  Eula told the police that Ashley was AWOL, she hasn’t seen her in several weeks, and that she thought that Dylan had killed her. LOL. I’m sorry. That’s not funny, but it’s just so….strange. I mean, I would expect family to do that, not a landlord, especially if the rent is being paid on time every month. Eula continues to play dumb (take a shot!).

Here’s the other crazy part. JJ takes a sigh before beginning the next piece. Eula actually called back at 9:55 am and reported a dead body and a lot of blood in the apartment (He came into her apartment/ he left the bloodstains on the carpet /She ran underneath the table, he could see she was unable /So she ran into the bedroom, she was struck down /It was her doom). What the hell was Eula looking at? I mean, was she just watching a fuckin horror movie, some SAW shit and got confused? Was she just on more than just alcohol? Listen, I’ve never hallucinated some crazy shit like that when I was drunk. I must not get drunk enough.

JJ just laughs at how crazy this all sounds as Eula tries to explain herself. JJ shushes her and continues reading the police report. Eula sips on her water while JJ reads that the three officers could smell at that early in the morning that Eula reeked of alcohol and appeared plastered.  Naturally, the police didn’t see any blood or a dead body because there wasn’t one.

Eula also stole a plant out of Ash’s apartment, but then tries to clean it up by saying she didn’t really go into the apartment, but reached around the door. JJ then says that Eula went into Jensen’s apartment, which Eula then says is true. Eula says she took the plant because it was wilted. Whatever. Supposedly, Eula also stole some boots, but Eula denies this. All of these accusations of stealing coming from Eula, I think she may have been the thief all along.  Again, Eula gets caught in a lie because she told the police that she took the boots and the plant because she thought Ashley’s life was gone. I guess she figured she was dead and wanted her shit back. I don’t know. When she found out Ash wasn’t dead, she put the boots back on the door. LOL. At least she didn’t keep them after the fact she found out Ashley was still in this mortal plain.

JJ then tells Eula that she has to stop drinking. Eula says that she doesn’t drink, at least not in the morning.

JJ thanks Officer Honer for coming and makes him sit down. JJ then turns her attention back to Eula and tells her that she entered the plaintiff’s dwelling on two occasions. Eula then responds ‘no’ and JJ comes right back at her with ‘yes’. Eula then shuts up and accepts her chastising from JJ. Before JJ can get her statement out about the defendant entering Ash’s apartment without cause, she looks at Eula’s witness and asks “Who are you?” Eula’s witness is David Rosenhauer, who looks like he used to follow the Grateful Dead back in the 70s and still looked the exact same. JJ then asks if David drinks too (LOL). David says he drinks off and on and that he is Eula’s boyfriend. David looks like he drinks a lot more than “off and on”. He denies living with her, and JJ says that Eula clearly has life fucked up. Eula takes a swig of water (shoot, take a shot for that because that’s like her fourth or fifth swig of water in this case) as JJ is saying that Eula needs to clean up her act.

JJ tells David that if he were truly Eula’s friend, he’d help her. Then JJ makes David sit back down. Then JJ gets back to telling Eula that she had no business going into Jensen’s apartment. JJ wants to see the notes that Eula was sending Ashley, as that’s part of her harassment claim. Ashley hands over her documentation. Ashley states that after the phone call that Eula made about her being dead, she did not feel safe in her own home anymore. Understandable. She gave Eula a 30 day notice to vacate. Eula claims that she doesn’t remember who she rented the apartment to after Ashley left. I mean….you are a landlord, isn’t it your job to know who is renting your property? Also, you were so involved in Ashley’s life, I’m sure you’re super involved in everyone else’s life as well. Eula claims that someone had an eye on the building and wanted that specific apartment, but she doesn’t remember the name. As she’s explaining this, she’s taking another swig of water (take a shot!).

JJ then asks David who is living there, since he does work around the apartment. Eula claims that she thinks McKenzie rents the place now. Knowing Eula, who knows? Ash states that McKenzie lived there before she did, but does not know who lives in there now. Neither does Eula. JJ states that it wasn’t so long ago after Eula claims that she needs her tenet book. JJ makes David sit back down. JJ gives Dylan some friendly advice on using his “inside voice”. Then she asks Dylan about the “hall chair”. Dylan begins to give an answer and JJ yells at him to stand up and speak. Dylan states that he was accused of breaking a chair that he didn’t break. JJ then makes him sit back down. Jeez Louise, there’s a ton of accusations running about this building. I don’t think the bargain basement price of rent there is worth all the constant accusations.

Eula claims that Ash got her full deposit back. Ash denies this and states that she was shorted $25 out of her $425 security deposit. There’s some BS about a cancelled check and that the charge was $30 and I just don’t believe anything Eula says, especially after telling the cops that she saw blood and a dead body in an apartment that supposedly belonged to Ash, who is very much alive and untouched.

JJ flat out tells Eula that she doesn’t believe her and believes that Eula has memory issues due to her alcohol abuse. JJ surmises that Eula was trying to force Ashley from her apartment or has some sort of mental defect.

JJ has had enough of Eula’s crap and renders a judgment to Ash for $1455. Eula tries to speak about some facts that she didn’t get to establish during the case, but JJ coolly gives her the slip.

During the Hall-Ter-View, Eula keeps doubling down on the fight being loud (take a shot!). Ashley all of a sudden remembers that the fight happened in November, not in December as Eula had stated. I don’t know, maybe there was a loud fight. Who knows? Couples fight, but I think Eula has her memory all fucked up due to being a lush and acting all ‘Karen’-like. I think the whole situation was an egregious misunderstanding that went too far. Eula claims that she doesn’t drink that much. Yeah, sure, she probably pounds the stuff down like how she was pounding that water down during her short ass case.

Verdict: $1455 to the plaintiff. It’s a small cry from what Ash was originally suing for, but at least she won.

Did Auntie Judy say anything fucked up to anyone?: {to Eula}: “You have to stop drinking. You have to stop drinking in the morning!”

Introducing….the Attacking Chiweenie (2017)

“Well…could you please ask him again?”- Michelle Herrera

Plaintiff: Bridget Mack from Denton, TX. Bridget is cute, but kinda trashy. She has a racy tattoo on her left arm that had to be blurred out because it was too “risqué” for television, especially wholesome family programming like JJ. Bridget has a son named Malik. I can look into Bridget’s eyes and tell she is a freak, an undercover freak. Bridget claims that her neighbor’s, the defendants’, dog bit her son. She even has the tape to prove it. She is just a pissed off single mom who wants justice for little Malik.

Defendant: The co-defendants of Michelle and Francisco Herrera. This husband/wife duo live next door to the plaintiff and her child in a trailer park in Denton, TX. Francisco comes off as sort of a dick, while Michelle has some thick ass eyebrows. Michelle looks like she stepped out of 1992 with that hairstyle and, to an extent, so does Francisco. They claim that Malik, the plaintiff’s child was teasing their dog, which caused the dog to attack him. Then they change their story and claim that the dog scratched him and didn’t bite him. Something about them just seems a bit scummy to me, but I don’t know, that may just be me. They have a son named Skylar, who has a mouth that is constantly open

The Complaint: Bridget is up in court suing for medical bills after the defendants’ dog bit her child.   

What Does He/She want: Bridget wants $2000 for medical bills.

Countersuit?: No

Puppy Multiplier: 2x (take two shots since two chased Malik in the video)

Driving Around Without Insurance: N/A

What Went Down: JJ starts the case by asking both parties how long they have lived at their respective residences. Bridget claimed that in July, she would be living there for 2 years. The Herreras claim that they have lived there for 7 years. The dog bite incident in question happened on Feb 19th, 2017. Bridget claims that Malik has asked for a dog more times than she can count. The camera cuts to Malik and sort of gives a sly grin. He kinda looks like my eldest son.

Bridget has her game face on, however, in sharp contrast to her son. You see, she’s a pissed off Mom who wants the defendants to pay for what their dog did to her child. The Herreras admit that they have four dogs; a mutt, a Chiweenie (a Chihuahua and a Dachshund mix) and two Chihuahuas. That’s a lot of dogs. We only have one Boxer and that dude is like our third kid. I understand that those dogs are a bit smaller, but they also bark a hell of a lot more. They also probably eat like nobody’s business. I just left Costco today and spent $115 on dog food alone. Plus our Boxer has his own bedroom in the basement of the townhouse. Not trying to gloat or anything, but our townhouse is much bigger than a trailer, I just couldn’t imagine having four dogs in a trailer, but whatever.

Anyway, moving past my soapbox moment.

There wasn’t a fence between the properties and also neither Bridget nor the Herreras witnessed the dog bite incident. JJ tells Malik that he got bit, to which he confirms. Malik looks a lot younger than 8, he seems more like he’s 6, but that’s just my take. JJ invites him up to the witness box (take a shot!), and we finally see Bridget drop her game face and smile a bit.

JJ asks Malik if he remembers the incident with the dogs of the Herrera family, but Malik states that he doesn’t. Malik doesn’t remember shit, so JJ then brings Skylar Sims, the Herrera child, to the witness box (take a shot!). Skylar is 13, yet looks like he’s 10. It must something in the water in the Denton area that makes children appear much younger than they are and the adults look much older than they are. I don’t know, it’s just me, but when I was 13, I could easily pass for 16. It got me out of trouble for a while. That’s why I'm worried about hitting middle age. What if I look older when I hit middle age?

Anyway, Skylar was out with the dogs. He says he was out with two of the dogs, which were the “mutt” and the Chiweenie. JJ then asks Skylar if that was the Chihuahua. Skylar looks to his parents for guidance, as any 13 year old child would do. JJ catches onto this and says “No, no. Don’t look at them. Look at me” (take a shot!). So right out the gate either Skylar has been coached or he had forgotten what actually occurred that day. JJ tells Skylar that all he has to do is tell her the truth and there will be no problem.

Apparently Skylar was walking the dogs behind his house in his own yard. He says that the mutt was twisting around his arm and the leash for the Chiweenie had slipped and the dog ran after Malik. Skylar states that Malik may have been on his own property or the property of the Herrera family, since there is no clear line of demarcation, such as a fence. JJ tells Skylar to go sit down.

JJ states that that was easy because it’s a little bit different from the answer that the defendants gave. She then wants to know who has a video. Bridget comes out and states that she has a vid and the receipts. She explains that the video shows Malik running from the dogs and points out that there were three dogs chasing Malik. Bridget is not fucking around. This came from her home surveillance cams. Bridget claims that the bite happened off screen. JJ also makes a comment about how Skylar admitted that the Herrera family is responsible for the dog bite.

In the video (take two shots since a vid was played in court), we see two dogs chasing Malik down as Malik tries to scale a recycling bin, but comes up short. Then, he just runs towards the dogs, but the dogs were chasing him. Meanwhile, there were a ton of other children just standing around until we see what I think is Skylar finally grabbing a leash and running towards where Malik is off camera.

JJ claims that she has got it. She tells the Herraras that what Skylar told her was completely different from what is in their answer and totally different than the video. JJ claims at first she was sympathetic with them, but that’s not the case now. At first, the Herrera fam claimed that young Malik went into their yard and was teasing their dogs, but now that JJ has seen the video and has spoken to Skylar, she doesn’t believe that to be the case.

JJ reiterates that Skylar screwed up with the leash and the Chiweenie escaped and chased Malik down. Michelle is defiant and claims that Malik was in their yard, teasing the dogs, and that’s how he got bit. JJ asks who saw that, and Michelle claims that Malik does that weekly. JJ then states “I don’t care!” (take a shot!).  She wants to know who saw that on Feb 19th. Michelle says that Skylar saw that, and JJ offers a rebuttal that Skylar never mentioned that. Michelle then asks JJ to cross examine Skylar again on what he said. JJ refuses to do so, as now he has been sufficiently coached by Mom on what to say.

I’m not going to lie, JJ legit can’t ask him again, but that’s some coaching shit. JJ then asks Malik if he was teasing the dogs. He says ‘no’. Then JJ asks if he remembers being bitten by the dogs, to which Malik says ‘yes’. Bridget runs interference and explains that Malik is just being shy right now, as he remembers. JJ agrees with Bridget and says that she can see that he was bitten and frightened.

JJ then asks Bridget for the medical bills. While Officer Byrd is collecting the medical bills, JJ asks Skylar who the other children were at the scene of the dog biting. Skylar explains, in a roundabout way, that those were children from around the way playing with his “littler” siblings.

JJ has a look at the medical bills and states that there is one emergency room bill and one doctor bill. Bridget goes on to explain that at that particular hospital the ER and the doctor’s visits bill separately. That there will be two different bills for the exact same visit and there was nothing she could do about it. Bridget also lets off some hearsay, but JJ allows it (take two shots for that!). Bridget has no health insurance, so all of this is out of pocket for her. She claims that she let Frank (Francisco) know that the medical bills were going to be two different bills since that’s the way this specific hospital charges. I mean, I’ve seen that before. You take your kid to the ER and then there’s a different bill for the both the ER visit and the doctor’s visit. America’s health system is greedy like that, so I don’t doubt Bridget.

The total bill was $821. Bridget says she tried to get in contact with the Herreras and they just flat out ignored her. She even warned them that she would pursue this further, but her warnings befell deaf ears.

Frank apparently came to Bridget’s house on the 21st of Feb asking if Malik was okay and that he had zero qualms paying the bill. However, on the bill, due to HIPPA regulations, it will never name a specific reason for the visit. Frank wanted proof that the bill was for the dog bite.

JJ says that both bills show that the visit was February 19th. Frank finally speaks, but comes off as sort of an asshole. He says that he’s the type of person who is not paying a bill unless it specifically states what it is supposed to be. JJ tells him that now he will pay the bill because it’s an emergency visit on February 19th. Frank, however, is defiant; stating that the bill never showed who the person was who received treatment. JJ says that she sees the name of the person right there on the paperwork. JJ looks at the documents that the Herreras have and it shows Malik’s name on there. Frank tries to play dumb and ask Michelle “It has it on there?” (take a shot!).

JJ starts admonishing Frank before Michelle raises her hand. JJ turns her attention to her and asks “What?!” Michelle says that this is the first time she has seen the video, and has even gone to the office at their park to obtain the video. The park told Michelle that Bridget’s cameras do not work. Apparently they do since we see a video up in court. Bridget, not even having to explain herself since she’s winning, states that she’s never received any request for any video. JJ doesn’t even acknowledge Bridget’s interjection, but instead is laser focused on the Herrera fam, stating that Bridget just didn’t materialize that video out of thin air. She then threatens to play the video again (take a shot!).  Michelle changes her tune real quick after that. She acknowledges that those are her dogs, but changes her story and says that Malik was not bitten, but scratched. Oh…okay, so now you want to acknowledge that something DID happen. At first, Michelle, you claimed nothing happened, and it was all Malik’s doing. Which one is it?

JJ just gets sick of the lies, and while Bridget was still talking (sweetheart, shut up, you’re not losing!), JJ awards Bridget $821.

During the Hall-Ter-View, Michelle sticks to her story on how Malik has been terrorizing their dogs forever and a day (take a shot!). Meanwhile, Bridget, who now has a slight grin on her face and has dropped her ‘pissed off single mom’ attitude, is saying that the Herrera fam have never indicated to her that Malik has been terrorizing their dogs. Michelle then comes for Bridget by insulting her parenting skills. She says that Bridget needs to teach her kids to respect other people’s property and animals. Bridget says she is fine with the decision. I don’t know, Bridget does seem like a responsible mother, even though she’s cute, but sort of trashy.

Verdict: Plaintiff awarded $821.

Did Auntie Judy say anything fucked up to anyone?: {to Frank}: “Well, now you’ll pay the bill-you’ll pay the bill because it’s an emergency bill on February 19th. You saw the video. That’s why she took the child to the emergency room. There was no other reason for her to take the child to the emergency room other than that. Now do you understand?”

Edited September 12, 2022 by DjamillasMan

[CrazyInAlabama]

4 p.m. episodes-

First (2014)-

Parking Rage! -Plaintiff Jeanette Camarillo suing defendant Marlyn Castillo   Plaintiff was going to park and take her kids to a street fair.    Plaintiff entered the parking lot, and defendant was in the lot with her engine off waiting for someone to leave.   Another fair goer walked to his car to leave, and waved at plaintiff to follow him and take the parking space.  Plaintiff claims defendant wasn’t anywhere close to space.   Then, when defendant pulled her car forward, blocking plaintiff from grabbing the space, but she backed down, plaintiff parked, defendant pulled up and said she was waiting for the space, and plaintiff ignored defendant and went into the fair.

Plaintiff got into the space first, and claims defendant keyed her car while she was at the fair. My guess is plaintiff is so nasty to others that there are probably hundreds of suspects for the car keying.  Anthony Luna, husband of plaintiff is her witness.   He lies for his plaintiff wife.   He claims he saw defendant key the car.   He also claims defendant said she was going to key the car.

Police report made from lying plaintiff witness is submitted.   Report says nothing about husband seeing the keying.

Plaintiff case dismissed.

Best Friend Bailout -Plaintiff Dana Martin suing defendant Suzet Begesha for return of money for bail, for Failure To Appear for a DUI case.      Defendant was 50 then.    So, after arrest on outstanding warrant she called plaintiff, even though her boyfriend bailed her out for the DUI.

Bail added up to $2707.    Defendant says plaintiff knew she was unemployed, divorcing, and is sole caretaker for her adult son, and lives off of food stamps, son’s SSI, and relatives.   How did plaintiff think the defendant could pay her back?   Answer is defendant’s mother will take her IRA out, and repay plaintiff.  

$2800 to plaintiff.

Second (2014)-

Fight Over a Funeral -Plaintiff/ex-girlfriend Jonna Patak suing defendant/ex-boyfriend,  Brandon Baxter for a loan to bury defendant’s father, a camper, and for assaulting her, and wants her dental bills paid because of damage from the assault.      Plaintiff say he punched her, defendant says she jumped him and he pushed her off, and didn’t mean to hurt her.    Plaintiff lives in Binghamton NY, this happened in Vestal, NY,  and is now in Texas, plaintiff has five days to pick up the camper from Texas.

Defendant lives in Brewton, AL.     Funeral costs were a year ago, and defendant says plaintiff offered to pay, but it wasn’t a loan, so $971 is owed to plaintiff.  

The night of the fight, defendant says plaintiff was very drunk, holding their dog carelessly, attacked him from behind, was clawing him, and he’s the one who called the cops.     However, police report statements don’t mention he was acting in self

Camper dismissed, plaintiff has five days to pick up camper, it’s in her name.    Plaintiff will get orthodontist bills paid, total $2728.

Attorney Extortion? -Plaintiff/attorney  David Clark suing defendant/former client Jason Strycharz for unpaid attorney fees, punitive damages for harassment and extortion.    Defendant was arrested by a SWAT team for a loaded shotgun in his home, during a custody fight, and he was arrested for child endangerment.    (This was in Valencia, CA). Attorney apparently has a past, and is willing to talk about it, JJ declines to hear it, but he did pass the California bar.     

Defendant took a plea to three charges, two for child endangerment, and one other.   Defendant paid $2,000 (retainer agreement was $3,000) for this case retainer.    If it had gone to trial it would be $5,000 for the retainer.    Defendant says after he accepted the plea deal, that plaintiff said ‘we could have beaten this’.  

Sentence was 72 days in jail, four yeasr probation, in lieu of 4 years in prison possible if he went to trial.   Defendant was enraged by the ‘we could have beaten this’ remark.    Not a good risk to take, in my opinion, 72 days vs. 4 years would have been foolish.

Plaintiff gets $1,000 for fees.  (Hall-terview is interesting, defendant claims the attorney's past includes burglary, and heroin possession. )

5 p.m. episodes-

First (2017)-

Internet Obscenity Revenge?!-Plaintiff Mary Class suing former tenants Steve Reid (Tenant #1) and Robert Turner (Tenant #2) for damages to her home, harassment, and defamation.     There were six tenants at the end of the lease, and only two were left past lease termination.   Plaintiff gave 30-day notice in April, to move out by 1 June, the two tenants were month-to-month tenants, but defendant idiot #1 (the one who sent the nasty texts to a 10-year-old child) says he didn't want to move. Steve Reid.   The third remaining tenant was also there until 11 June, Brady Ulrich is Tenant #3.       

Tenant #1 Steve Reid, says when plaintiff called one of his Nigerian friends a "Ratchet Princess" he decided to retaliate.  Plaintiff was moving back to her $2 million dollar beach house.  

When JJ sees the text on plaintiff's phone, she has Officer Byrd show it to defendant witness, tenant #3.    After seeing the nasty text sent by idiot #1, Steve Reid, to a 10 year old child, he says if someone sent that to a 10 year old in his family, that person wouldn't be sending any more texts.     After the notice was given (they had six month’s notice that plaintiff wouldn't be renewing the lease), idiot #1, Steve Reid, started posting plaintiff's address and other information on revenge porn sites.    (Brady Ulrich, witness and tenant #3 is now a Physician's Assistant, so he must be a lot better character than Idiot #1.   Judging from his responses at seeing the texts, his reaction is very appropriate).  

The nasty ads show requests to call or visit the woman for various sex acts, and role play, all posted by Idiot #1, Steve Reid.  They also included her phone number and address.   There is nothing the plaintiff sent to defendants that was nasty in any way. 

Plaintiff shows photos of the damages to the home. 

$5,000 to plaintiff.   $5,000 is against Steve Reid. 

Wild Car Crash Caught on Tape- (I love cases with video that shows who is lying)-Plaintiff Nafeesa Leverette suing her former friend, Joseph Pinkston, for totaling her car.   Defendant borrowed plaintiff's car (they are friends from church), running an errand stopped in at a store, left the motor running, and keys in the car, and the car was stolen (that’s the defendant’s story, which is total garbage).      When defendant realized car was stolen (like hell it was, you know he wrecked it), he called plaintiff, a police report was made.   30 minutes later a fireman called plaintiff, asking if she was all right.   Car was found wrecked, crashed into a telephone pole, and with the keys on the driver's seat.  

Plaintiff had insurance, so that paid off, and there was a shortfall of over $1,000, which plaintiff has been paying off.    

There is a video of the car crashing in the telephone pole, showing defendant jumping out of the car, and jumping into another car (sounds like they were street racing).    The video is from a neighbor with security cameras, showing the race, the accident, and defendant running to the other car.   Defendant is such a liar, it's the same jacket he was wearing when he borrowed the car, and it is absolutely the defendant.  

$2800 for plaintiff to cover $1,000 deductible, and shortfall on car insurance.   

Second (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, Jason Gould, 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.

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.  

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.    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.   

 Boyfriend, Jason Gould went to the hearing, and the petition was withdrawn, because defendant Female Birth Vessel (FBV) was on vacation already.   Jason the boyfriend certainly has a bad case of sweating bullets in JJ's court.    

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

(Nothing JJ says to the parents registered with the mother.   Poor kid will be about 11 now, not quite old enough to say who he wants to live with permanently. )

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 interrupts in one time too many, and is told to refile locally.

Edited September 12, 2022 by CrazyInAlabama

[CrazyInAlabama]

4 p.m. episodes-

First (2014)-

Child’s Dog Bite Marks Disputed -Plaintiffs Julia and David Burg suing defendants Elizabeth and Tanner Schultz for a dog attack on plaintiff’s 7-year-old son, Noah.   As usual, defendant says it didn’t happen, but if it did it wasn’t that bad, and blames the victim.    Defendant Tanner took their two dogs to visit his wife’s grandparents, and wife’s mother, who live close to plaintiffs.    Plaintiffs say black dog owned by defendants bit their son, want medical bills, and punitive damages.  

Noah testifies that he was riding his bike, and the dog ran out in the road and bit him on the leg.    Sister Ava didn’t see the bite happen, but saw the marks.   Bite didn’t break the skin, and the kids went home to tell the parents.   Two dogs weren’t on leashes.      Defendant claims he went home by 3 p.m., but grandmother’s caretaker said at 5:30 pm that Mr. Schultz just left.    

Medical bills are submitted for a small puncture wound, and dogs were quarantined for 10 days.   Wife wasn’t even there, and is the director of the defendants’ case.    Defendant wife says only one puncture, not four, but I see four.   Defendant also claims it’s not a dog bite. 

$987 medical, and punitive total $2000. (Hall-terview defendant woman claims nothing happened, plaintiffs say people in the neighborhood have had issues with defendants’ dogs before).

Show Me the Money -Plaintiff Joshua Sparks suing defendant Ryan Benniventall for the balance of payments on a Subaru WRX (Medford, OR).   Sale price was $24,500. KBB was $25,000 (Officer Byrd says car was worth $19,500) with different modifications making it more valuable.  

Defendant claims he got a loan for the purchase price, and creditor paid plaintiff’s loan at Sterling Credit Union off, but defendant has no proof.     Defendant’s loan company paid $22,100, still owing $2400 to plaintiff.   Defendant has no proof of what was paid. 

$2400 to plaintiff.   Car will cost almost $30k with interest.

Second (2014)-

Drunken Stupor Nightmare! -Plaintiff Christopher Cordrey suing defendant Jessica Craig, for damaging his apartment and car while she was drunk.   Both litigants were drunk.   Plaintiff says defendant was outside the house, covered in blood, his car had shattered windows, mirrors.   Defendant says she doesn’t remember a thing about that night.  

Plaintiff says they were both drinking, he went to bed, and the police broke his door down, and woke him up (he’s a very heavy sleeper).   When police asked him to look at his car, plaintiff says there was a trail of blood from the car to the front door of the apartment.  Plaintiff’s car windows were smashed,  mirrors ripped off, defendant’s laptop and purse were on top of his car, a fire extinguisher from the apartment was in the car too, with blood all over.   Defendant claims other unknown people trashed the car, and she did nothing to the car.

Police report says defendant was drunk, and under other drug influences too.   Report says defendant said she was mad at plaintiff, and she admitted she vandalized the car.   

Plaintiff receives $1,151 to fix the car.

Dirt Bike Bonfire! -Plaintiff Richie Trimble suing defendant Graham Joseph for damaging his dirt bike in a bonfire started by defendant.   Plaintiff Trimble rents a garage space to work on bicycles and motorbikes.   Defendant looks out of it, and JJ thinks he’s on something chemical. I think both litigants look stones.        Plaintiff pays $400 a month to leaser, plaintiff is a sublet to actual renter.     Defendant rents another bay in the garage area. 

Defendant started the fire in the west courtyard in a burn barrel, in the common space.  Defendant was drinking, not plaintiff.     Plaintiff’s dirt bike was parked in front of his garage space, and claims dirt bike was ruined by the defendant’s fire.   There was only one fire in the garage area that day. 

Defendant’s defense was plaintiff shouldn’t have parked there.

$1100 to plaintiff 

5 p.m. episodes-

First (2017)-

Wedding Ring Theft?-Plaintiff Awni Safadi is suing  defendant, his  younger brother Joshua Goff.   Plaintiff is suing defendant for home damages, damaging his motorcycle, and stealing plaintiff's wife's wedding ring.   Defendant was kicked out by mother from family home, for smoking pot, having parties in her home, and plaintiff took the brother in.    Plaintiff was injured in a motorcycle wreck, was in the hospital, and plaintiff and wife came home from the hospital after three days, and found dog stuff on the rug, his motorcycle spray painted, TV broken, other spray paint vandalism, and the wife's wedding ring had been stolen, and pawned by defendant.   Defendant graduated from alternative high school.  

Defendant says house was trashed when he came home, and blames it on plaintiff's enemies.   Defendant pawned the plaintiff's wife's wedding ring.  Plaintiff's witness is the pawn shop owner, saying the date and time the wedding ring was pawned, and paid defendant $900.  Defendant says the ring pawn was to pay for his cell phone the plaintiff broke.  However, defendant pawned the ring a few days before the phone was taken by plaintiff. 

Defendant signed it was his ring when he sold it to the pawn shop for $900, and it wasn't reported stolen when it was pawned, and resold.   Defendant claims there was no party, and he's absolutely lying.  The ring was never reported as stolen, and the vandalism wasn't either.   Ring was pawned the day after plaintiff returned from the hospital, and it was pawned by defendant.   If ring was never reported as stolen to the police, then how did pawn shop know it was hot?   Or did plaintiff go to the pawnshop?   

JJ tells the plaintiff to make a police report, against the defendant.    Plaintiff has five days to file the police report against defendant, and then he will get his show money.      Defendant can't keep his story straight.  (I know a lot more than I ever wanted to about pawning stolen items in Warren, Michigan). 

$2800 to plaintiff, plaintiff has five days to file a police complaint against the defendant, and after proof of a police complaint against defendant is filed the plaintiff gets paid.    (I bet the $2800 was never claimed by plaintiff, because he never filed the police report against his brother).

Don't Kiss Your Sister's Boyfriend-Plaintiff Brandy Parish (21 years old) suing her older sister, Veronica Williams (23) over an unpaid loan.    Defendant claims plaintiff damaged her car, and that exceeded the cost of the loan.   Car damage happened when they had a fight involving plaintiff sucking face with defendant's boyfriend (is it too much to hope it's the defendant's ex-boyfriend? No, boyfriend is defendant's witness).   Plaintiff claims defendant damaged her own car.   

$416 to defendant for the car.  

Second (2017)-

Worms Coming Up Through Drain?!-Plaintiffs / former tenants James Glass and girlfriend Veronica Ortiz are suing former landlords David and Melissa Dempsey (Her mother is the actual owner) and for return of rent, security deposit, and harassment.     Plaintiffs paid first month's rent, and security deposit to defendants, with a written lease (defendants brought lease copy). 

 Defendant mother, the owner of property, can't fly (Sorry JJ, some people can't fly for physical reasons).     Plaintiffs saw the home before move in, (Jersey City, NJ), and claim defendants would put in new appliances, and shower, window security bars, and a cabinet or two.  Plaintiffs only lived there a month. 

Plaintiffs claim shower flaked paint, that jammed drain, and worms came out of the drain (plumber says it was pasta spaghetti, not worms).   Defendants claim plaintiffs were in the apartment more than a month, and flooring was new before plaintiffs moved in.   

Defendants had plaintiffs evicted in June, by housing court.   Plaintiffs claim they moved in April, voluntarily.   Defendants say the closets, refrigerator, kitchen were full of garbage. 

Plaintiffs claim they stayed in motels from April through June, because they were afraid of defendant woman.   The owner/defendant's mother actually lives in part of the house.  (I'm sure I saw this before, probably a couple of times, but the plaintiffs look very familiar.   I wonder if they're on other shows too?).  

By the way JJ, people buy all new furniture on payment plans, or rent to own, then move leaving everything behind, or take everything with them, and leave no forwarding address.   They also get a house hold full of rent to own furniture, get it delivered to an empty house that they claim they're moving into, and then sell it, but they never lived there at all.     

Defendant/landlords also say the plaintiffs smoked pot every day in the house, and the lease says smoke free environment.     Also, plaintiff woman has a 3-year-old asthmatic child they were smoking pot right next to.    

Defendant also say plaintiff woman wanted a different lease leaving the plaintiff boyfriend's name off the lease, in plaintiff woman's name only, to defraud the welfare department.  Why is JJ going to reward welfare cheats?   (The worms coming out of the jammed shower drain is the dumbest thing I've heard in a long time). 

$850 to defendants, (this is for 2 month’s rent, minus the security deposit).  

[CrazyInAlabama]

4 p.m. episodes-

First (2014)-

Salvaged SUV Scam? -Plaintiff  Shaunda Nohrer suing defendant Cortenay Davis for scamming her  over a car sold by defendant to plaintiff.    Plaintiff witness is husband Phil Noher.   This happened in Finneytown, Ohio. Plaintiff claims $2600 was paid to defendant. Ad was for a 2000 Ford Expedition, garage kept, one-owner, and price was $3,000 in the craigslist ad. Defendant claims it was her ex-husband’s title, and says the ad said ‘Salvage Title’, but plaintiffs dispute that.  

Car had to be inspected to have title changed to regular title from salvage title.   Plaintiff gave $2650, to defendant.   Defendant signed the title that day, when plaintiff paid for it.   Defendant claims plaintiff never gave her any money. 

Defendant claims plaintiff didn’t pay her, but they took car for inspection (unless it’s very different than my knowledge of salvage titles, it’s not just an inspection, but an in-depth inspection), and car flunked.  Plaintiff says she paid defendant, put new tires on car, had signed title, and the went to DMV, and car wasn’t able to be titled.     

Plaintiff took car back to defendant, and car is now in defendant’s driveway.   Defendant claims she was never paid for car, and that she told plaintiffs it was a salvage title.

$2600 to plaintiffs.

Dog Walking Attack -Plaintiff Jovonna Kingkade suing defendant Yolanda Wallace and Taylor Brown (Wallace’s son’s girlfriend). for their dog biting plaintiff’s dog.    Plaintiff’s boyfriend, John Speckman was walking two tiny dogs belonging to plaintiff, and boyfriend was walking the leashed dogs on regular leashes on the public sidewalk.   Then defendant’s dog attacked the plaintiff’s two tiny dog.  All dogs were leashed.

Defendant says she was across the street from apartment foyer where they all live, and claims plaintiff dogs lunged and bit the tiny dogs.  

JJ is claiming having the Maltese dogs on regular, not retractable, leashes was inadequate.    JJ is blaming the little dogs yapping at the Boxer caused the attack.

Plaintiff case dismissed.    Ridiculous decision by JJ.  

Second (2014)-

Vandalism Caught on Tape! -Plaintiff Denise Zack suing defendant Keever Czlapinkski for harassment, vandalizing and stealing her property.  Litigants are both residents of the same triplex apartment house.   He is accused, and shown on camera, of destroying her plants.    Defendant works for Department of Corrections in California.   Plaintiff has a restraining order on defendant, defendant actually moved out already.    On video, defendant is show going behind the apartment house, which is where plaintiff lives, and not his property.   He went to the back yard, and came back and destroyed her plants. And screaming at plaintiff. 

JJ was totally irrational on this case, and the dog attack on the previous episode at 4 p.m.    

BBQ grill was cabled and bolted to house, and defendant went out back with bolt cutters, shown on video, and then cutting cable, he says he cut the cable.    He says it was done to protect himself.  He admits to the vandalism, but claims it was justified.

(He’s a licensed psychologist! Apparently in San Diego now.)      

Plaintiff receives $50. 

Two Moms Sue One Child -Plaintiff Debra Allen and partner Stephanie Reedy suing, defendants Nicholas Reedy (son of plaintiff), and his girlfriend Taylor Jessee for an unpaid loan, unpaid rent, and for a playstation 3, suing for $1874.   Rent dismissed.    Reedy bought a car for $1000 for Nicholas, and she claims he only repaid $350.   Defendant Nicholas denies repaying the $350.  

Mother Allen claims son repaid her $350 for the loan, and Nicholas said it was for the loan, of course son denies this.   There’s a red stain on the carpet, and Nicholas claims his 17-year-old sister did it.  Mother says sister claims Nicholas’ girlfriend did the paint mark.   

Nicholas says he moved out, and wanted the Playstation, and mother gave it to him.

Then plaintiff Reedy wants to tell JJ about some therapy for their daughter, and a letter from daughter’s counselor. .  

Plaintiff case dismissed

5 p.m. episodes-

First (2017)-

Felony Kickbacks?!-Plaintiff Kevin Maher suing former friend, and business associate, Christina Garnica for unpaid gardening, and legal fees.    Plaintiff is a private investigator, and defendant was a claims adjuster, and sometimes referred plaintiff business.     Plaintiff claims defendant said that all others adjusters she referred work to gave her kickbacks, and plaintiff refused to give kickbacks (plaintiff also said defendant wanted him to provide her with sexual services).    Defendant had plaintiff's gardener clean up a property for her, and defendant refused to pay gardener, and defendant wanted plaintiff to pay the gardener for her.     Plaintiff did pay the $400 for gardener, so the gardener wasn't working for free.    Plaintiff also paid a paralegal firm $400 to prepare paperwork to sue defendant over this $400.    Plaintiff told defendant's boss about the kickback scheme, and defendant was fired.   

Plaintiff also says things changed in their friendship after he made clear that he wasn't interested in her romantically.   Defendant did quid pro quo to have gardener/handy man do other work for her, and wanted plaintiff to pay the $400 to gardener / handyman. 

Defendant is counter claiming over a false termination.  (As the next post by CG says, only the company employing you can be sued for false termination, and at-will employees can be fired for almost any reason, or no reason).     Defendant can forget that, she was terminated for a good reason. 

$400 to plaintiff.        

Pomeranian Puppy Problem-Plaintiff Kelly Minister suing ex-boyfriend Devon Henderson for the return of her Pomeranian puppy.     When litigants were living together, a friend gifted them with the Pomeranian puppy.  After that the unhappy separation happened, and defendant took the puppy with him, and plaintiff would visit the puppy sometimes.   

Then defendant told plaintiff that if she paid him $1000 (she says $500) for the dog, he would give up dog to her.   Plaintiff claims she paid the $500 for dog to defendant.       Then defendant came and took the dog back after that.   Defendant claims plaintiff owed him $500 more, but plaintiff says she doesn't owe the money.    Defendant came and took the dog back, while ex was taking a shower.  (We all know exactly what was going on then too). 

Defendant brought his current girlfriend to court with him.   Girlfriend doesn't seem too thrilled about the shower story.      Then, the girlfriend says defendant gave the dog to her as a present. 

JJ tells defendant to return the dog to plaintiff, and then he'll get his expense and appearance money.   JJ is preparing an order to retrieve dog.   Defendant said that he won't give dog back, and JJ jumps all over him, and says he's getting no money from the show.   I wonder how this turned out?  

Case is recalled, to ream out looser defendant over the dog statement.   Defendant told to give the dog back to plaintiff, or he can walk home, and will not get appearance money.   I hope plaintiff got the dog back, but I doubt it.  Defendant threatens on national TV that he's going to break into plaintiff's house, and get the dog back.   However, defendant came from Spokane WA, and will get no ticket home or appearance money, and the friend who is watching the dog will surrender custody to a neutral person so plaintiff can get her dog back, and no money until then. 

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 .    Damages to grill and washer are dismissed.   

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’s phone (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).  

Edited September 15, 2022 by CrazyInAlabama

[Carolina Girl]

16 hours ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

Defendant is counter claiming over a false termination.   Defendant can forget that, she was terminated for a good reason. 

Loved Defendant claiming that they fired her based solely on Plaintiff's allegations.  I would bet my next paycheck that after getting the phone call from plaintiff, they contacted every investigator that worked with this slimey bitch and they were more than happy to confirm it.  And for all those supposed "family" outings defendant spoke about, I'd sure be interested in hearing how much of it was financed by the plaintiff.  

Someone also needs to tell the defendant that "wrongful termination" is a cause of action against your EMPLOYER, not the whistleblower who exposed you.  Notice that she didn't include defamation and/or slander in her cross-complaint.  

[CrazyInAlabama]

4 p.m. episodes-

First (2014)-

Eyewitness Perjury?! -Plaintiff Jonathan Matthews and mom Gloria, are suing defendant Johnell West for car damages, claiming defendant hit their parked car.    Defendant claims she ran over something on the road, but didn’t hit anyone’s car, but the incident caused her car to swerve into an alley mouth.   Something was under defendant’s car, but she doesn’t know what it was.    Whatever defendant ran over broke her axle.   

Plaintiff was in the house, and someone came to tell him, Ms. Bolser, plaintiff witness, says defendant barreled down the street, hit plaintiff’s car, barely missed Bolser’s mother’s car.   First witness told plaintiff about the accident, and Bolser didn’t come forward until later.  JJ doesn’t believe the witness statement, and says statement was perjury.

Plaintiff got the information from defendant, and her car had to be towed.   Front tire is sideways.

Defendant had no insurance, it lapsed two days before.  

Plaintiff case dismissed.

Twice Kidnapped Puppy -Plaintiff Marilyn Keiss is suing Tiffany Spalding/ defendant for stealing her puppy.     Defendant had puppy for a couple of days, but couldn’t take care of it.  Plaintiff had puppy for 8 months, and after an argument with defendant, puppy was gone, it went to mediation, and defendant lost and had to return dog to plaintiff.   Two days later someone broke in through the sliding glass door, but only the puppy was gone, not a laptop, prescription drugs, and other valuables were in plain sight, but only dog was gone.   This happened after defendant confronted plaintiff, spit in her face, and lost at mediation over the puppy.

Defendant claims plaintiff had a textbook on CD and wouldn’t return it, so she used the key, and stole the puppy.     Then when they met to exchange the textbook, defendant claims plaintiff ripped the dog away from defendant, spit in defendant’s face, and other nasty things.   JJ suspects the defendant’s boyfriend burglarized the home the second time. 

Defendant says burglary and stealing the dog was her only option. Police can’t find the puppy.  (My guess is the dog was either dumped at an animal shelter far away from plaintiff’s home).

Defendant admits she burglarized the home to steal the dog once, and JJ says boyfriend and defendant did it the second time.

Plaintiff wants $5,000.  In the hall-terview, plaintiff says defendant is a convicted felon many times over.  My guess is plaintiff never saw the puppy again.

Second (2014)-

Hidden Camera Catches a Thief? -Plaintiff /landlord Ludmila Boiko suing defendant/former tenant Linda Byrum for identity theft.  They lived together for two months, and have been fighting in court for two years since.   Plaintiff has a video of defendant in plaintiff’s private quarters in the bedroom, stealing plaintiff’s items.   JJ doesn’t think the theft or property theft on camera is important.  Must be nice to be a multimillionaire.  Bet if you stole from JJ she would track you down like the policeman in Les Miserables (spelling).  

JJ won’t let plaintiff show the video of the defendant’s theft.   Video is finally shown, with defendant stealing mail from plaintiff, and identity theft.  

Defendant says she took a lot of photos of plaintiff’s documents in plaintiff’s room to protect herself.

JJ’s wrong, plaintiff can film in her own bedroom.   Plaintiff may be out of control, but I think somebody did steal her stuff.

JJ dismisses plaintiff case.

Unwed Parents Parking Ticket Plight -Plaintiff Dominque Hall suing defendant Leroy Cooper for boot-removal fees, and parking tickets.  Tickets were all defendant’s tickets.   Litigants have a child together, and were living together, but sometimes.

Plaintiff came out of work one day, to find a boot on her car.   Since she’s a co-owner of the car, and defendant doesn’t even know what planet he’s on, she’s the one the police went after.

JJ dismisses tickets when the two were together.   Plaintiff case dismissed.

5 p.m. episodes-

First (2017)-

Last Will and Testament Surprise- Plaintiff Thomas Reilly suing his cousin, defendant Anna Wells for legal fees due to false allegations by her.    Plaintiff's sister died in California, had cancer, and plaintiff and wife moved from Florida to California, However, plaintiffs are working on a contracting job in California, and still are, and didn't just move to help sister.    Plaintiff says he did move with the wife, to help the sister, and are originally from California.      (I hate plaintiff's witness/wife's hair bow).    There were six siblings of the sister and plaintiff.   Plaintiff and wife took care of the sister, for a long time.    

Then sister dies, and at will reading the sister left everything to the cousin/defendant, and plaintiff was made trustee to the estate for the cousin/defendant.   Plaintiff says defendant didn't like the way he handled the trust, and so plaintiff dropped out as trustee.    Plaintiff says estate went through four attorneys for the estate in six months, because defendant is hard to work with.  (If I would have been in plaintiff’s shoes, I would have refused to handle the estate).

After defendant got into the sister's condo, she claimed a lot of stuff was missing, and vandalized, so defendant put in a claim through the homeowner's insurance company.  Insurance adjuster said the police report says defendant names plaintiff as the thief.  (Plaintiff's wife is booted for butting in).

Plaintiff wasn't given a copy of police report, because he was named as the culprit by defendant.   Defendant has a copy of the police report, which says defendant said plaintiff ruined the sleep number mattress, and other items, said plaintiff is unstable and vindictive, and she didn't want criminal charges, just a police report for the insurance company.     Defendant also didn't want the police to contact the plaintiff either. 

Defendant received $16,000 from the insurance company, for a bicycle, purse, mattress, etc.,  (When the amount is read of the payout, the audience members gasp, and don't get told to be quiet).   However, as JJ points out, defendant paid for none of these items, but had a windfall from the insurance company.    That's also why she didn't want an investigation, but just wanted the report for the insurance company.  Defendant didn't even make the report to police until two months after the alleged theft.    I can't believe the insurance company paid off on the vandalism and thefts, no proof of purchases to equal $16,000, no proof of who stole, or vandalized anything, it could have been anyone, including defendant, someone else with a key, or anyone who knew the condo was not occupied.      

I don't see why the insurance company paid off on a theft, and vandalism where the defendant refused to file charges, wanted no investigation, and hadn't paid a penny for any of the items.    How does the insurance company pay someone for items she can't prove existed?    (On a personal nasty note,  I can see that the amount of facial work defendant had done has eaten up the money from the insurance.)  Defendant sold the condo for $407,500, net $120,000, plus the $16,000 for the insurance payout.  

Plaintiff and wife are contractors, and this could have seriously hurt his ability to get bonded, and have a contractor's license.   Plus a felony record disqualifies you for  lot of jobs.  I agree with plaintiff, it was all about the money.   Defendant is counter suing for her insurance deductible, car insurance, harassment, etc., which will be dismissed.   Defendant made a profit of $75k, plus the $16k, and is whining because she had to pay the condo/HOA fees, utilities.  

Plaintiff's case is that to clear his name with the insurance agency, he had to hire an attorney for $800.   

$800 for plaintiff for attorney fees.   

Silent Partner Rip-Off-Plaintiff Tina  Dunham suing former business partner/defendant Chris Uldall, over $1800 she calls a loan, and defendant said was a business investment that didn't pan out.  Loan was supposed to pay defendant's bills.   Defendant was also an ex of plaintiff's daughter.   

As usual, defendant claims it was a failed investment, not his fault, and plaintiff isn't getting her 'investment' back.  Defendant says business was to start flipping cars.  

$1800 to plaintiff.

 Second (2017)-

When Miniature Pinschers Attack!-Plaintiff Christina Hilling (dog owner) and Thomas Kohler Jr (dog walker) suing defendant Temmie Rosenthal for vet bills from defendant’s dog attacking  the dog plaintiff (Kohler) was caring for.   $1077 is the vet bill (cute little white, non-shaggy dog).   Defendant claims her dog didn't bite the plaintiff's dog sitting dog.   

Plaintiff was at dog park, and Felix, the victim, and defendant's Min Pin (a Min Pin isn't that big, I suggest a Manchester Terrier or some other possibly larger mix) attacked plaintiff dog Felix.    Defendant showed up at the vet clinic, but never paid anything.   Plaintiff has seen the attacking dog belonging to defendant on several other occasions.    Defendant's witness is now going to lie about seeing another dog bite the plaintiff's dog too.    

After lying to JJ and the court, defendant is very thirsty, and is drinking the Water of Dry Mouthed Liars.     The plaintiff's witness had two dogs at the park too, and plaintiff knew all of the dogs there at the park when the bite happened.    Defendant was yakking with her lying witness, ignoring her off-leash dog, and then showed up at the vet clinic after the plaintiff did. 

 As usual, defendant says her 100 lb. dog is a Service Dog, and some other dog bit the plaintiff's dog.

Plaintiff receives $1,077 vet bills. 

If You Like Me...Take Down Your Dating Profile-Plaintiff Jeffrey Graham Jr suing defendant over a plane ticket to L.A for defendant, Caroline Douglas.   Defendant and plaintiff met online, then once in person, and then defendant was going to meet her daughter the actress at an interview, so defendant could attend the interview with daughter.   Defendant called plaintiff saying she couldn't go to her daughter's interview in L.A., so he bought her a plane ticket.  Defendant is counter claiming for money she spent out of pocket, when plaintiff cancelled the plane ticket.   

Defendant claims she sent a text saying that someone she loaned money to years ago, didn't repay her, so she couldn't fly to L.A. for the daughter's interview.   Defendant says she never asked for the money from plaintiff, he offered to pay for the ticket to help her out.   Plaintiff said that he wanted her to remove her dating profile online, but she refused to.  

$613 for plane ticket that plaintiff paid.    Defendant is a disgusting grifter. 

Eviction Save-Plaintiff Carri Moore suing former neighbor for unpaid loan for rent after defendant, Teresa Aldhmour, was being evicted.   The Marshals were actually tossing her stuff out, so plaintiff got a money order for $2357 to the landlord to pay the unpaid rent, and defendant repaid $2,000.    Plaintiff wants the other $357 that wasn't paid.    Defendant claims the cashier's check cost $50 per $1000 (no it doesn’t).

The kicker is defendant finally did get evicted.   

$357 to plaintiff.

[CrazyInAlabama]

4 p.m. episodes-

First (2014)-

Dad Calls Police on Daughter -Plaintiff /daughter Natalie Jones suing defendant/dad Nathaniel Jones for wrecking two of her cars.   Then daughter was driving dad’s car.   Dad titled a Volvo in her name, and dad was driving the car, and he wrecked it.     When dad was driving the Volvo, daughter was driving the truck.    Dad promised to buy or pay for another car for daughter.  

Daughter bought and was driving a Dodge Stratus, and she was driving a Toyota Tundra when she needed air conditioning.    Dad was driving the Stratus, and wrecked it, titled in daughter’s name, and that car was junked.   Dad bought another junky car, then wanted the Toyota back.     When daughter moved out, she took her father’s truck with her. When daughter moved out, she took the Toyota Tundra, when she refused to return it, the father called it in as stolen.   A warrant was issued for the truck.

Father wanted daughter to move into an apartment with her little kid, dad saw boyfriend’s car outside the apartment, and father wanted boyfriend gone.   When daughter, boyfriend, and kid moved out she took the Toyota Tundra with her.    

Unfortunately, plaintiff was driving the Toyota, with the nannied kids, when the warrant was served.    Daughter bought another car.  Daughter wants some value from the two cars the defendant wrecked.

Total cost of Dodge and Volvo was $1800.   Junked price for the Dodge was $200.

Plaintiff gets $1600 from father.

Voicemail Vengeance -Plaintiff Daniel Stein is suing defendant Jeffrey Green ex-husband of plaintiff’s girlfriend, and father of her 7-year-old, for filing a false restraining order, and plaintiff had to hire an attorney.    Defendant claims the plaintiff tried to run him over on several occasions.    Apparently, if defendant is telling the truth, then plaintiff needs car aiming lessons, and maybe a stronger bumper.     Defendant claims plaintiff left a nasty, threatening message.

Plaintiff, defendant, and girlfriend live in the same house with the 7-year-old child.  Plaintiff left a nasty voice mail message, about the cell phone mother gave the 7-year-old on defendant’s machine.    Defendant is 67, has the 7 year old, and two others 34 and 38 years old, and JJ tells him he’s too old to have a 7-year-old.    

JJ points out plaintiff is not a step father, or husband to the girlfriend’s kid, and he needs to butt out.  

Plaintiff butted in to the open school night for defendant’s kid, and that started everything.  That’s when JJ again says that it wasn’t plaintiff’s place to show up at the kid’s school event, Open-School Night. 

Defendant says plaintiff tried to run over him, but only has a card with an incident number.    Plaintiff says the girlfriend (ex of defendant, and kid’s mother) reported defendant for child abuse.

Plaintiff case dismissed.

Second (2014)-

Incriminating Facebook Photo -Plaintiff Cynthia Santacroce suing defendants for  Dean Gray  (ex-boyfriend) and former landlord, Gabriel King. For stolen property, dog-care expenses, stolen property and libel.    Plaintiff claims there was a bedroom set that she should have been paid half for, but she didn’t purchase it.     Plaintiff claims defendants trespassed into her rented house, photographed alcohol and pill bottles and posted it online.    Defendant Gray posted the pills and booze on his FB briefly, and took them off.  The only identifying information is plaintiff’s name posted on the medication bottle labels.   JJ can’t read them. 

  Plaintiff claims she just had a tooth pulled.  Property is defendant Gray’s, he keeps the dog (already given back by the court, and not able to be re-litigated).    Then, plaintiff claims Gray grabbed her, threw her down, and she filed an assault report.   Gray had an existing assault warrant, so he was arrested.  

Then defendant King took the car keys from plaintiff to keep her from driving drunk again, and then plaintiff punched him in the stomach.   Then, plaintiff’s 911 call claiming Gray assaulted her is played, and plaintiff sounds slurred.     911 says ‘pushed me’, not assaulted, grabbed, or thrown down.  

Defendant spent almost 30 hours in jail before charges were dropped, and he wants $1200 for the effects of the assault by plaintiff.   JJ dismisses the $1200 for King (my opinion totally unfair).  

There was a cite-and-release order on King, but he was arrested anyway.  Unfair of JJ, again.

JJ will give defendant King nothing.

$1500 to defendant King, because the arrest was because of the plaintiff’s call.  Plaintiff case dismissed.  Plaintiff claims in the hall-terview that she’s going to AA meetings, is in recovery, and I don’t believe a word she says.    I just hope she stopped driving drunk and high with her kids in the car.

Scissors vs. Shoes -Plaintiff Tracie Fletcher suing defendant (her sister) Sharie Anderson for cutting up her shoes with scissors.   Plaintiff looked at the stuff left behind in closet at parent’s house, and talked to defendant about picking the stuff up.   After getting the message, defendant didn’t pick the stuff from the closet up, so plaintiff got rid of it, and defendant went ballistic with the scissors.    Father (plaintiff’s witness) says when defendant came to pick her stuff up, she cut up plaintiff’s shoes with scissors, and he was injured trying to take the scissors away from defendant daughter. (this was in the Bronx, NY).

Plaintiff said bag had been taking up room in that closet for three years.   JJ says plaintiff had no right to throw away the stuff, only her parents did. 

Plaintiff case dismissed.

5 p.m. episodes-

First (2017)-

Quick!  Take This Homeless Baby?!-Plaintiff mother Carla Johnson, and stepfather Larry George are suing mother's adult daughter, Valencia Carroll for destroying their TV, and vandalizing their car.     There was an argument, and defendant went off, and caused damages, but defendant blames it on stepfather.   

Before this argument, defendant's homeless friend had a baby, and defendant wanted mother to watch baby for a few hours.   But mother/plaintiff said defendant wanted her to watch baby long term, and mother said only if it was done legally through the court.  Mother has a two year old also.    Defendant claims the friend/baby's mother is homeless, and can't keep the baby.   Daughter claimed social security card and birth certificate for baby were lost during eviction.  Daughter can't have roommates in her program apartment, so friend couldn't move in with her.   Daughter is on disability. 

Stepfather said he wasn't going to take care of baby, so stepdaughter defendant and friends could go out and party.     During the argument between mother, stepfather, and defendant, mother claims defendant destroyed her TV, and damaged her car.  Defendant says stepfather pushed her into the TV.   Mother says daughter punched the TV.    This was with the homeless friend and baby in the house too.    Defendant claims stepfather actually damaged the car.   Mother says her daughter is a liar.   Mother says when she got to the parking space, daughter had already vandalized the car.  Daughter admits she ripped off the car's windshield wiper, and hit stepfather with it.   Stepfather says daughter ripped off the windshield wiper, and is banging on the car, hit the stepfather with the wiper, and bit him.   

$2100  to plaintiff for the TV, and the car damages.

Single Mother Mayhem?-Plaintiff Chloe Early suing former friend defendant Chelsea Escobar for return of security deposit, and moving expenses.   Litigants each are both Sainted Single Mothers of One (SSMO) child each, and moved into an apartment together.    Defendant says she was moving out of her mother's place because the dad or step dad had a heart attack, and mother didn't want extra people in her home.      Plaintiff claims defendant said defendant's sister was going to take pictures of defendant's drug paraphernalia, and send it to DCFS, CPS, whatever it is.   

Plaintiff and child were living in the master bedroom, and defendant wanted to move her boyfriend in, and defendant demanded the master bedroom for defendant and her love muffin.     Plaintiff said no to the move in idea, and the kerfuffle started.   Defendant is counter suing for unpaid rent, utilities, damages.   

Defendant has cell phone photos of damages, blamed on plaintiff.   Defendant claims plaintiff stole her laptop, but no police report or proof, so it's thrown out.   In Hall-terview, plaintiff says defendant is a druggy, and had random men over all of the time.  

Plaintiff receives $1400 for her security deposit. minus $130 for unpaid rent for 5 days =$1270 to plaintiff

Second (2017)-

Go Find Yourself Another Harlequin Great Dane (aka Harlequin Great Dane Rescue?! )-Plaintiff Billee Hirsch suing former neighbor, Kara Pedroni for the return or value of a Great Dane, and punitive damages for having the dog spayed.   Counter claim if dog is awarded back to plaintiff is board for taking care of the dog.    Plaintiff paid $1200 for the two month old dog, in 2014.   Plaintiff had a Staffordshire Terrier, and Great Dane for a few months.    Then plaintiff moved in with her boyfriend six weeks after she bought the dog (2015), and his Pit Bull didn't like the puppy, and plaintiff gave dog to defendant to dog sit.   Defendant had the dog spayed, because she wasn't going to have a 110 lb dog in heat in her house.

After two years, defendant still has the dog,  Plaintiff claimed she paid defendant for dog food.    Defendant says plaintiff paid no bills for the dog.   Over two years, plaintiff claims she visited dog every two weeks.   Plaintiff says she was waiting for a settlement for her father's estate, and then would get her own home, and get the dog back.    However, plaintiff had her own place when dog was 10 months old or so, but never got the dog.    Defendant has taken the dog to the vet for shots, treatment, and spaying.    Defendant said plaintiff's cell phone was disconnected, and that's the only way she could contact plaintiff. 

Defendant says she received a bag of food twice in the two years, and says she only saw plaintiff twice in two years.    

Defendant keeps the dog.    Plaintiff told to get another dog.  She only had the dog for six weeks, and almost never visited, or brought food.     I'm betting she only wanted the value of the dog, because she wanted a breeding animal, and defendant spayed the dog. 

Plaintiff gets nothing. 

Judge Judy Shares Her Husband's Approach to Telemarketers (aka Whatever You Do...Don't Answer the Phone!" )-Plaintiff Judy Dietzler suing former business partners John Toth and Carolyn Leonard (Carolyn Leonard is a retired psychotherapist), for the return of money, and jewelry.    Plaintiff received a phone call from the male defendant, promoting a telemarketing investment business, and she was dumb enough to do that.   On a bizarre note, plaintiff actually works for Idaho, as a Consumer Advocate.  

 (JJ's husband tells the telemarketers where to go, and how to get there, I really like Judge Jerry)).    Defendants talked plaintiff into joining their pyramid scheme, where the idiot makes money by conning other people into joining the pyramid scheme.   Plaintiff whines because she was never paid for cheating other people that she recruited into the scheme.  Plaintiff's first and only sale was for $15,000.  Defendants want training costs, and making false allegations.     

Plaintiff didn't have enough cash, and some jewelry for collateral.  Plaintiff paid $4,000 cash, and the jewelry.   The product was digital downloads teaching you to make money online, by getting people into the business (pyramid scheme).   Defendant says they sell digital licensing franchises.    

(In my opinion, plaintiff joined the scheme, recruited others to join the scheme, and that makes her a criminal.  She did not come to court with clean hands.   I wouldn't have given the plaintiff a penny back.)   Defendant claims plaintiff didn't pay him anything, but paid his partner $3500 cash, and the jewelry.

As JJ says, plaintiff was stupid, and is lucky to get her money back.  The two defendants split the $3500, and never paid the commissions to the plaintiff for recruiting other suckers.   

$3500 to plaintiff.   Plaintiff gets her jewelry back from the wonderful Officer Byrd in the hall-terview.   

(My telemarketer story is I was at my last job, and we had a lot of international students.   Then some telemarketer called from India, probably Mumbai (maybe Sumit from 90 Day Fiance?), and I asked him to wait a second, and told the officer from India about the situation.    He took the phone, and started talking to the man in Hindi or one dialect, and you could tell the officer was not happy.    The telemarketer hung up, and the officer said the man wouldn't be calling back again, ever.    I've been known to tell others that called my office (I worked for the federal government) that a Predator drone with a Hellfire missile was in their future.  However, I really couldn’t send an armed drome after them). 

[DoctorK]

15 hours ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

However, I really couldn’t send an armed drome after them). 

That's a shame, I think telemarketers should as a group be legally considered "vermin" and therefore always open season.

[CrazyInAlabama]

4 p.m. episodes-

First (2014)-

Stabbed in the Face! -Plaintiff Isaac Medina suing defendant Derek White for assaulting him, and stabbing him during an argument on the street.  Plaintiff is suing for medical bills, and defendant is suing for property damage.    Plaintiff was out with a group at Picnic Day at UC Davis.   Plaintiff and friend were crossing the street to his car.   Defendant was in his car, with his two children, driving down the same street.   Plaintiff claims there were a lot of people in the street, and plaintiff and friend were crossing in the crosswalk.   When defendant drove down the street, and almost hit the plaintiff and witness.    Defendant got out of his car, after plaintiff witness, Kelsey Crane,  and I bet others, yelled at him.    Plaintiff was about 10 feet away from defendant.   Other people from plaintiff's group were behind him.  Plaintiff drinks the Water That Should Not Be Drunk.   

Witness Kelsey Crane was a couple of arm lengths from defendant, plaintiff was about ten feet back.  Plaintiff pulled his witness back, and then defendant hit him, and it turned out defendant had stabbed him in the face.    The pictures are horrible.    Defendant was looking for used stroller for his infant child, turned around the corner, and saw people all over the street.   Witness told defendant he almost hit her friend (who was in the crosswalk).   Defendant claims someone punched him first.     Defendant claims he saw a hand with a knife coming at him, and he grabbed the hand, and pushed it away, slashing the plaintiff's face.   

Then defendant got in his car, and went around the corner, saw some police officers, and reported the incident.     Defendant also had a stab wound on his cheek, and grew a beard to cover the scar.    Defendant's 8-year-old was interviewed by police right after the incident (sorry, I don't give credence to an 8-year-old's testimony).

Police report tells a different story than plaintiff.     Defendant's 8-year-old on police report says plaintiff and friends attacked the father, started punching him, one man had a knife, and went after her father.     Neither litigant was charged.  JJ is blaming plaintiff witness for this.    What about defendant almost hitting people with his car?    (I wonder if the police report was made right after the confrontation?    If it was, that was only claimed by defendant).   

I think both sides were acting like fools.    Even if the plaintiff witness wasn't drinking, the plaintiff certainly was, and I think the plaintiff witness is volatile.      However, the defendant certainly must have been going pretty fast, and not paying attention to people crossing all over the street, and that huge crowd.       I think JJ was right, no one deserved anything.   

All cases dismissed.   

Second (2014)-

Soldier Accused of Credit Card Theft -Plaintiffs (mother) Linda Zapora and (daughter) Taylor Zapora are suing defendant Miles Fredette for unauthorized credit card charges on mother’s credit card.  Defendant was in the military,  Army Reservist, and is now in truck driving school.    Plaintiff daughter had mother’s credit card, and since litigants were shacking up, they both used the mother’s credit card.

Daughter lives in Boston, and works in Boston, and defendant moved to Lawrence, Mass, so mother thinks anything out of Boston will be defendant’s charges.    The only reason JJ will consider payment on card is defendant’s facebook message about paying Taylor back for something.   Mother’s mistake was putting daughter on credit card as an authorized user.  Mother claims they were only shacked up for a week.

$554 to plaintiff.

Super Lovebug Lawsuit -Plaintiff Elizabeth Lewis suing defendant/ex-boyfriend David Johnson over a 1972 Super Beetle, plaintiff wants either the money she put into the car, or the value of the car.   After they split up, defendant has car because it’s titled in his name, and defendant paid for car.   But defendant traded in his Mustang, worth $1800.    Plaintiff claims she put about $9,000 in the car.   JJ will only consider what plaintiff has receipts to prove.

Plaintiff totals up receipts she put into it, and so far it’s $2000.   However, defendant does everything in cash, including deposits to plaintiff’s account so he’s out of luck.  

JJ drafts an order to give title to plaintiff, defendant gets $1800, and defendant gets money when he transfers title to her, and she takes possession.

5 p.m. episodes-

First (2017)-

Heartthrob Concert Chaos!-Plaintiff Michelle Miller mother suing defendant mother Lisa Moore for concert tickets, and limo, plus for bullying, and an assault.    This was a concert trip for a nine-year-old's birthday party, including the limo ride (limo was only to go to the concert, not roundtrip).    The birthday party was a concert trip to see a Jacob Sartorius concert.   Plaintiff mother wanted to take her daughter, and defendant's daughters to the concert, plus a friend and her daughter, and hired a limo.    So. plaintiff's daughter heard about the concert trip, and then defendant (daughters were friends of plaintiff's daughter, but not friends anymore), and the friend and child went too.    Concert performer was Jacob Sartorius, who apparently lip syncs. 

Defendant said her daughters could go to the concert with plaintiff's daughter.   Plaintiff purchased the tickets, and then defendant claims she hadn't agreed to pay for the tickets yet.   However, plaintiff purchased tickets for her own daughter, and later purchased tickets for defendant's daughters, at first the plaintiff was willing to buy the tickets, and defendant was told the tickets were $162 for defendant's daughter.   

The limo was booked the day after the ticket purchase by plaintiff, and plaintiff wanted defendant to pay half for the limo, but defendant claims the price for limo kept changing.     Litigants can't agree on how much the limo was, and who was paying for what part of the limo ride.    (The reason the third each is plaintiff, defendant, and plaintiff's irritating witness were using the limo).    The day of the concert is when the limo arrived, and when defendant found out about the limo.      Plaintiff is awful (and so is that stupid looking wig she's wearing).   (Also, the third mother, Tracy is staring at JJ with her mouth hanging open, not a good look).

Defendant says the day before the concert was when she found out about the limo being hired, and the strange 'contract' for the limo is submitted.    After the concert was when the defendant was told about the limo cost.    Limo cost $434, split three ways.    Then defendant posted pictures of her own children at the concert, and then the limo price demanded by the plaintiff was $394.    (Limo ride was only to the concert, not back home). Then the bullying charge was added by the plaintiff to her case. 

Plaintiff claims text message from defendant the night of the concert started the feud.   Plaintiff daughter was invited backstage, when plaintiff 'just happened' to meet the star's manager, and plaintiff's daughter went to meet the star.    JJ tells plaintiff it was rude to have only her daughter go back stage, and plaintiff is nodding, but smirking too.   I really wonder if the backstage pass was as spontaneous as plaintiff claimed it was?  I doubt it.

After the concert the daughters started arguing.    Plaintiff added bullying to the law suit, after the original filing.  However, defendant was never served with the amended complaint. Plaintiff claims her daughter received mean texts, and other bullying incidents, and is claiming for an assault.    (In hall-terview plaintiff calls defendant a lousy mother, and says she hopes defendant moves away)

Plaintiff receives $306 for the limo ride, and tickets. 

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 deductions, 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. 

JJ points out defendant shows no signs of drug use, but plaintiffs can't say the same. 

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 September 19, 2022 by CrazyInAlabama

[Megan Markled]

I was equally bummed about losing Byrd and refused to initially watch the new show. We recently dropped satellite and started streaming. The show comes up on some channel so I watched. 

I have noticed the last few days they are repeating the shows on a loop so I hate that. 

New format is meh, Sarah and crew are fine, nothing exciting. 

Too lazy to do a search for this, but, I was recently made aware [thanks to streaming] that Pluto TV has a Judge Judy channel, so if this has been mentioned before, my apologies! If you are just hearing of this, it is SO worth checking out!! Really old episodes, back to 1996-ish era! So happy to have discovered this, so the new J Justice may just not be on my radar!

[CrazyInAlabama]

4 p.m. episodes-

First (2014)-

Child and Car Custody Battle -Plaintiff Juanita Butler (mother of defendant’s ex) and her son the father of the grandchild with defendant) suing defendant/ex-girlfriend of plaintiff’s son, and mother of his child, Desieree Welte, for the balance of a car loan..   Custody was 50/50, and plaintiff and son wanted that changed, and plaintiff served papers on defendant at her job for the custody case, and repo’d the car that defendant was driving.   Defendant says plaintiff would give her the car if she relinquished custody.   (This happened in Santa Barbara, CA).

Defendant claims one payment was late, and one skipped.   Plaintiff told to produce proof about car payment arrearage, but can’t.    Police were called and helped plaintiff take the car back.    That evening plaintiff called defendant to her home to sign a contract about car payments.   Defendant claims plaintiff never brought up anything about the car payments, and going to 50/50 custody.   One month before this case it was more like 10/90, with no support, and each paid for expenses when they had the child.   Then, plaintiff mother and son wanted 50/50 custody, and the car possession came up.    Plaintiff son’s wages were garnished to pay Medi-Cal (medical care by the state, for the baby).    Then, the plaintiff repo’d the car, and defendant signed the agreement to get the car back, and keep up payments.

Instead of paying the car payments to ex’s mother, defendant wanted to buy another car for herself.  Defendant took her tax refund to buy another car, instead of paying car off to plaintiff.    Defendant also didn’t try to refi the car loan either.

Plaintiff gets $5,000, leaving a shortfall of $2000 for plaintiff.

Older Cabbie’s Young Roomie  -Plaintiff/landlord Stephen Smith suing Katelyn Carmine defendant/former tenant for unpaid rent.    Plaintiff is a cabbie, who is 60, and he moved defendant, 23-years-old, into his two-bedroom apartment, and wants months of unpaid rent.   

Between September and March defendant didn't pay rent, and he didn't move to evict her until she had been there for eight months. 

Defendant crashed at plaintiff's place a couple of times, and then he invited her to move in. 

Plaintiff case dismissed, no contract. 

Second (2014)-

Mama Drama! -Plaintiff mother Angie Hartman suing defendants Jeffrey Hartman (son) and (girlfriend) Kerie Mainord breaking a lease in her name, stealing property, and damaging a car in plaintiff’s name.   Plaintiff prepaid 6 months rent on the apartment.  Rent was $620 a month, and defendants were supposed to pay plaintiff $350, after the first six months were up.  (Pasadena, TX is where this happened).

Then, plaintiff was called by apartment manager about trashed apartment.    Then plaintiff mother argued with Kerie, and Kerie moved out.    Three weeks later, plaintiff and friend cleaned the apartment up, and changed the locks.   Defendants moved in with defendant Kerie’s mother.    Then, Kerie went back and took her clothes, and Jeffrey’s clothes, but left everything else.  Kerie claims plaintiff owes her $2,000 for property Kerie left behind in the apartment and never picked up.

Plaintiff is still paying the rent on the apartment, and wants a car she loaned to son, car is in plaintiff’s name, and JJ will give mother an order to pick up the car.   Car is in Pasadena TX, at defendant Kerie’s mother’s house.    Plaintiff wants rent $350 after six months, but prepaid the first six months in full.

Defendants claim they paid two months of the $350, but didn’t pay utilities, JJ tells plaintiff to give up on utilities.     JJ says plaintiff coming into apartment on the eight’s month breaks the contract for defendants to pay rent.  

Plaintiff case dismissed. She gets the car back with a marshal’s help, and defendant will give mother back the key to plaintiff’s sister’s storage unit.   

In Hallterview plaintiff wants son to leave Mainord and move home.   Defendant Mainord says she’s not holding plaintiff hostage, and he’s free to go back to mom’s at any time.     

The Mentor and the Squatter?   -Plaintiff/former landlord Wilson Reeves suing defendant/former roommate Kane Martin for unpaid rent, gas, and auto insurance costs.    Plaintiff wants gas money for taking defendant to and from work (plaintiff’s not going to get that).    Plaintiff has a big house, and rents two bedrooms at a time.    Defendant says there was no rental agreement with plaintiff, but $500 was the rent though.   (East Carbondale, IL)

Defendant stopped paying rent, even though the rent was reduced to $300.   I have no idea why the rent went down.   Defendant paid $200 a month, short of $300 rent.    Plaintiff owes rent and stopped paying, but stayed at the house, because defendant says plaintiff invaded his privacy.   I wonder what the backstory is on the rent reductions?  

Plaintiff wants $2,000 for unpaid rent, not happening, and not getting gas money or auto insurance either.   

$575 to plaintiff for rent, everything else dismissed.    Defendant finally moved out.

5 p.m. episodes-

First (2017)-

Teen Assaults Woman With Mace-(I remember this one, I really hoped that Officer Byrd would mace the spoiled brat, or taser her, I love to see a tasing where the person is flopping around on the floor and screaming) .   I bet Officer Byrd and the security crew were close by for this case)-Plaintiff Cassandra Griffin was sitting in a nail shop getting a pedicure at the Pink Lotus Nail Salon, and the 13-year-old defendant, Adriana Sterling, daughter of Bar'Jah Sterling walked into the salon, and maced the plaintiff. after saying she was going to mace her.   Plaintiff wrestled the mace away, and police were called.   

Plaintiff wants medical bills, and punitive damages from the assault.   Defendant's mother doesn't care, never will, and JJ can stop telling the defendant's mother about teen's future. 

Defendant daughter claims she had a confrontation with plaintiff a couple of years ago, over tag football, at least according to defendant, and her mother. Defendant daughter claims plaintiff grabbed her hair, and was swinging her around over the football argument.

After the salon macing the result of criminal charges was minor teen had a three-year protective order keeping her away from plaintiff.   This protective order was in lieu of criminal charges, but the daughter has no consequences from mother. 

Defendant mother keeps saying the daughter was protecting herself, and carries mace all of the time.  Why would someone who claims to be afraid of the plaintiff, and clearly saw her before entering the salon, then go into the salon?

Plaintiff submits medical bills, but because of her health insurance, there were no medical bills that were not paid by Kaiser.   The lawyer plaintiff consulted sent her to the chiropractor, that plaintiff is not getting that. (funny note, right after the chiropractor/lawyer statement by plaintiff, a couple of local personal injury attorneys advertised on my local channel).    

$2500 to plaintiff.  Defendant's idiot mother is still making excuses for her in the hall-terview.

When Old Cats Attack-Plaintiff Nichole McClure suing neighbor Betty DalPorto for vet bills, after defendant's cat attacked plaintiff's dog.    Plaintiff was walking her dog on a leash, and defendant comes along with her own dog on leash, and with defendant's vicious cat trailing behind.   Plaintiff says cat attacked her dog, without warning.   Defendant claims her cat ran out from under a car, and attacked the plaintiff's dog, and claims it was self defense.   

This gets even better, when plaintiff says the number defendant gave her to discuss the vet bill was totally wrong, not a number or two reversed, etc. but four last digits are wrong.    Defendant says there is no leash law for cats in California, but JJ points out the cat doesn't have to be on a leash, but the owner is responsible for damages.    Pictures of the poor dog are bloody, and horrible to look at.   

Plaintiff receives $305.

Second (2017)-

Don't Sell Dogs to Teenagers!-Plaintiff Francine Smolkowski sold the 18 year old defendant Halle Frey, a German Shepherd puppy (defendant used to be a student of plaintiff).   When puppy was injured, defendant refused to take dog to vet, until the choice was put the dog down, or do surgery.   Plaintiff loaned the money to defendant for the vet bill.  Defendant and boyfriend are both unemployed, and living with boyfriend's parents.     Puppy gets leg infection, vet said dog needed surgery, or needed to be put down.   Vet bill was $4,169.     

Plaintiff breeds one litter per year.   Plaintiff has texts from defendant saying she would start paying money back.   Why did plaintiff sell the defendant a puppy?   Defendant doesn't have a stable situation in housing, and a spotty employment record.    

Plaintiff wants to buy dog back from defendant. Defendant says she does interviews for money? Sounds shady to me. 

  The plaintiff telling the viewing audience that she wants to buy the dog back was a huge mistake.    I'm sure if defendant had any intention of selling the dog, the price would now be huge.  

Plaintiff gets $4,169. 

World's Worst Roommate-Plaintiff Wendy  Scheller suing former roommate Bradley Bates for unpaid rent, and vet bills.  Plaintiff's witness is another roommate Anthony , and defendant and plaintiff witness were on the lease.    The plaintiff and witness were paid by the roommates, and then defendant paid the landlord, until defendant stopped paying rent for five months.      Plaintiff paid the back rent to the landlord, after defendant stole the plaintiff and her witness' rent money.     When landlord contacted plaintiff and witness, plaintiff paid the back rent, and kicked defendant out.    

Defendant says in the hall-terview that he was sending money to some Catfish online, and is still sending her money.   

Defendant wants his property back, and claims that he owes the landlord or property manager.   However, there is proof the plaintiff paid the landlord, but only has a suspicious receipt for the payments.  I'm hoping plaintiff will be able to show where she took the money out of her bank account for the back rent, $5730.  Defendant claims that since plaintiff Wendy Scheller wasn't on the lease, then landlord wouldn't come after her for money.   What law school did defendant graduate from?   

I think the plaintiff and witness should have filed criminal charges against the defendant.  However, embezzling like this is often not even prosecuted.   $3530 was proven to be paid by plaintiff.

Defendant's claim for his property is dismissed, but he will get stuff back from the front porch (someone else will have to pick it up), and at the appointed date and time items will be there for one hour, and considered abandoned and trashed after that.

$3530 to plaintiff.

[CrazyInAlabama]

4 p.m. episodes-

First (2014)-

Transient Parenting? -Plaintiff/homeless father Bruce Cohen is suing defendant/landlady Laura Martinez, for return of son’s belongings.   Plaintiff and child slept on defendant’s floor, then switched to another home, and plaintiff can’t remember that landlord’s name.   Child is 8 or 9-years old.    Plaintiff wanted to rent a room from defendant, but room wasn’t ready for a while, so plaintiff and son slept on the floor.   Right before they could have moved into the room, plaintiff and son left.  Plaintiff claims he left property behind, that defendant won’t return.    However, defendant says nothing was left behind.   This happened in Oceanside, CA, and ex-wife is in San Diego.    Plaintiff wants $5,000 for property that arrived in one car load, and plaintiff left in the same car. 

Ex-wife, son’s mother is in court, they’re just friends now, and not romantically involved.  Plaintiff and ex-wife were staying at the motel with son, then ex-wife left to her parent’s house.   Plaintiff lost his job, or quit, to be stay-at-home dad, and was staying in motel with son.  Ex-wife, and child’s mother isn’t working, but taking care of her ailing parents.   Ex-wife was unemployed, and plaintiff quit his job.  Plaintiff has been on public assistance for three months, and is transitioning to stay-at-home dad.   Plaintiff’s goal is to get a job.  My goal is to be very wealthy and 5’9”, that’s not happening either.

Room rent was $600, at Martinez residence, and plaintiff moved in with another woman, Lauren, but he can’t remember her last name, and was there for two weeks.  He left there because Lauren’s husband got jealous.  

Plaintiff claims he left suddenly, and defendant was screaming and yelling at him, and threatening to call CPS.   If anyone needs payment for pain and suffering then JJ does, and I do too.

Defendant claims she was talking to her adult daughter about how plaintiff treated son, and maybe calling CPS, and overheard by plaintiff.   So, plaintiff and son took off.  Defendant says they heard plaintiff choking his son, but didn’t actually see it. 

Plaintiff case dismissed.

Good Deed Gone Wrong -Plaintiff Alexis Lawson suing defendant Teri Bennett for not repaying loan to get her car out of impound.   Defendant says her car was towed, and impounded for an invalid parking permit for her neighborhood.    Litigants discussed the car impound issue, and defendant claims plaintiff gave her a gift to get her car out of impound.   (This was in Las Vegas).

Defendant says she had no money.  When JJ says defendant ‘Is not a rocket scientist’, defendant thanks her for saying that, and I have no idea why she thanked JJ for insulting her.  

Plaintiff receives $395

Second (2014)-

Blind Curve Catastrophe -Plaintiff /uninsured motorist Dawn Coltellino is suing defendant David Novak for her auto damages.  She was driving uninsured, and is suing the other driver for totaling her car.  Plaintiff drove for eight months without insurance.   Plaintiff was living in Pennsylvania, moved to Colorado, and didn’t change her address or get insurance in Colorado (you have to be covered by a policy from an insurance agency that is allowed to operate in that state, and had to have coverage according to the laws of the state you live in.)  Policy was in plaintiff’s name, not her parents the way she lied to JJ.   She also claims she was ‘in the process’ of moving to Colorado, but over 8 months?  

Plaintiff was driving south on Colorado State Highway 119, on a mountain road, and was being tailgated, so she put on her turn signals, pulled over but not off the road, two cars went around her, when defendant rear-ended her.   Defendant says he crested a hill, saw plaintiff parked on the road, shoulder was blocked by a snow bank, so no shoulder of the road was available, on a no passing zone.  There is a double yellow line, and no passing.   

Plaintiff’s boyfriend Daniel, man bun, lies to JJ about the accident.   Sorry, but a 4-cylinder Subaru does fine on the mountain roads in Colorado, Subaru is referred to as the ‘state car’ of Colorado.

Manbun, Daniel claims it’s not a blind corner, but it is. Plaintiff wasn’t off of the road.   I think she was still fully on the road.  

Defendant’s insurance company found plaintiff liable.   JJ is steamed at defendant for not going slower.  Colorado’s full of blind curves, and he was going at 30, 15 below the speed limit.

JJ gives plaintiff $50.   

Trashed Transport? -Plaintiff Augustine Okon suing defendant/ex-girlfriend Tamar Meeks for trashing important legal documents, including his Green Card.  The litigants were dating, and he put his old stuff in her storage room.   Storage junk was left for 14 months, and when defendant had to give storage unit up, plaintiff didn’t pick up his stuff, including his green card.    I call bull pucky on that, plaintiff carries his drivers license, and other items in his wallet, but abandons his green card in a storage unit for 18 month?    JJ’s right, no way plaintiff stored his green card.      This was in Beverly Hills, CA.    

He wants $5,000 for his green card and his passport.  Defendant says storage was dirty, used crock pots, dishware, etc.   He also claims his stuff was only there for a month, which is a total lie.   His own statement says items were in storage for six months, not one month.

Plaintiff case dismissed.

5 p.m. episodes-

First (2017)-

Sardines, and Dr. Pepper Vandal-Plaintiff Samantha Hines suing ex-boyfriend Timothy Peck, Jr for a bad check she cashed on his behalf, return of tools, and bank fees for the bad check.     Defendant Timothy Peck Jr. answered a craigslist ad, to have their cars wrapped in return for money.    Litigants never had the cars wrapped, but plaintiff received some of the money for an auto detail shop, to have the cars wrapped.    There were two checks, one to each litigant, and plaintiff deposited both checks.   

Defendant can't have a checking account, because while he was incarcerated, and divorcing the soon to be ex, he bounced checks, and the bank would make him pay the money back before he gets an account.    $1488 was plaintiff, and $1850 for defendant, and both were deposited by plaintiff into her checking account.    

Plaintiff claims she cashed the $1850 check, and claims she gave defendant the whole amount in cash.    Defendant says she paid him with a pack of Marlboro Reds, and a $20 bag of weed.   (This is when Byrd says JJ is the person writing a check at the grocery store that holds up the line.   JJ says she uses cash for groceries).        

Defendant claims the plaintiff ruined his fiancee's car (she's his witness), and plaintiff says car isn't in defendant's name, but her property.  So the plaintiff admits she vandalized the car, in front of 10 million people.     Defendant's new fiancee was incarcerated a few months after break up with plaintiff.   

Five days after the deposits, the checks were returned by the bank as bogus.    They broke up after this, a couple of weeks later.     Plaintiff paid a lot of her debts off before finding out the checks were bogus.    Plaintiff claims she was leery of paying the check money out, so only withdrew the money from his check.    The bank account shows she did withdraw her $1488, so she's a liar.      

Defendant claims plaintiff put fish oil in the car vents, etc.   Defendant bought a new car for fiancee, and JJ tells defendant to have his current squeeze sue plaintiff. 

Plaintiff claim dismissed over the checks. 

Motorcycle T-Bone Crash-Plaintiff Alondra-Soto Castillo suing driver that hit her while she was on her motorcycle, for a totaled motorcycle, damages, and lost wages.   Defendant Priscilla Valdez (car is owned by defendant's mother) received no citation for not having insurance, or the accident.   What a surprise (not at all) , defendant didn't have insurance on the day of the accident.      Police report confirms the defendant was at fault for the accident.   

Plaintiff was riding motorcycle straight, and defendant was coming from the other direction, turned left, and received no citation by the police for driving, or lack of insurance.     Plaintiff bounced off of defendant's car.    Defendant still says accident wasn't her fault. 

Defendant failed to yield to on-coming traffic.     Plaintiff only had liability on her motorcycle but missed a month of work.

$5,000 to plaintiff.  

Second (2017)-

Unwed Teen Parent Turmoil & CPS Visits-Plaintiff Haley Crosby s suing her child's father, defendant Christopher Stevens for filing multiple false CPS reports, and return of property.    Plaintiff says she can decide when defendant sees the child, because she's the mother (Sainted Single Mother of One) SSMO.   

Both litigants are 18.   Plaintiff now lives with a friend, and her friend's mother.    The litigants lived together at defendant's grandmother before the baby was born, and for a while after.   Before that plaintiff lived with family, but was booted out.    

Plaintiff claims defendant is controlling, so she moved in with the friend, who is 17, and friend's mother.     Plaintiff really never worked, but defendant has been constantly employed.   

Plaintiff claims defendant called CPS three times.    The property plaintiff wants back are baby items, and defendant will keep them.    Plaintiff is a jerk, and my guess will do anything she can to stop any relationship between father, and child.   

Defendant was caretaker for his son for months at a time.    

My guess, plaintiff will never get a job for any amount of time.   The last time defendant was 'allowed' to watch his child, she called the police to get the baby back.     She also pulled the old 'I was breast feeding a little" as an excuse to keep full custody.  She was only feeding a little at bedtime, to keep full custody.    

 The woman who lets the plaintiff live with her seems to think defendant has no right to see his own child either.  Jennifer Basset (the woman plaintiff lives with) is just as bad as the plaintiff.    

(Why do I have the suspicion of how well the plaintiff's friend's divorce will go?) 

JJ throws out plaintiff's stupid case.    JJ says to get a mediator, or court order delineating custody, support, and visitation. 

[CrazyInAlabama]

4 p.m. episodes-

First (2014)-

When German Shepherds Attack! -Plaintiff /German Shepherd buyer Cheryl King is suing dog breeder/defendant David Billings for return of money paid for a German Shepherd dog, because it was aggressive.    Plaintiff is claiming breeder gave her the dog for a four day trial, and would give her a refund of her $3500, plus his transportation.   Dog stayed with plaintiff for four days, she paid defendant $3500, but no travel.   Plaintiff wants refund of the $3500, plus her transportation.   Billings will swap dogs, but not give a refund.

Plaintiff’s 19 year-old daughter, and 14-year-old son live with her.   Defendant drove from Cullman, AL to Ashburn, VA (where plaintiff lives, it’s in Northern Virginia) to drop the dog off.   Plaintiff wanted dog to run with her daughter while training, and be a companion, but not be a protection animal.    Contract/Bill of Sale agrees that no warranty or guarantees exist, and no refunds.  The only exception is if the dog has xrays and has hip dysplasia.   Plaintiff claims the Bill of Sale/contract was modified by oral statements from defendant to refund the dog price.      

Plaintiff doesn’t want another dog from defendant. Defendant has texts and voice mail, stating no refunds.   Plaintiff shows photos of what dog allegedly did to her daughter.    JJ points out plaintiff still owes $950 for transporting the dog to Virginia, and dog training for four days.

Why do I bet that the daughter went for a run, and yanked the dog along, and dog got sick of getting yanked along.   I bet mother and daughter supposedly getting bitten didn’t indicate the dog was bad, but the plaintiff and daughter were incompetent owners.

There are no guarantees except the hip dysplasia exception.    Plaintiff wants transportation fees for sending the dogs back to Alabama.   I’m so glad the dog isn’t still with plaintiff.   

Plaintiff case dismissed, and Defendant gets $950 for transporting the dog.   I hope the dog had a soft landing, and is in a happy home.

TV Remote Control -Plaintiff Rita Dugan defendant/ex-boyfriend and is suing for the return of an engagement ring, a necklace, and assaulting her daughter.  Kristen Pingree, is the daughter, and claims when she visited her mother, that defendant assaulted her, and he was subsequently arrested.    Plaintiff daughter said she didn’t toss anything at defendant, but her mother says daughter tossed remote at defendant, and hit him, during the argument.

Defendant says remote hit him on the leg, and he claims daughter was out of control, and the defendant himself against her.   Defendant claims daughter yanked stuff off of the wall, and was throwing it around.   Plaintiff didn’t bring photo of daughter’s imaginary injuries, and no medical records, either.    Defendant is counter claiming for property.     Plaintiff tossed ring and necklace at defendant, and told him to keep that piece of junk. 

After arrest, defendant came back with a police officer to get his property.   He had 15 minutes to pack.

Plaintiff claims defendant returned the necklace to K-Mart.    Necklace was about $175, so plaintiff gets that repaid.  Defendant claims plaintiff kept his computer, gym equipment.   

Plaintiff gets $175 for the necklace that was a gift.   Defendant case dismissed.

Second (2014)-

Daughter-In-Law Dilemma -Plaintiff/grandmother Ernalee Grady suing defendant /Daughter-in-Law (DIL)Jennifer MIller wants money for a car.    Plaintiff wants money for the car, but it was purchased, when DIL and son Casey Miller, were married and together.   Loan for car was in plaintiff’s name.   Defendants have two children.    Plaintiff didn’t repossess the car when the payments were behind by defendant DIL, and she didn’t start this law suit for a year after the payments stopped.  

Plaintiff and DIL both signed the contract.   However, since defendants were married, the car is marital debt, so son owes half of the loan amount.     First car in family is in defendant Jennifer’s name, it was her grandfather’s, and is Jennifer’s.    The car in the loan was a second car for the family.

Plaintiff claims Jennifer’s didn’t have a driver’s license, and son Casey’s license was suspended.   Plaintiff paid the car off to avoid lapsed payments on her credit history.  

After plaintiff tried to force the repayment, by going to defendants’ house, plaintiff claims they stopped her visitation with the children.   Payment history shows defendants made credit payments.

Defendant is suing for emotional distress, from mother coming over and causing an ugly scene in front of defendants’ children.  Defendant says plaintiff and her other two adult children forced their way into the home, and threatened and assaulted her. 

JJ tells plaintiff half of the car loan is her son’s responsibility, so plaintiff should sue her son. 

Plaintiff case dismissed.

Worst Job Interview Ever -Plaintiff Joshua Avery suing defendant  Kimberly Fair for hitting his car in the parking lot.   Plantiff interviewed defendant for a customer service job.      Defendant went for a job interview with plaintiff, and after leaving hit plaintiff’s parked car, got out of her car, looked at his car damage, and then she climbed back into her car, and fled like a criminal.  Plaintiff didn’t see the initial contact, but saw everything else he testified to.       Plaintiff’s car had just been washed by the mobile car detailer.   Detailer came and told plaintiff about witnessing the car accident.  (This happened in Simi Valley, CA).  Defendant claimed she would pay the plaintiff’s insurance deductible off.

Kimberly said she didn’t have insurance, so she plaintiff to let her drive home so police won’t charge her with driving without insurance, and impound her car.    Plaintiff drove home, and called her son.

$1,000 to plaintiff.   

5 p.m. episodes-

First (2017)-

Mermaid Mural and Assault at the Yogurt Shop-Plaintiff Ginger Hawver suing yogurt shop owners, defendants Michael and Deborah Jones, because they painted over her butt ugly mural, and breeched her contract (she wants $5,000).    Plaintiff wants the usual, $5,000 for the blow she's been dealt.    Plaintiff wants the unpaid balance for the mural (she claims it took 200 hours), harassment, and an assault.    Plaintiff is a substitute teacher, and does art on the side.    Plaintiff was going to get $325 for the mural, plus the supplies included.   Plaintiff was paid $150 up front for supplies, so only $200 is remaining.   

 The alleged assault was after five months of work on this masterpiece, plaintiff was fired, and claims male defendant pushed her out the door.   No medical records are submitted, no police report, no physical injuries are proved.  Sketches are submitted, and photos of the five month point are submitted.  Only part of the 35' long mural is submitted.    

Defendant claims the mermaids on the mural are by another artist.   Only some of the kids on the beach scene are done by the plaintiff, but others were not her work.   The sailboat, and crude dolphins (they look awful) are plaintiff's work, and it looks like a little kid did it.    Defendants pay $200, because they owe that.   The fact there is no written contract, and no finish date, and defendants brought in real artists to do some of the work, because they wanted to get the mural finished.   The defendants hated the mural, and painted over it.    Plaintiff still claims it was 200 hours of work.   I can't imagine going to a yogurt shop, and smelling paint for five months. 

Plaintiff claims the defendants only painted over the mural because she filed a lien against them. Plaintiff claims the defendant husband punched her.   

Note to plaintiff, tears in the hall-terview work better if you actually have tears coming out. 

Defendants submit the 911 tape on the last day plaintiff worked, to get their key to the shop back.

$200 to plaintiff, I hope defendants have a restraining order to keep plaintiff away. (My suggestion is that the defendants should have bought a wall mural for the yogurt shop.  Even I could install that in an hour, they're peel and stick, and easy to put up, or remove.      They aren't expensive, and would be up in one day, not five months, and would look better than the plaintiff's work).

Stylist Wars-Plaintiff Adrian Muskelly /salon owner (My Blessings Salon) issuing former chair and station renter for booth rent, and lock changing fees.    Defendant Dominique Williams, claims plaintiff breached the lease.  Plaintiff is leasing the shop from someone else, and has four operators, including herself, doing hair there.     There is a written lease for six months, and a cancellation period of two weeks from either party.   Defendant claims the contract requires the plaintiff advertise the shop, but it doesn't.   Defendant claims it was a verbal agreement, but there is a written contract, no written amendment was executed, so verbal is out. 

Defendant paid two weeks rent for February, and owes five months rent to plaintiff.     Defendant says she had no clients, so decided not to pay plaintiff, for months.    What was stopping defendant from doing her own online advertising?   Or some other way to promote her services?   I don't understand why she had no clients, because usually stylists that are good get regular clients that come back over and over.  

I am livid!   When JJ stops trying to explain the back rent to defendant, defendant makes a smart remark about JJ being useless.   Defendant is shaking her head like a bobble head doll. I loathe bobble head dolls, and the defendant.  

Plaintiff is suing another former stylist too, and that person also left owing rent, and is defendant's witness. 

Key fee is $25, Total to plaintiff is $2,425.  So, leaving court defendant is reminded by Officer Byrd to leave her papers behind, and toss her papers on the table from the gate, what a b-word. 

Second (2017)-

Baseball pregame took JJ’s place, at least in my location.

Edited September 22, 2022 by CrazyInAlabama

[CrazyInAlabama]

4 p.m. episodes-

First (2014)-

The Anguish of Ex-Lovers -Plaintiff Seneca Woods suing defendant Chiki Wuous (Mother of Two Children with plaintiff, SSMOT-Sainted Single Mother of Two) attorney fees, overpayment of child support, harassment, and assault.    Defendant says plaintiff was abusive, but as JJ says, why did she have another kid with him?  Children are 12 and 5-years-old.   Litigants never married, but defendant is now married to someone else.   Child support was $500 a month for the two children, through garnishment.    Plaintiff says he paid child support, but his wages were garnished anyway.  

Then I guess the Child Support Fairy did the garnishment.   Plaintiff was laid off by that company, and order was vacated because defendant wanted a change in support, and in court mother/defendant was evasive about her income, so child support order was vacated.   Child support was later taken from plaintiff’s disability, and unemployment.   Amazing coincidence is that when plaintiff was laid off, he coincidentally received the disability, and unemployment.  

The litigants have 50/50 custody, so why would anyone pay child support

Disability ended, and plaintiff is currently unemployed.   Plaintiff is now living with his fiance, and he hasn’t worked since November 2013.

Plaintiff case dismissed.

World Cup Woes -Plaintiff Christian Corea (woman) suing defendant Edward Jackiewicz for the return of a deposit for a defendant’s condo in Brazil during the World Cup.    Plaintiff says she only gave a deposit because it was refundable.    Defendant’s email doesn’t say it’s refundable, but the middle man in Brazil is the one the deposit was paid to, and it’s not refundable. 

So, the woman in Brazil is the one who made the contract with plaintiff.   So, plaintiff isn’t owed a refund by defendant.   There are three people going to Brazil for the event, and stay at the same condo.   However, defendant and his partner did do partial refunds to others.  

The two other people put down the same $700 deposit, two others plaintiff was going with dropped out also.   Two others are going to the other part of the trip to the condo.   

Plaintiff told no guarantee of refund in the contract. Originally six people signed up, and don’t have the entire time booked for the entire time of the World Cup.  It’s too confusing to figure out.   Plaintiff’s ex-boyfriend received a partial refund from defendants, but he didn’t split the money with plaintiff. So, plaintiff should be suing her ex-boyfriend for half of the refund he received.

Condo is $1000 a night, and the cost per night is split among the people who stay there during that period.

Ex-boyfriend received $1400 refund, but didn’t give any money to plaintiff.  Defendants say they have no contact information for plaintiff, just the ex-boyfriend.

Plaintiff’s lawsuit is premature.   The cause of action is against the boyfriend for the refund, but the defendants will only know when the World Cup happens, how many people are staying at the condo for each night, to know how much plaintiff should get.  (I hope that’s clear, I remember this case, and it’s a mess). 

Plaintiff case dismissed without prejudice to bring later.   Plaintiff may get a refund after the trip is over, and the World Cup ends.     The middle person in Brazil said it was refundable, not defendant.

Second (2014)-

Friendship, Finances and Flirting -Plaintiff Dennis Simion suing defendant Dennis Bremer for a loan to pay rent and bills.      Defendant is told to introduce his witnesses, girlfriend Sunshine Hunter and his landlord Jane Pederson.  Defendant Sunshine claims she saw Simion give Bremer cash to pay defendants’ bills.   Defendant witness Sunshine, has three kids, with other people, not with defendant.    The money exchange was on a county road near plaintiff’s home, according to Sunshine.    $1400 is the loan amount, in $1000 one payment, and $400 later. (Augusta, WI is where this happened).

Plaintiff Simion says defendant, girlfriend, her three kids, and others, and landlord told defendants to leave when he found out how many people were living in his house.   Loan was claimed to be for $1000 security, and $800 a month for rent.   However, Bremer claims he had a bonus due from his previous company.  Bremer quit, with no job.   Bremer claims he cashed his 401 K in for some money.   How does someone who has no job, with a girlfriend with her three kids who has no job, get a rental house?  Defendant claims the HR lady at the previous company sent him a bonus.

Defendant’s witness told defendant that plaintiff made advances to her, and derogatory remarks. $2400 is what plaintiff loaned them.   Plus, $1000 to put a transmission in defendant’s girlfriend’s car to keep or get a job.  Defendant Bremer’s own father called defendant a liar. 

Landlord testifies that she got a phone call from some man, telling her that her tenants were cooking meth, and would blow up her house.    Defendant doesn’t know who called her. Defendants are counter claiming for harassment about the phone call, and the assault on defendant girlfriend.    Then, defendant Bremer claims after he paid nothing to plaintiff that plaintiff confronted him on his way to the library.

$3,000 to plaintiff, nothing for the lying defendant, and witnesses.

Designer Jeans Disaster -Plaintiffs Jodi Davis and business partner Catherine Goodman suing defendant  Don Valenzuela over designer jeans plaintiffs were buying from manufacturers that were arranged by defendant.    The jeans delivered by defendant’s companies are so tiny that no one could wear them.  This case is hysterical when JJ measures the waist band of the tiny jeans, at 24 inches.  (24 inch waist is size 5, or XXS and that’s before washing and possible shrinkage).

 Jeans were supposed to be sold for $60 to $80 a pair, according to defendant, and Jeans were $39, wholesale.    300 jeans were manufactured, 140 delivered because of lace inserts (I don’t understand anything about this part of the case).  The 23 labelled waist, is actually 24, and fits defendant’s 9-year-old daughter, except they’re too long.   Plaintiff claims jeans were  supposed to be 25 inches at the waist.  The plaintiffs can’t measure the jeans, so JJ has to do it.   Defendant wants to be paid for the other jeans he already ordered, I guess the ones awaiting the lace inserts.  

Plaintiffs paid over $11k for 300 pairs of jeans.   The 140 jeans were delivered to plaintiffs, and the other 160 is waiting for the lace.  

$5,000 to plaintiffs.  

5 p.m. episodes-

First (2017)-

Family Business Money Triangle-Plaintiff stepdaughter Natasha Franklin is suing stepmother, Charmain Franklin for an unpaid loan, and a false restraining order.  Defendant is stepmother to plaintiff.  Defendant says the loan is being paid back, and she didn't miss any payments.    Plaintiff, Erick Franklin, is husband of defendant, and father of plaintiff (soon to be ex-husband, there is no legal separation in Florida, so I hope defendant sped up the process of divorcing this entire set of moochers).    All of the family lived in New York, but all moved to Florida.   

Plaintiff witness (husband) is on disability, stepdaughter barely ever worked (she did collections for American Express, and later worked at Macy's, but didn't work after moving to Florida).   

Plaintiff father/husband got a settlement, of $20k, and gave that to the defendant to start her online business.    Business supports husband, stepmother, plaintiff's daughter, and her two children.    Plaintiff, and her father got a loan when they moved to Florida, as co-signers.   Loan paid for the move, furniture, and supplies for the business.   

Since 2012-2016, defendant's business supported everyone (a cast of thousands, just like in the old movies).      Defendant is from Canada, and received a green card.   (If defendant was smart, she would move back to Canada, and get away from the entire plaintiff family).     Plaintiff daughter said in her statement that the $20k was a loan, but it was a settlement for the father's car wreck (settlement was in 2012).   

Defendant actually started her business in 2008 in Canada, and just continued it in the U.S.      By 2014 and 2015, defendant was supporting husband, stepdaughter, her two kids, and ran her business.       Then stepdaughter moved out, and actually had a job for a year, and then moved back home.   

Stepmother/defendant has already paid back $11,000 of the $20,000.    Plaintiff daughter never paid rent, and was supported by defendant except one year.    Stepmother/defendant felt threatened by plaintiff daughter (I wouldn't want to cross the plaintiff daughter either).  In November, defendant's son came to visit, and stepfather, and son argued.   Stepfather/plaintiff witness says son objected to how his mother was being treated.   Stepfather was arrested, and held in jail for seven days, and was finally released.     

Plaintiff/daughter says she didn't file a protective order, but defendant/stepmother did while plaintiff/stepfather was in jail.   Defendant called police when stepfather/husband pushed her.     JJ thinks defendant over reacted.     (I don't agree with JJ.  If someone puts their hand on me, especially with a pending divorce action, then I would file charges against the soon to be ex-husband, and get a restraining order against the entire bunch). 

The plaintiff and her father want the remaining $9,000 of the loan, after defendant supported all of their useless butts for years on end.    Judging from the nasty looks, and stank attitude of the stepdaughter/plaintiff, I would have filed for protection too.  Since house is in defendant's name, then JJ says to file for eviction for stepdaughter, her kids.   I hope defendant divorced the husband too.    Plaintiff father, and defendant aren't divorced yet, so the $20k loan is marital debt.     

I do not like JJ’s dismissive attitude about assault by estranged husband, and his vicious freeloading daughter.

Home down payment came from the business for $60,000 in 2015, however, that means defendant paid the down payment, all utilities were in her name, and no one else ever paid rent (in the daughter's case) or part of the mortgage.   The entire useless lot of Franklins, excluding the defendant, are living in a house paid for by defendant.    Plaintiff claims that telling her to pay her own utilities on a house that she squats in is stalking (No, it isn't).    JJ advises defendant that the debt is mutual, and dismissed. 

Stepdaughter claims defendant was sending mean messages to herself on stepdaughter’s facebook. Total garbage. 

Defendant wrote to plaintiff Natasha, and said she's cutting the utilities, and Natasha says that's harassment.  I hope Natasha took her father with her, if she ever moved out.   SInce the father has a low income, and plaintiff daughter doesn't work, then I guess the always generous Officer Byrd must be paying for where ever Natasha was talking about moving to.  

JJ says loan was martial debt, and husband claims he lives in another state.  However, stepdaughter, and her two kids, ex-husband, all live in a home totally paid for by defendant, and deed is only in her name. JJ says utilities (power, internet/cable, water, etc.) will be cut off when defendant gets back to Florida.

(My guess is once the plaintiff husband co-mingled the funds, that they became marital property, and hopefully a divorce judge would say the $11k defendant paid off was more than sufficient.  However, the plaintiff daughter claiming it was a bank loan was garbage.     I hope defendant got the plaintiffs bounced out of the house she paid for, or at least forced a sale.  However, plaintiffs might have established tenancy under Florida law, so might still be there). 

Case is tossed.

Second (2017)-

Childcare Payback! – Plaintiff Julie Webb suing defendants Christina and Joshua VanWinkle for child care fees, later fees and overtime for unpaid child care costs for their two children, $1350.  Defendant claims plaintiff let them have four weeks free.   Plaintiff denies anyone paid the $125 a week, defendant claims she paid plaintiff each week in cash.    Defendant lies and says plaintiff gifted her with four weeks free because an older child showed defendant’s children porn.    

Plaintiff says the defendants paid late every time.   The text from defendant says they found friends and relative to watch their kids for a month, and then were paying more at another daycare after that. 

$470 to plaintiff.

Expensive Phone - Throwaway Boyfriend?! -Plaintiff Elsy Macay suing ex-boyfriend/defendant Adam Peters for a loan to buy an expensive cell phone.    Defendant claims phone was $739, plaintiff says it was $839.   Phone plan was in plaintiff’s name.    Defendant claims he was being harassed by plaintiff, because she was demanding her money for the phone.  

$739 to plaintiff.

Telephone Pole Crash! -Plaintiff Nueza Barros suing defendants/ex-roommates Deon Harris and his girlfriend Tania Santiago for crashing her car, for an insurance deductible, and property damages.   The pictures of damages to the utility pole are epic.

Two defendants were living in plaintiff’s apartment, because she felt sorry for them. Defendant had no driver’s license, but says his girlfriend had to get to work, and so she drove the car to work, and he only drove home.

Defendant roommate claims he had an accident driving plaintiff’s car, because his girlfriend had to get to work, and he was tired.   Defendant says plaintiff was supposed to drive the girlfriend to work, and plaintiff didn’t drive woman to work, so he had to drive the car.  Then in the hall-terview defendant Deon says he was going to hang out with his buddies, after dropping girlfriend off at work. 

Plaintiff is being charged for a Verizon pole, $4261.

[DjamillasMan]

Happy Friday/Saturday Morning everyone!! Grab your favorite drink and let's get started!! 

False Restraining Order? (2013)

“I have a beer every now and again just like everyone else!!!”- Tuesday Wilcoxon

Plaintiff: Tuesday Wilcoxon from Arvada, Colorado. Tuesday is cute, but kinda trashy. She has some awesome ‘90s hair. I love Tuesday. First of all, her name is Tuesday, which is a very crappy day of the week (tons of meetings go down on Tuesdays). Secondly, her hairstyle looks like it came 23 years too late. I can look into Tuesday’s eyes and see that she’s a party girl. She looks like she gets started on the drinking if you play “Song 2” by Blur or some “You Could be Mine” by Guns n’ Roses. I met types like her when I was in the Navy in Virginia. Tuesday doesn’t know what the hell sublet means. She also is hellbent on showing JJ a letter after she rented the basement of her townhouse to the defendant. This girl is quite handy with her stepdaddy’s sledgehammer. After the case, Tuesday was pretty pissed at her baby sister for destroying her case (SPOILER ALERT).

Defendant: Peggy Munoz from Denver, Colorado. Peggy is a waitress with a 16 year old daughter. Peggy is older, however, she was not about to sit around and deal with Tuesday’s shit. Peggy was highly emotional when she was detailing with a lot of the shit she put up with while living in the basement of Tuesday’s crib. Peggy was scared for her child and Tuesday’s child, and in effect, called the police before Tuesday and her stepdad showed up at Tuesday’s crib to try to get to the furnace. Peggy is almost always on the verge of tears, and during her hallway testimony of Tuesday’s child abuse, she recommends Tuesday’s ex-husband take a closer look at Tuesday’s care of their infant daughter.  Peggy is wearing some hoop earrings and a tasteful top. Peggy wishes she were Farrah Fawcett (RIP).

The Complaint: Tuesday is up in court suing for rent, property damages, and attorney fees.

What Does He/She want: Tuesday wants  $4726.25 for all the drama she had to go through with the defendant.

Countersuit?: No

Puppy Multiplier: N/A

Driving Around Without Insurance: N/A

What Went Down: JJ kicks this case off with Tuesday. JJ goes over what Tuesday is suing for, which is rent and the false arrest for child abuse or some shit. Tuesday is also suing for the fact she had to hire an attorney to help out her child abuse case. She wants the fees because the whole case against her was dismissed. JJ also makes mention that Peggy says that Tuesday was renting an illegal apartment to her and her 16 year old kid.  JJ wants to find this out.

JJ wants to know when Peggy became Tuesday’s roommate. Peggy states that she became her roommate at the end of December of 2012 (goddamn, I remember 2012 like it was yesterday, I MUST be getting old). Peggy claims she found the apartment via Craigslist. Shame on you, Peggy!!!

Craigslist is/was a very dangerous site. I remember when the Craigslist Killer was stalking about in Mass back in ’09. He was a goofy looking fuck, but he was getting women and trying to kill them. He was a psycho sicko, and prison is too good for him. He needed to be pummeled by the victims’ families. That’s what’s wrong with the American system of justice. But, let me get off my soapbox.

Peggy is a brave waitress, going to find the plaintiff under the “roommates” section of Craigslist and wanted to move her and her daughter into a stranger’s home. Peggy explains that the property was a two story townhome, but she was renting the basement portion of the townhome where there was a full bedroom down there and a living room type area down there, but she and Tuesday had to share the upstairs full bathroom.

I don’t know. I have a townhouse and I can’t get far enough away from Djamilla sometimes in our townhome, and I will venture into the “office that can be used as a bedroom”, which is really my home office, and I’ll sleep there. It’s on the ground floor, but whatever. Our Boxer has the bedroom in the basement (along with that full bath), and the kids are in the upstairs bedrooms. There’s some sort of “guest bedroom” upstairs, but I’m not sleeping upstairs when I need some time to myself. Keep all that between us, please. 

Why do I say that? Because JJ goes over the damn occupants of the house, listing that Tuesday had her three children there (Paige, Dustin, and Peyton), along with her sister, and Peggy and her daughter. I’m just wondering where everyone slept is all and how fucking big this townhouse is. LOL.

Tuesday tries to pull some shit about subletting being “grandfathered” into her lease. JJ shushes her (take a shot!) while she reads on the lease and tells her all about what subletting is. Then she tells Tuesday “Don’t speak!” (take a shot!). Tuesday shuts up and allows JJ to read the lease and then deduces that Peggy was just a roommate. Tuesday tries to deflect from that and states that her current landlord told her that she can sublet (take a shot for hearsay!). JJ doesn’t even bother with Tuesday claiming the hearsay, and continues to read the lease, trying to make Tuesday look stupid. JJ then explains to Tuesday what subletting is.

After admonishing Tuesday on her lack of knowledge on subletting, JJ turns her attention to Peggy, asking her twice how long she lived there. Peggy, looking shaken, tells JJ that she lived there from December to February. Peggy admits that she was supposed to pay $650 a month for rent, including utilities. That sounds like an awesome deal. JJ even says “Great!” Peggy seems very nervous and shaken, meanwhile Tuesday is over there looking like she has the case won.

JJ claims that if Peggy lived there a month and a half, then she owes Tuesday two months’ worth of rent. Peggy denies this and claims that she moved in in December, which her lease shows that she moved in on December 15th, and the rent was prorated. Tuesday chimes in that she did Peggy a favor and didn’t start charging her rent until December 20th. How kind. JJ asks Peggy if she has proof that she paid December’s rent, and Peggy denies it. JJ asks where she thought she was coming to today (to the beach? Take a shot!). Peggy apologies for her transgression in JJ’s court. Peggy goes on to say that the  receipt book went missing during all the drama she had with Tuesday.

I really, really want to start calling Tuesday Tuesday Knight or Wednesday Addams.

Tuesday is very cordial, and confirms that Peggy paid her for December in the amount of $231. Peggy then skirts around when it comes to January’s rent (I’m getting dizzy typing this; Tuesday, January, February, December, take a shot for me being dizzy, please). JJ starts to lose her patience a bit with Peggy and asks again how much did Peggy pay her for rent. Peggy states that she didn’t pay the full rent and owes her $200 bucks. Peggy also admits that she didn’t pay Tuesday shit for February.

Things are not looking so great for Peggy here, I must admit. Peggy states that a lot of  things were “all going on” in February. Tuesday chimes in and states that it all started “going on” on February 1st. JJ shushes her. Peggy admits that the eviction would have taken place on February 15th.

JJ states that Peggy owes her for some of January’s rent and February’s rent. Peggy interjects and states that there was more to it than that. Apparently this has JJ spellbound because she doesn’t tell Peggy to be quiet, she doesn’t shush her, she doesn’t have any smart ass quip to Peggy, but allows Peggy to begin her testimony (take two shots!). Peggy states that Tuesday was refusing to take her cash (because everybody refuses to take free money from someone else) and that Peggy has a video (ooooh!).

JJ has no interest in said video and states that Peggy isn’t being truthful there and that her answer and what she is telling JJ are two different things. JJ is not having the lies. JJ then wants to know why Peggy had Tuesday arrested.

Peggy states that she “has pictures here” and JJ says that she doesn’t want to see pictures (take a shot!) and wants Peggy to articulate to her why she had Tuesday arrested. Peggy states that we (her and her daughter) have seen aggressive behavior from Tuesday. JJ corrects Peggy and states “Not we. YOU!” causing Peggy to reiterate that she and her daughter had seen aggressive behavior out of Tuesday. This prompts JJ to say “I don’t want you to tell me what your daughter saw!” (take a shot for hearsay!)

This prompts Peggy to give a very, very disturbing testimony on allegation that she left the upstairs bathroom one morning, coming downstairs for some breakfast as she spotted Tuesday laying on the couch. Tuesday had been out drinking the night prior, ostensibly (I told you Tuesday looks like she knows how to party), and she probably had a hangover. Her two year old daughter (which I think is Peyton? I’m too lazy and in too much of a rush to put this review out to double check) walked up to her. Tuesday allegedly summoned the soul of Joan Crawford as portrayed in Mommie Dearest and backhanded the hell out of her daughter. The two year old child fell against the glass table. Peggy thought that Tuesday would pick the child up, but instead, held her hand over the child’s mouth.

While Peggy is giving this testimony, she is on the verge of tears, which makes her somewhat believable, even if I don’t believe that was her intent. I just think she saw some weird shit at Tuesday’s crib while being somewhat weird herself, but that was too much for her.

All the while, Tuesday is giving looks like she wants to whoop Peggy. Peggy is saying that her 16 year old daughter noticed bruises on the 2 year old child and Peggy didn’t think much of it at the time, but she surmises that there may have been some abuse. Peggy states that she, in the dire situation she was in financially, thought it was worth the risk to report this to the police, even if it meant that she would be kicked out of Tuesday’s home with nowhere to go.

It’s at this point that Peggy has JJ hanging on to her every word. Peggy states she made the report on the 20th of January. JJ asks for the police report and then asks Tuesday’s witness “Who are you?” (take a shot!) The witness, who we later find out is Tuesday’s baby sis Elizabeth, states that she is now living with Tuesday in the same space that Peggy and her daughter used to occupy.

JJ makes her stand up and give some testimony. Elizabeth ‘Liz’ Scharfenberg states that before she moved in with Fat Tuesday, she was actually was living with Tuesday (damn, is Tuesday’s house a pit stop or something? I remember back in my roaming days there was some woman named Wendy who had a house like that which was pretty much a frat house), then she moved in with her boyfriend, before she moved back in with Tuesday.

JJ gets super serious here and warns Liz to be very, very careful with her on her next answer, as it could tip the balance of the case (and the entire world, I mean, with this current climate we live in) in anyone’s favor with her next steps. Shit, Liz’s next steps could lead to extreme embarrassment for either woman here.

JJ {to Liz}: “Does your sister drink?” (take two shots because we’re being shamed here!)  

After the dramatic commercial break (which included some nonsense about Bathfitter and a commercial with Shaq being someone’s big brother), we get back to the case.

JJ asks Liz if her sister drinks, to which Liz replies ‘Yes’. Then she tries to clean it up by saying ‘On occasion’. JJ then rebuts that by saying that she wasn’t surprised that her sister was laying on the couch hungover when she backhanded her child. Liz doesn’t confirm nor deny this. JJ tells her to sit her ass down twice.

It’s sort of at this point that the tide is turning in this case (take two shots!).

JJ, going into full family court mode, asks Tuesday if she had any prior run ins with social services. Tuesday denies this. JJ then wants to know from Peggy about the incident that caused bruises to her arms.

Peggy begins to explain a wild ass story (while again, almost on the verge of tears) about how Tuesday was wildin out and acting irrational, placing a box on the thermostat so that Peggy and her daughter couldn’t have access to heat in the basement. That’s sort of unusual, considering Colorado gets cold as hell. I’ve been to Fort Carson once in my life in MARCH and it was cold as hell there (and yes, I know, most consider March spring, but it’s winter still in states north of North Carolina). That tactic backfired on Tuesday, as now she didn't have heat upstairs. 

Peggy states that she had to put a lock on the basement door where she and her daughter lived because she was scared of Tuesday’s verbal and physical abuse, as it was escalating.  After all, Peggy allegedly witnessed Tuesday slap the shit out of her two year old child and not give a damn, so imagine what she would do to Peggy and her 16 year old daughter. Peggy states that she works evenings at a restaurant.

Peggy claims that shit hit the fan when Tuesday came to the house with the “new landlord”, the “furnace person” and some of her family to try to get to the furnace in the basement where Peggy and her daughter lived. Peggy had just come back from making a report to the 5-O because she was scared of the escalations and what they may lead to.

Peggy was willing to let the “furnace person” go down to the basement as well as the "new landlord", but not Tuesday. She did not want Tuesday anywhere around her living quarters. Peggy says that she let everyone know that the police were on the way (Karen Alert! Take a shot!) because she had her daughter wait in the car and call the fuzz. Someone told her that the lock on the basement door was considered a fire hazard.

Peggy, who is, at this point, feeling important and riding her momentum, attempts to show JJ a letter from the fire marshal, which JJ responds to by shushing her and then stating “Don’t give me a letter!” (take a shot!)

Peggy ignores JJ and tries to make her point that the fire marshal stated that it wasn’t a fire hazard. This prompts JJ to do a pen smack on the desk (take a shot!) and then warns Peggy not to go off on a tangent again (take a shot!). JJ redirects her to tell her story from the point where she told them the police were coming.

Peggy gets back on track and states that Tuesday’s stepdaddy was a little hesitant on breaking down the door at Tuesday’s request. According to Peggy, since Tuesday’s stepdaddy was so hesitant, Tuesday took it upon herself to grab the sledgehammer and break the door down, breaking Peggy’s new lock and putting holes in the door in the process. Peggy also has pictures that JJ would like to see.

Peggy further explains that she tried to stand in front of the door and prevent Tuesday (who has a height/weight advantage over Peggy, so I don’t know how Peggy thought she was going to prevent Tuesday from going down there, but I digress) and stepdaddy from going down to her chambers. Tuesday and Stepdad overpowered her and dragged her ass outside by her arms, essentially throwing her out of the house.

Now Tuesday is on the defense, stating that all this shit went down on February the 11th, 2013. Tuesday claims that she got a call from her landlord in the morning claiming that it was not kosher that there was a lock on the basement door. JJ dismisses that as hearsay (take a shot!). Tuesday tries to counter by saying she has a letter right there (take a shot! We’re going to get as drunk as Tuesday was that night!).

JJ just wants to know what Tuesday did on the date in question. Tuesday claims she went to her parent’s house, grabbing her stepdaddy and his sledgehammer (is her stepdad Triple H or something?) and went back to her house. She also states that her landlord told her to use any means necessary to get Ms. Munoz out of her residence. JJ screams at Tuesday, stating: “Don’t tell me what your landlord told you!” (take a shot for hearsay!). JJ then chastises Tuesday a bit, and Tuesday is indignant, stating that she has a letter signed by the landlord.  JJ tells Tuesday to shove the letter up her ass.

Tuesday is starting to seem unbalanced here, and is absolutely losing her cool. She claims while Peggy, her father, and the landlord were arguing in the kitchen, she grabbed the sledgehammer and broke the door down. Tuesday claims that after she broke the door down, Peggy called the cops. JJ just laughs at Tuesday because Tuesday is starting to lie and not make sense.  JJ then says that she believes Peggy. This pushes Tuesday over the edge and she continues to do battle with JJ, while JJ tells Tuesday to listen to her quietly. JJ says that she believes every word that came out of Peggy’s mouth, and the report she made on January 28th, mostly because of Tuesday’s sis, Liz. We cut to a shot of Liz looking like she is about to have a fuckin nervous breakdown.

After yet another commercial break (this time with a LifeAlert commercial, and a JJ Wentworth Commercial), we get to the conclusion of this case. JJ asks Peggy to verify the date that she initially filed the police report for the child abuse allegations. Peggy, who seems so meek at this point, references the document that JJ already has on hand. Meanwhile, Tuesday is flipping through paperwork, as if it is going to save her case. Honey, the case is already over and JJ has made up her freaking mind. Let it go.

JJ tells Tuesday that the initial report of child abuse allegations happened prior to the eviction proceedings. Tuesday does NOT TAKE THIS WELL. Tuesday starts losing her fuckin mind about how all of this was a vindictive scheme cooked up by Peggy to get back at her for beginning the eviction proceedings. Peggy is over there feeling vindicated and giving JJ sad eyes. JJ tells Tuesday that eviction does not mean SLEDGEHAMMER. I mean, holy shit, I must admit, that is taking things way too far. Tuesday, damn babygirl, you don't fuck around. 

This causes Tuesday to again lose her mind, as she launches into a triade about how Peggy falsely accused her of child abuse, trying to get her fired from her job, and the false harassment charges with a restraining order. JJ stops her rant by using her sister as evidence against her character, citing that Liz states that Tuesday drinks too much. Tuesday is not having that and states that she’s not a drunk and JJ is twisting her baby sister’s words. The two get into a weird battle of wits where Tuesday is showing her true colors. At this point, I’m fully on Peggy’s side as Peggy looks absolutely frightened, as if she is having fuckin flashes. Tuesday says that she takes care of her kids and has a beer now and again like everyone else. JJ is having too much fun with Tuesday.

JJ then gets serious and turns her attention to Liz. She asks Liz if she is living in that house now. Liz confirms this. JJ then asks Liz if she works, which Liz affirms. JJ tells Liz that she better make sure everything is okay in that house. JJ then dismisses the case and kicks both of the litigants out of court. Tuesday takes her documents and storms out the studio courtroom, a woman scorned.

During the Hall-Ter-View, Peggy tells the tale of how all of this drama started. She then states that she hopes that Tuesday’s ex-husband looks into Tuesday and attempts to get custody of the two year old child. She states that Tuesday losing her mind in the courtroom was a regular Tuesday in that house. Meanwhile, Tuesday claims that she is not a drunk, that she drinks here and there, and that Peggy trashed her basement.

Note: Tuesday, who also goes by the name of Tuesday Dixon, runs a daycare now. Make of that what you will.

Verdict: Plaintiff gets nothing. Case dismissed.  

Did Auntie Judy say anything fucked up to anyone?: {to Tuesday}: “Don’t tell me what your landlord-listen to me. Listen to me. Hey! *claps hands* What part of “don’t tell me what your landlord told you because I don’t believe it anyway because it’s hearsay and inadmissible”. Take the letter, fold it up, and do whatever you want to do with it. I don’t read letters. Just tell me what you did!”

Edited September 24, 2022 by DjamillasMan

[DjamillasMan]

Djamilla is making some blue crabs tonight and my cousin is coming over from Baltimore City to do a Madden tournament, so like Jeffrey Graham, I decided to be generous  and "bless" you guys with another short review tonight. Grab your favorite drink and read on. 

If You Like Me, Take Down Your Dating Profile (2017)

“I’m not an opportunist. I told him I would refund him!!!”- Caroline Douglas

Plaintiff: Jeffrey Graham, Sr. from Hazelwood, Missouri. Jeff looks like a Black Eeyore. He claims that he and the defendant met online and that after she called him and cried hysterically, he loaned her money to get a plane ticket. Jeffrey has a stool sitting behind him, which means he may have had to sit down. He wanted Caroline, the defendant, to take her dating profile down, which she didn’t. Jeff loaned her the money before they actually met. Jeff seems like a nice guy, but I can tell he is an OG. He’s the type that sits on his porch around 6:30 pm with an Old Fashioned or some Crown Royal.

Defendant: Caroline Douglas from St. Louis, Missouri. Caroline is a fast talker and works as a customer service rep for a “furniture company”. Caroline is also her daughter’s “assistant”, with her daughter being an aspiring actress. She is being sued over a plane ticket to LA to accompany her daughter to an audition. Caroline lies so much her tongue would catch fire if she told the truth once. Caroline has her Ms. Crabapple, the Librarian, glasses on and a pink sweater top, as she is ready to do battle in court over this plane ticket.

The Complaint: Jeffrey is up in court suing Caroline for an unpaid loan to fly to LA.

What Does He/She want: Jeffrey is petitioning the court for $614

Countersuit?: Yes. Caroline wants $337 for the cancelled plane ticket.

Puppy Multiplier: N/A

Driving Around Without Insurance: N/A

What Went Down: JJ starts this case off by asking Jeff what state he lives in. He answers that he lives in Hazelwood, Missouri. She then asks Caroline (who has removed her glasses that she was wearing when she walked into court) where she lives, and Caroline answers that she lives in Missouri. Caroline then states that the plaintiff lives “several miles” from her, which is totally a non-answer.

Caroline, just say that he lives half an hour, an hour, two hours, etc. from you. No need to be so discrete. You’re on JJ at this point. The entire world can see you. We find out later that she is from St. Louis. This is our first indication that Caroline spits a lot of game (take a shot!).

JJ wants Mr. Eeyore to explain to her about the plane ticket. Jeff claims that the plane ticket was to LA. The plane ticket was just for Caroline, as Jeff was not going. He admits that he met Caroline online. She was his online girlfriend. JJ is so confused over the whole online dating thing (take a shot!) because she thought they had met at a central location. Jeff explains that he and Caroline met later, but that was after he paid for her plane ticket.

Jeff takes over and tells JJ that he had never met Caroline prior to him paying for the plane ticket. He states that he had gotten a phone call from her on May 8th where Caroline was crying hysterically. Caroline was telling Jeff that she had loaned a friend of hers some money and she wanted it back, but the friend wasn’t giving her the money back. She then tried to do the very thing her friend did to her on Mr. Eeyore here. She had loaned the friend $800 some years ago and never got it back. That person blocked her and never paid it back.

JJ asks Jeff why Caroline was crying and what she needed the cash for. Jeff explains that she needed the money to meet her daughter in LA because her daughter was doing an audition. An audition for what? Who the hell knows? Probably Sharknado 3-D or some shit. JJ says she gets it.

JJ then turns her attention to the defendant and asks Caroline if she has a daughter in Los Angeles. Caroline denies this. JJ asks if the daughter was coming to LA for the purpose of an audition. Caroline answers back (with some shifty ass eyes) that her daughter was coming to LA for the purpose of an interview.

See, I don’t like people who can’t look me in the eyes when they answer questions, nor people who can’t give a straight answer. It’s ridiculous. I’m sort of judgmental (as you guys can tell), and if someone can’t give me a straight answer, I immediately surmise they are trying to blow smoke up my ass.

JJ asks Caroline why she needed to go with her daughter. Caroline claims that her daughter is an actress (oh really? What’s her name and name me one blockbuster role she has been in), with Caroline admitting that she is her daughter’s assistant. So, do actors get interviews like the rest of us plebs, or is that pretty much a screen test/audition?

You see where I’m going with this? Already, not five minutes into this case, Caroline seems shady af and someone not to be trusted.

JJ says that it was not necessary for Caroline to go to LA, but that she wanted to come. Caroline rebuts this and states that “they” expected her in the meeting. Who “they” are is left up to interpretation. Was it the production studio? Was it her daughter’s actual agent?  Does her daughter even have an agent, or is Caroline her agent? Was it the screenwriters? Take a shot for vagueness here.

JJ asks Caroline if on May 8th, did she call Jeff and ask him for the cash for the plane ticket. Caroline denies this while JJ is talking and JJ states that if she didn’t, then Jeff would have to be a very good guesser.

After the commercial break (which included yet another LifeAlert advert and a heartfelt Bayer commercial with a daughter and her father where Bayer saved his life), we cut back to the case.

JJ asks again if Caroline called Jeff on May the 8th. JJ says “Look at me!” (take a shot!), so we know JJ is serious at this point. Caroline looks right into JJ’s eyes and tells her “No”. JJ, pulling knowledge from her lawyer days, asks if Caroline called Jeff on or around May the 8th. Caroline looks to her left, then answers “Yes”. I’m not sure if Caroline is right handed or left handed, but those shifty eyes have me somewhat uncomfortable in the story she is telling.

JJ wants to know if Caroline told Jeff that she spilled the tea on loaning a friend $800 in the past that she was screwed out of. Caroline answers that she did. JJ then asks if Caroline was counting on the return of that cash to go to the interview with her daughter in LA. Caroline again looks to her left and says “Yes, Ma’am”.

JJ states that otherwise, it is a very bizarre story for Jeff to make up. JJ then asks Jeff if he is on any psychotropic medication or if he has been psychiatrically hospitalized in the past six months (take two shots!). Jeff answers no to both queries.

JJ just cuts through the BS and asks if Caroline asked Jeff for the money for the plane ticket. Caroline denies she ever asked him for the plane ticket to LA. All this LA talk, I think I may watch To Live and Die in LA film tomorrow. JJ then, in all her sarcastic glory, states “Let me hear!”

Caroline begins her testimony by saying on the day in question that Jeff is speaking of (which would have been the 8th of May, but Caroline doesn’t want to admit that she’s lying just yet, as that would be too easy of a case), Caroline sent Jeff a text message about her getting screwed over by helping someone out. Caroline says that Jeff questioned what she was referring to. JJ just says “Show me!” (take a shot!)

Caroline puts her glasses back on, then produces some raggedy ass documents that look like some AOL chat messages from back in 2001. JJ wonders what the hell the document is and what they’re talking about in said document. The document has the time stamps, which are dated May 8th and all, so Caroline is in some trouble now. Caroline keeps calling them “text messages”, but they look more like old school internet chit chats. JJ just says “Nah….no, no, no, no no, no, no, no.” as she is reading the texts. LOL. JJ states that it was a lot of “in between” stuff between the texts, and, to be frank, JJ already knew Caroline was fuckin liar to begin with, but this just sealed the deal.

Caroline admits that there was a lot of that, but then she states that after the two text messages that JJ sees, Jeff called her. JJ states that now we’re getting there and reiterates that that was on May the 8th. Caroline admits that it was on May 8th. JJ then says again that Caroline did speak to Jeff on May 8th. Caroline confirms, once again, that she did speak to Jeff on May 8th. Caroline is a fuckin liar (take two shots because she admitted that she was a liar pretty much).

JJ then says that Caroline told Jeff that she needed that plane ticket. Caroline again denies it. Jesus H. Christ on a pogo stick. Caroline is either an unbashful liar or has a mental issue where she can’t tell the difference between fantasy and reality. First of all, Caroline, you aren’t going to get one over on JJ. Secondly, you have been caught in two different lies. Just come out and own your shit. Simple as that. Quit writing checks with your mouth that your ass can’t cash.

JJ then grabs the paper again, holding it up, asking “What has Southwest done?”

I promise you, I don’t really like to fly on Southwest or Spirit. Delta or American have always done right by me. Spirit is tacky af and Southwest will make you have a three hour layover in Chicago or Charlotte. LOL. Maybe your experiences are different, but I don’t mess with Spirit or Southwest really.

Caroline begins to give testimony on what occurred with Jeff. She states she was explaining to Jeff what transpired between her and her friend that owed her $800. She states that she was venting, not crying hysterically. I think she was crying. So far, Jeff has been completely honest, while Caroline keeps getting caught in all her lies. Caroline claims that Jeff bought the ticket without her consent. That’s funny, because she didn’t bother to not go to LA with her daughter or at least call Southwest Airlines and try to refund the ticket back to Jeff.

Caroline claims that she told Jeff no, but Jeff was bullheaded in his entire generosity. She states that he made the statement that he had been “blessed” (LOL) and he had so many clients now. JJ interrupts Caroline and moves Caroline’s document around in a funny manner, which causes the audience to laugh (take two shots!). JJ wants Caroline to show her on the document where Jeff stated that “he has been blessed and has all these clients”. JJ then says “Show me” twice (take two shots!).

JJ is starting to grow impatient with Caroline’s game and asks her directly if she works besides being the “assistant” to her daughter. Caroline confirms that she does work. JJ wants to know what she does. At first, Caroline shifts her eyes around before saying “Uh…”, which catches the ire of JJ. “Uh is not an answer!” JJ responds (take a shot!). Caroline states that she is a customer service representative for a furniture company. I was thinking that Caroline may have sold used cars for a living with all of her sneaky ass tactics and fast talking. JJ asks Caroline if she is salary or commission. Caroline states that she’s salary. Then she changes her answer and states she isn’t commission, but she’s hourly. What the hell is wrong with my dear Caroline?

JJ starts admonishing Caroline and states that Caroline needs to pay Jeff for the ticket, as she played him like a game. JJ then admits that Caroline is slippery and slick with her bullshit. I must agree with JJ here, as Caroline talks a good game, but can’t tell the truth if her life depended on it. She was after ALL she could get out of that man. JJ then starts ranting at Caroline about how much of a liar she is, while Caroline looks on, with a confused expression on her face. JJ reiterates that Caroline was telling Jeff this sob story and had never even met him. She didn’t know this man from Adam, but made sure she told him how she couldn’t get on a plane to go to some “interview” with her wanna-be actress daughter about an acting job.

Caroline and Jeff did eventually meet, with the two having a liking for each other. Jeff asked Caroline to please take down her dating profile. Caroline states in her answer that she wouldn’t take down her dating profile. Caroline denies this and states that she wasn’t going to remove said dating profile. The audience cracks up laughing again (take four shots; two for Caroline playing dumb for the third time in a row, and two for the audience laughing at her being caught in yet another lie). Jeff just shakes his head.

JJ is at the end of her rope with this case. JJ asks Jeff how much the tickets were. Jeff finally gets a word in when he says the ticket was $613. JJ asks Caroline if her daughter got the acting job. Again, Caroline doesn’t give a direct answer and claims that her daughter will be back in LA in January (take a shot!). I wonder if Caroline is going to scam some other lonely soul out there for that ticket. JJ then asks again if Caroline’s daughter got the acting gig. Caroline admits that her daughter didn’t get the job (take another shot for Caroline’s being deceptive). JJ awards Jeff $613 (I guess he has to eat the change for falling victim to Caroline), while Caroline looks absolutely shocked.

Verdict: Plaintiff gets awarded $613. Countersuit is dismissed

During the Hall-Ter-View, Jeff is looking quite sad (does this man EVER smile?) and states that he thought the ruling was fair and accurate. He feels as though he can’t help anyone else out anymore and feels extremely betrayed. His heart has been broken irreparably. His tender heart has turned to stone. Meanwhile, Caroline claims that she is not an opportunist (LOL, yeah, okay). She states that it was her full intent to pay Jeff back for the plane ticket (Oh, so now you want to tell the truth). Then she lies again (take a shot!) by saying that Jeff offered to pay for the ticket. Which one is it, lady?

Did Auntie Judy say anything fucked up to anyone? {to Caroline} “Pay him back for the ticket! You have to pay him back for the ticket! You know, you’re slippery. I’m getting such slippery feelings from this *grabs chat logs that were said to be “text messages”*, which doesn’t tell the whole story. You have not met this man. You called him complaining. He says crying. But you said ‘no’. I was expected at this ‘meeting’ for my daughter who is an actress. That’s why you reached out to him. You have never met the man! You…have…never…met….the man!!!”

Anyway, I have some blue crabs and beer to get to tonight. I thought I’d drop another review since I’ve been slacking on my game lately. Happy Saturday to all of you! 

Edited September 25, 2022 by DjamillasMan

[CrazyInAlabama]

4 p.m. episodes-

First (2014)-

Three’s a Crowd -Plaintiff/ suing Jordan Bianco suing defendant /former roommate Mary Stanko for unpaid rent security deposit and utiliies.    Plaintiff and girlfriend Kirsten Paskett, were two roommates, and plaintiff is suing defendant for her portion of the rent (50% because plaintiff and girlfriend shared a room).      Plaintiff’s girlfriend and defendant didn’t get along, and so defendant moved out.   

Original agreement is claimed by plaintiff girlfriend was half paid by them, but defendant claims she was originally told she would pay 1/3 of rent and utilities.   When defendant moved out on 1 May she was going to pay the rent, but when she went to pay up, and pick up her stuff, plaintiff Kirsten would only give Mary her stuff when she paid her more money. 

Plaintiffs aren’t getting security back, because new roommate will pay Jordan back for the security deposit.   New roommate will pay half of the rent.  

Did all three litigants go shopping together?  

Plaintiff girlfriend claims she found out defendant was going to move out without notice, and that caused the argument.   Audrey the roommate helped plaintiff sort through and lock up Mary’s stuff. Audrey was the fourth roommate, and was the woman living there until Mary moved out.  

$335 to plaintiffs, for the one month’s unpaid rent, when Mary’s friend was still there, and some of the friend’s stuff is still in the apartment, so plaintiffs will get even more rent.   

$415 to plaintiffs.

Moving Out Madness -Plaintiff Cassandra Allen suing defendant Douglas Marks rent late fees and cleaning fees.   Roommates were plaintiff, and her husband Billy, and defendant, were all on the lease, and renting one or two rooms from someone else in a house.  All three lived together for three years before everything fell apart.  (This was in Mission Hills, CA)

Defendant didn’t give 30-day’s notice to move out to live with his girlfriend, but he claims plaintiff husband Billy told him to move out. 

However, $900 rent to plaintiff, because even though defendant claimed he would move after April, but he was still there in June, and his stuff was still in the house until almost the end of July.   Defendant says Cassandra wouldn’t let him take his stuff out of the house.

Plaintiff receives two month’s rent $1800.

Second (2014)-

Drinking and Driving House Sitter -Plaintiff Deon Dionne suing defendant/former house sitter Paulino Cervantes   for car damages, house and furniture damages, and claims defendant drank a lot of her wine.   Defendant claims he only drank two bottles of cheap wine, didn’t damage the house or furniture, and car wasn’t damaged by him.    Defendant claims since he was given keys to move car from one side of street to another, and he claims that was the same as permission to use the car.    Defendant claims he didn’t cause the car damages to bottom of door, right side of car, or bumper.   Plaintiff claims defendant told her the damages happened driving to and from Pomona.   

Estimate for car damages are $1401, but estimate was $2011, and that defendant paid her $700.  She wants money for a week’s car rental also.

Plaintiff says she had six to eight bottles of wine gone, and wine was spilled on the couch.  

Plaintiff gets $1401 for car damages.

Traffic Ticket Pile-Up! -Plaintiff Jaymi Algeo suing defendant Veronica Grimes for traffic tickets, and other damages from a car plaintiff was selling to a third party, who resold vehicle to defendant’s boyfriend, and then defendant was driving.   Plaintiff sold her car to another man, who didn’t reregister the car, and he sold it to defendant’s boyfriend, and then defendant was buying it.    Then, the notices from the traffic tickets started, and nine months later car still wasn’t registered in defendant’s name, and no insurance.   

Plaintiff couldn’t renew her own car registration because of the outstanding tickets.  Defendant is counter suing because plaintiff stole her car. 

Plaintiff was arrested for stealing her own car, when she took her car back from defendant.  Defendant had been driving car for 10 months, without insurance or registration.   Defendant says car was impounded as stolen and unregistered, and wants impound and damage fees, dismissed.   When defendant saw car was gone, she called police and reported it stolen, so plaintiff was arrested for stealing her own car. 

Tickets are up to $100 each.  Plaintiff wants money for arrest, and she couldn’t renew her license.

Plaintiff receives $2500.

Three’s a Crowd -Plaintiff Caroline Kindred is suing defendants /roommates Jessica Ruth and Kayla McCarter for return of her security deposit.   Plaintiff’s credit wasn’t approved, but her father was her co-signer.   Plaintiff moved in with the agreement that no one would use her bathroom, and found someone else’s stuff, so she moved out before she actually moved in, but some of her stuff was still there, so she owes rent.    Plaintiff wants her share of $1066 security deposit back, and rent $687

$363 for security to plaintiff and that’s it.

5 p.m. episodes-

First (2017)-

Teen Joyriders Busted by Police-Plaintiffs, Rhiannon Torgerson, mother and son Tajauan Tyler , suing defendant mother Kerri McCoy, and son Marcus McCoy for a share of restitution money to fix a truck.   Defendant son says plaintiff son picked him up in the middle of the night in defendant's mother's truck.   Plaintiff son says that defendant son came over to plaintiff's house in the middle of the night.       Plaintiff says defendant picked him up on his motorcycle, and then they took defendant's mother's truck for joyriding.  (I realize that the stories don't make sense, but they never do).    Plaintiff criminal stole, and drove the truck, and went joyriding.   Plaintiff criminal is blaming defendant criminal for the crash.   

Both sons were arrested, they claim both for the first time, and they plead guilty to truck theft, and each pay restitution for the truck $4330 ($2165 each).      Defendant mother refused to pay the restitution.    Payment of restitution by both would result in case being sealed and expunged.   Plaintiff paid all of the restitution so her criminal can play basketball or something at school.    Plaintiff demanded defendant sign a letter that she had repaid the restitution, and plaintiff criminal could play sports.

Another wrinkle, defendant criminal violated probation, charged with vandalism, and violation of house arrest, so he was again arrested.   Even if defendant pays restitution, defendant criminal will not get his record expunged, because he reoffended the next month.    Defendant mother still thinks her criminal son will get his record expunged, but as JJ explains, son reoffended, and won't get expunged or sealed records.    Plaintiff mother doesn't care about what her son did, just that he can bounce a ball around.   Defendant mother just lied to JJ, about son's second arrest. 

The plaintiff paid with a credit card, and waited six months to pay the restitution, but the court holds the payment for 90 days, because the credit card holder can dispute the charges.    However, plaintiff mother paid both sides, and gets $2165 from defendant.  

$2165 to plaintiff.     

Uninsured Boy Friend Destroys Car-Plaintiff Letrishia Tyson suing defendant/ her daughter Adrienne Tyson for tow bill. Defendant is counter suing for moving expenses.    Plaintiff bought new car, sold old car to daughter for $2700 (insurance continued in plaintiff's name).    Then two months later defendant's boyfriend was driving the car, and totaled it.    Because defendant's boyfriend, Devante Evans, wasn't licensed, and wasn't named on the insurance, insurance didn't pay for the damages.   

Plaintiff told daughter, it was her fault, and to pay the car off, and she did.   Plaintiff got a bill from the tow yard for storing the car for a year, for over $3,000+.    Defendant's witness is the same idiot boyfriend. 

As JJ says, daughter paid off the car, but since plaintiff was legal owner, she's the only one who could get the car out of the tow yard impound. 

Mother and daughter moved after the accident, and daughter wants moving costs.  She couldn't drive because of a C-section, how heartwarming. 

Plaintiff case dismissed.   Defendant's stupid case dismissed.   

Second (2017)-

Ex-Girlfriend Escape Caught on Tape!  -Plaintiff Orlando Hernandez  suing defendant/ex-girlfriend Montiel Reeves for intentionally damaging his property, and assault.  Plaintiff says defendant invaded his apartment, after they broke up (plaintiff was in jail for six months, and they broke up before his unfortunate incarceration).  Plaintiff claims his friend was at his apartment playing video games, while plaintiff was walking his dog.    This is the second time defendant invaded his apartment.   

Defendant ex-girlfriend scares me, and her girlfriend witness is off too.   Plaintiff hasn't been on a date with defendant for over three years (she was 17 then, and is now 20).     Plaintiff was walking his pit bull/Dingo mix (I suspect this is an American Dingo cross, not an Australian Dingo) when the ex-girlfriend broke into the apartment.     Defendant claims she didn't force her way into the apartment, but came over for money.

When plaintiff friend called and told him the defendant was in his apartment.    Plaintiff cares for his disabled (double amputee) father, and is paid as a caregiver.   While in prison, plaintiff completed his GED.   

Video is submitted of the assault, and loco actions of the defendant.  Video shows the apartment with defendant singing, screaming, and acting high.   Defendant was breaking the window out, and you can see that on video.   The assault by defendant is shown too, and recorded.  

Plaintiff wanted a restraining order, but was refused.   Defendant wanted $20, and claims plaintiff lured her to his apartment for sex, and would pay her $20, and wouldn't let her leave.   What a liar she is. 

Defendant was given a protective order by the court.    (I won't go into details, but defendant has quite the record since this case aired).   I know who I think the victim is here, and it's not the defendant.

Plaintiff claims defendant came through the bedroom window, not via the front door.  Plaintiff looks so confused with JJ reads defendant's lying statement to the court.  Defendant told police that she went out the window to escape, and called the police make a false report to cover herself. 

I really hope that plaintiff is doing well now.  

 Plaintiff receives $956. $500 was for the assault, and the $456 was for the window and headphones (Plaintiff broke the number one rule of dating, ‘never sleep with anyone crazier than you are’)

Show Me the Money Trail!-Plaintiff Tynikki Burkitt suing contractor/defendant Joseph Mannino for return of her deposit on work he never performed.     Defendant/contractor says plaintiff made an insurance claim, received $6500, and then found a cheaper company to do the work.    $2500 deposit was paid to contractor, and plaintiff wants it back.   JJ wants to see the paid bill or check paid to contractor that did the job.  Plaintiff says she hasn't completed the bathroom repair, so she brought her suit prematurely.     JJ will explain why suit is premature.  

Defendant says the insurance check was negotiated with the insurance company, so JJ needs to find out how much the other company is charging for the bathroom.   (JJ surmises that the defendant padded the bill to cover the deductible).   

 JJ says the $6500 was insurance payout, and giving the $2500 back is not warranted, because that would be enrichment.   Plaintiff case dismissed.

Plaintiff receives $956.

(This week the 5 pm episodes are all 2017, but next week the 5 pm episodes are all 2012.  That should be interesting).  

[CrazyInAlabama]

4 p.m. episodes-

First (2014)-

Uninsured Motorcycle Crash! – Plaintiffs (motorcycle owner) Michell Beram is  suing defendant Charles “Chad” Pocher for crashing the motorcycle.    Plaintiff flips motorcycles, bought for fix up and resale, Defendant was going to buy the motorcycle, went on a test drive, and crashed it.  Motorcycle was not insured.   Witness Josh Ostrander works with defendant, and is friends with plaintiff.   (Huntington Beach, CA).

Josh invited defendant over to plaintiff’s house, and Chad wanted a faster motorcycle than his current one, asked plaintiff if he could ride the motorcycle and maybe buy it on payments.   Chad got on the bike, was told to stay in the neighborhood, and defendant crashed the bike.    Defendant has insurance on his current bike.    Plaintiff only had insurance on the bike he rode a lot, not the sale bike in the case.

Chad was riding on Pacific Coast Highway, way out of the neighborhood, took a turn on a new tire, and bike fell in turn.   Chad claims he was going at a reasonable speed, and claims he hit an oil slick. My guess is Pacific Coast Highway is well out of plaintiff’s neighborhood.   

Judging from the defendant witness, Margaret Pocher, waving and jumping around in her seat, Chad brought his mommy to court.    Estimate from plaintiff is $6985, demand to defendant is that amount.  Defendant says plaintiff wanted to do cosmetic repairs to the motorcycle, not mechanical repairs, and sell it at an inflated price to someone else.  

There are two ways to fix the bike, for $3,000 to do cosmetic only, and commit fraud.   The other way is to spend almost $7,000 on it and it would be safe.    Plaintiff claims frame was intact, but bike was safe.

Plaintiff only paid $3,000 deposit to fix the bike, and it’s at the shop now.   Motorcycle cost $6400 when plaintiff bought it.

Plaintiff says he could sell bike for $7000 to $7200, after it's repaired.

Plaintiff gets $1500 , half of what he wanted.

Crash After Bible Study  -Plaintiff Jennifer Romero suing defendant Aaron Ballou after he hit her parked car, while he was on his way home from Bible Study.    Defendant says 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.   Accident was around 11 p.m., on Saturday night, for a bible study.    What bible study goes to 11 p.m.   Defendant came around a curve, hit plaintiff’s parked car, and he claims it was parked out in the road. 

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

Plaintiff receives $4,000.

Second (2014)-

Teens in Tight Quarters! -Plaintiff/former roommate Jesse Waite suing defendants/former roommates Brianna Zumbrum and Daniel Ramirez, both side demanding property damages.  Plaintiff wants all remaining rent.       All three litigants are former high school friends, who moved in together, and are fighting over pets, girlfriends, and property damage.   Plaintiff moved his girlfriend and a Labrador in, and defendant Ramirez says both were irritating, and so he left.   There was one bathroom, attached to the bedroom, so everyone had to go through the bedroom to the bathroom. .   Defendants were sleeping in a bed in the living room.    Defendant woman moved out after plaintiff tried to fix defendant boyfriend up with some woman.  (This was in California).   

When defendant Brianna moved out, the two men decided to live there together, and up their rent payments by $200 each.   Plaintiff’s girlfriend moved in at least two full days a week.    Defendant Daniel says plaintiff’s girlfriend stayed over every week, for several days, and the dog moved in full time.   Then, plaintiff moved in a couch in the living room, and kept locking the bedroom door, so no bathroom access for defendant.   Case against defendant Brianna dismissed.   

Plaintiff wants the $1480 a month rent for the remaining months on the lease.  Defendant Ramirez has to pay half of rent for four months, the rest is on plaintiff.  Defendant paid pet deposit, one-third each $750 each.    

$2150 to plaintiff, for four months from defendant Ramirez.  

Tattooed Lip Infection! -Plaintiff/lip tattoo client Elina Khutinaeva is suing defendant/cosmetologist Kelli Ho, over a serious infection after a lip tattoo by defendant.   

A twist is that the plaintiff wanted her lip tattoo from a defendant who does eyelash extensions, not lip tattoos.      Plaintiff claims the defendant was injecting Novocaine, and that requires a nursing license, or other certification.   However, JJ says that’s hearsay.  

Plaintiff claims a few days after the procedure, she woke up with infected lips, but didn’t go to the doctor until 15 days after the procedure.    Doctor’s report says mild possible infection, and cold sores, and prescribed a mild ointment to help the problem. 

Plaintiff case dismissed.

5 p.m. episodes-

First (2017)-

Home Profits Snafu!-Plaintiff Julia Barrera , is suing her cousin, Joe Rea,  for the profit from the sale of a home.  Plaintiff bought a home, put house in defendant/cousin's name because he had better credit, and would get a better interest rate.  Plaintiff claims she put down $10,000, and defendant never put a penny down.   Plaintiff lived in home for 17 months, made the mortgage payments, and has receipts for that period.    Defendant claims he made 3 payments.   Plaintiff first claimed she made 21 payments, but she only made 17 payments.   House was sold in 2015, by defendant cousin, and he paid nothing to the plaintiff.   Defendant's profit was $20k, after commissions, and taxes. Defendant's $20k profit was reduced by the $3k plus the three payments defendant made.      

Defendant never paid the $10k down payment, but made $17k in profits after his payment.     Defendant says he's an investor, and made the investment to profit, but was on his credit.    Defendant swears plaintiff was supposed to refinance the mortgage into her name after two years, but plaintiff claims defendant kicked her out, and sold the house.    Defendant claims he paid her $4k right into plaintiff's bank account, but has no proof.   Plaintiff's down payment came from her divorce settlement of $39k, so that's where the $10k down came from.    I wonder if plaintiff ever tried to get a mortgage in her own name?   Plaintiff moved out in May, and house didn't sell until August.   So, if plaintiff was going to get a mortgage on the house, she would have had plenty of time to do that.  

Plaintiff will receive the $5k court maximum payment, but there was no contract to split the profits.    

Can You Find the Scam?-Plaintiff Mary Mendoza suing her former friend, Lisa Fleming, for a bad check she cashed for defendant, and an antique table.    Defendant was a friend of plaintiff's son, and defendant needed a place to stay for a while.   Defendant needed a social security payee, and two checks were issued to plaintiff each month, because plaintiff was landlady (the payee program pays half to payee for living expenses for the recipient, and then the rent is paid to the landlord).   

Plaintiff received both checks, and signed her check over to defendant, and therefore, government was paying rent, but scam was that defendant actually received all of the money from the monthly checks (very confusing).   (Scam is that defendant isn't supposed to get both checks, one check is to pay the plaintiff for rent, but no money was actually paid to the landlady, just to the defendant.   Defendant received over $1100 a month with the rent check, she is now married so the husband is the payee, and the check is $837 so the money went down from $870).    

Defendant has a payee because she has a gambling problem, and this has been going on for 17 years (filmed about 2017).   

One check plaintiff cashed was returned by the bank, because social security said defendant's husband had already been made payee, and a check had been deposited by defendant husband.    Plaintiff had to borrow the money from the bank to cover the bounced check, plus fees so $485 owed.

Antique table was damaged when litigants were discussing the money issue at plaintiff's house, and defendant went off, and flipped the table over, damaging the table.    Table was fixed, but plaintiff didn't have to pay, so that's dismissed.

$485 to plaintiff.

Second (2017)-

Outrageous Mother on a Rampage-Plaintiffs Katelyn Rose (current partner/wife of child’s father),  suing defendant /mother of plaintiff's fiance's child Paige Brasher for car and house vandalism by defendant at a custody exchange.  Custody exchange was for plaintiff witness’s child with defendant.  Plaintiff witness is her fiance, William Bader (who is ex of defendant), and father of child with defendant.

The plaintiff man and defendant lived together from 2010 to 2015, and had a custody agreement in 2016.   After plaintiff man and defendant separated, he went to court to get a custody arrangement.   Custody 50/50 has been rocky, she gets kid Monday-Tuesday, he gets kid Wednesday-Thursday, and they alternate Friday through Sunday.   

Defendant came to visit the child on Thursday evening at plaintiff house, for mother's weekend visit.   Child had tonsils out recently, and mother wanted kid during recovery, but defendant came to visit son at plaintiff's house.    Defendant called plaintiff man at work repeatedly, and defendant came to man's job to see where son was, and to see if plaintiff woman was watching the kid.   

Defendant also wanted to see if plaintiff father was working, or if plaintiff's fiance was home with the child alone.   Plaintiff man's supervisor called and told him the defendant was coming by the man's workplace.  

Plaintiff father takes off Wednesday and Thursday for his son's visitation.    Son had tonsils out on Monday, and then went to father's place on Wednesday and Thursday, and then defendant would get child for Friday as usual (it was her weekend).    But defendant demanded to have the son earlier, and was jealous that father's fiance would be alone with the child.    

Defendant dislikes plaintiff fiancee woman, and then came to the home, where the house and car vandalism happened.  Plaintiff woman says defendant came to house, beat the sides of house, and doors with a lawn chair, smashed two huge windows at the plaintiff house, and the car windows and windshields are gone.    I can tell defendant why child was crying inside the house, because she was beating on the house, yelling, and being a jerk.   

JJ says plaintiff man should take defendant back to family court, and get supervised visitation only.   JJ is not buying defendant's stupid tale that she didn't do the damage.   Pictures of house and car damage are horrible. 

There is an audio clip of the vandalism (sadly, they don't play it).     I feel sorry for the child, his mother will never let go of her jealousy that the plaintiff father has moved on to someone else, and will never come back to her.   

Plaintiff gets $1250.  (They should have asked for $5,000 in my opinion, for the damages, and to help fund the custody fight).  In the hall-terview plaintiff says he's going to sue for full custody, and supervised visitation for the mother, and I hope he gets it. 

Child Support Nightmare-Plaintiff Dr. Adnon Bader (Dr. is a Gastroenterologist) suing former employee/defendant John Fisher for misuse of credit cards.   Defendant was paying almost $1,000 a month for child support, via payroll deduction.    Then defendant fell behind in paying support, and the $1,025 was coming out of pay for seven months while employed by plaintiff.     After defendant left the plaintiff's employment, the child support still came out of the plaintiff’s money for three months.     

Plaintiff wants the three months paid back.   Defendant says it was in his employment agreement that for the term of his contract the child support will be paid by plaintiff's medical practice.   The contract clearly states that Texas is an at-will employment state, and that the employment of defendant will follow that law.  

Work contract says defendant is an at will employee, for $50k a year.  Employee was terminated 3 months early, but child support continued to be taken out of plaintiff’s accounts.

Plaintiff gets $3500, and never had to say a word.  

[CrazyInAlabama]

4 p.m. episodes-

First (2014)-

Neighborly Plant Destruction -Plaintiff Christy Wilson suing defendants  Mark Fite and (wife) Cara Kelly over trimming vines that were growing on plaintiff’s property but grew onto defendants property, and  onto their carport, so defendants cut them.

Plaintiff claims defendants cut the vines on their property, but also damaged vines on plaintiff’s side.   The vines are all over the common wall, and down the length of the wall.  Vines went all over the wall, and into defendants’ carport, and onto defendants’ house roof.    The defendants’ moved in five months before this, and plaintiff about five years ago.   Plaintiff agreed to cut the vines, but wanted the privacy from having the vines on top of the fence. 

Plaintiff keeps arguing the vines on the defendants’ carport and roof have been there for years.   

Mice, bugs, etc. will love vines like the ones on the encroaching vines.  

Plaintiff case dismissed

Facebook Furniture -Plaintiff  April Lozano suing defendant Lily Jo Rodriguez (plaintiff’s husband’s cousin), for disposing of furniture.   Plaintiff, and her family, and defendants moved in with defendant’s house temporarily, and after plaintiff’s daughter said defendant pulled a knife on her, so plaintiff wanted defendant out.   Defendant babysat twice for the plaintiff, and after the second incident ended the babysitting by defendant.   

Plaintiff only had time to get her clothing out, but not the furniture.   This happened 2 years ago, and furniture was replaced by plaintiff. Defendant has sold the furniture on Facebook.   Plaintiff claims to have proof that defendant made a false CPS claim against plaintiff.   Since plaintiff has a daycare, she was also worried about more false reports.

Everything dismissed.

Follow the Money -Plaintiff Crystal Mounts suing defendant/ex-boyfriend James Pullen for half the cost of a camper and camping spot, and return of property, and money.    Plaintiff wants one year of the camping spot rent paid. 

Plaintiff has a total of eight kids, one with defendant, none of the eight kids live with plaintiff The other child is being raised by defendant, and his mother.    No property decision is made, because they weren’t married, and have no documentation about who owns what.

Plaintiff took out a car loan for $16500, when she was working, and put it in her bank account.   Plaintiff pays $100 a month child support, and is unemployed again.   Defendant says he’s never received a penny from plaintiff.    Defendant says plaintiff has been on social services benefits her whole life.   Defendant doesn’t have custody, but some guardianship through the state, and child has only medical benefits through the state.

Plaintiff says defendant emptied the car money out of her account, and defendant denies ever having a joint account.   Defendant claims he never took a penny from her, and he didn’t have access.

Plaintiff case dismissed.

Second (2014)-

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

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

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

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

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

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

Plaintiff case dismissed. 

5 p.m. episodes-

First (2017)-

You Can't Take the Fireplace With You!-Plaintiff Samantha Torregrossa suing ex-boyfriend, ( the father of her son), Salvatore Geraci for an unpaid credit card bill, and for the return or value of a fireplace.   

Plaintiff left defendant for someone else, when that didn't work out she came back, and is suing defendant.   They lived together for seven years, in a home purchased by defendant.   They dated for ten years total.    Plaintiff never worked, SSMOO (Sainted Single Mother of One), says she was a SAHM.   

Defendant bought the house, paid for the house, and plaintiff paid for the appliances.    Defendant didn't pay for the credit card bills, but plaintiff never paid for anything or worked.      How does someone who hasn't worked in years have a credit card?   

Fireplace was put in house in 2014, it was a gift for the house from plaintiff's mother.   Plaintiff gets nothing for the fireplace.      For 3 1/2 years, plaintiff never worked, but only the appliances were put in by the plaintiff.   Appliances added up to $3500 (stove, microwave, washer/dryer fridge, and TV).    Two years after the appliance purchase plaintiff took off for some other guy, and then after the new guy didn't work out, plaintiff suddenly wanted to sue.

Defendant is a fire alarm inspector for the city of New York, and he pays child support.     Plaintiff looks really pissed she's not getting her $3500 back for appliances, and nothing for the fireplace.    Plaintiff moved into her grandmother's apartment, so no rent, and plaintiff and her mother are fake crying about this.  Plaintiff doesn't want anything back, just the money for the appliances.   

Plasma TV and microwave will go back to plaintiff, and that's all.   Everything else dismissed.  

Best Friend Split After Party Swipe-Plaintiffs Jorge Santos and girlfriend/fiancee Taylor Alens, are suing former friend, Quran Alhameed, for backing into plaintiff's car during a party.   (Plaintiffs have been dating for nine years, and she's 21).    Plaintiff says defendant backed into plaintiff's car leaving a party, and defendant says he didn't do it.   Defendant's insurance company information was given to plaintiff by defendant.  Ms. Arens paid for the repair, so that's why she's suing the defendant also.    

Litigants were at a party, defendant left, and plaintiff heard a crash, and defendant backed past plaintiff's car, but hit it.    Defendant claims he saw the damage to plaintiff's car, but didn't hit the car, and went in and told plaintiff about the car.   Then defendant gave the insurance information to plaintiff, and as usual, insurance had lapsed from non-payment.  Defendant claims plaintiff Santos' brother hit the car. 

Plaintiff submits the car repair bills.   Defendant never got insurance, and his car got towed, and is gone. 

$2,430 to plaintiff

Second (2017)-

$100 Basketball Bet Turns Violent-Plaintiff Richard Caldwell suing defendant Danny Copeland for an assault over a basketball game bet, and missing property.    Two years before there was $100 bet on the game, plaintiff lost, and never paid up.   The two men started arguing over the non-payment, and a fight resulted.  Plaintiff claims he was badly injured, and his gold cross was ripped off (cross was found by police and returned).   Police report is presented. 

Defendant was arrested, but is suing for a false police report.    Defendant claims plaintiff attacked him.  Defendant's case was resolved, and he plead out for a lesser charge, (he was originally charged with five charges) so his counter claim is dismissed.   Next time the plaintiff should pay his bets.   Since defendant plead guilty, his claim is gone.   

Plaintiff gets $2500.

Quick!  I Need a Pizza Oven-Plaintiff Wesley Miller contracted with defendant Jose Martinez to have an outdoor pizza oven, and other items installed, and it had to be finished in a week, and it wasn't finished.  Plaintiff hired someone else to finish the work.   

Defendant claims it rained 5 out of 7 days, and he was in the hospital too, for one day.   Defendant will have to return the money for the job. 

However, defendant claims plaintiff paid $1,000 deposit by check, and put a stop payment on the check, and he never received any money from plaintiff.    However, JJ has proof that the check was cashed already.         The check was cashed by defendant for $1,000, and there were supplies that plaintiff tried to return, and other supplies were dumped by defendant on plaintiff’s property.   Plaintiff had pay to get ruined materials hauled away.

(In the hall-terview the plaintiff says the defendant wasn't in the hospital, but was arrested, and in jail). 

$1,000 to plaintiff.   

[CrazyInAlabama]

4 p.m. episodes-

First (2014)-

Pesticide Assault? -Plaintiffs Jim Diamond suing defendants Frank Nettles and Laura Roldan (married couple) over an assault on their street (they’re neighbors).   Defendant wife says neighbors were friendly for a while after they moved in, and .  Melanie and Steve the neighbors, greeted defendants, and claim plaintiff came over and threatened them over being friendly with neighbors and defendants. 

Plaintiff says a neighbor who was out of town for quite a while, asked plaintiff to watch for strange cars in her driveway, and defendant wife parked in the driveway, and plaintiff asked her to move. 

The dispute has been going since defendants moved in.   

Plaintiff was spraying weeds for a neighbor, and defendants crossed his yard, and confronted him on the neighbor’s property.   Plaintiff claims he had permission to be in the yard, and the neighbor asked him to take care of her property.   Plaintiff witness Marsh Brown saw defendants confront plaintiff on the neighbor’s yard.   Plaintiff witness says defendants and two other neighbors (Melanie and Steve) from across the street, arguing plaintiff, and so plaintiff witness got involved because it was 4 against 1, then defendant husband pushed him hard, and sucker punched plaintiff.   Plaintiff had finger marks from defendant grabbing his arm, and then defendant husband punched him in the head.

The pesticide/weed killer was sprayed on the plaintiff’s neighbor’s property, but it doesn’t touch defendant’s property.   Defendant man claims his dog got sick from plaintiff spraying his own yard (litigants properties are side-by-side) a month earlier.  

Defendant wife claims she saw plaintiff spraying her yard with weed killer right before he did the neighbor’s property.  I don’t believe it, and agree with JJ, if the defendants saw him spraying their yard from his yard, they would have confronted him then, and not waited.

I remember this case, and wonder what happened since?  I can’t believe the neighborhood is quieter now, unless the defendants and their friends Melanie and Steve moved.

Frank Nettles is disabled, with neuropathy, bad heart with 5 stents, and claims he charged over to talk to plaintiff.   As JJ says, “what did you tell the government to get disability money?”      Why didn’t this assault result in police charges?

Defendant case dismissed, plaintiff receives $1,000 for the assault.

German Shepherd Scare  -Plaintiff Joanne  Flournoy suing defendant Precious Greer, for damage to plaintiff’s car hood.    There was a loose German Shepherd, and when defendant saw the dog, she jumped on plaintiff’s car hood.  Defendant claims she asked permission to jump on the hood.   Defendant claims she sat on plaintiff's car hood, but plaintiff's fiance who was driving the car at the time, denies that.    Plaintiff fiance says he saw a little kid walking a German Shepherd dog.   Everyone standing around scattered, and defendant jumped on the car hood, and hood was badly dented.    

Defendant says she saw the car, and the group around it, asked to sit on the plaintiff's car hood.   JJ points out that defendant isn't tiny, and would damage the car hood.  

$1300 to plaintiff. 

Second (2014)-

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

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

Plaintiff receives $240 for defendant's tax payment.     

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

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

$1200 to plaintiff.

5 p.m. episodes-

First (2017)-

Pekingese Chihuahua Mating Mess-Plaintiff Christine Dietrich-Morgan (owner of Pekingese male dog) suing neighbor/defendant Roy Johnson III(owner of Chihuahua female dog) over his dog boinking her dog, and the resulting puppies.   Plaintiff suing over unpaid stud fee, and breaching an agreement to breed their dogs.    Plaintiff didn't get her stud dog fixed because she wanted him to have his own sibling (that would be his own descendant, not sibling you dim wit).   Plaintiff claims the litigants agreed for the Pekingese, and Chihuahua to breed, and months later the Chi. had puppies.  Defendant claims Peke didn't knock up his Chi, and if they did, it would be vet bills for him, and that's ridiculous, so defendant claim dismissed.    

Defendant says his dog was already pregnant, but two puppies looked like the Peke, and he claims they all died.   As JJ says, daughter, Meshelle Johnson,  and defendant wanted to breed the dog, daughter is 12, so not legally responsible for this. (Daughter is as dim as defendant father).      Defendant says he came home, and the defendant daughter, and plaintiff were breeding their dogs (or not-stupid case).   Daughter testifies that plaintiff came on their property while she was there with her father, while the dogs mated.  

JJ doesn't believe defendant said he wasn't going to breed his dog, and only wanted vet bills after puppies died.   Sadly, the puppies seemed to have been horribly neglected also.    Both litigants are the worst kind of despicable backyard breeders.    My guess trying to get a crossbreed designer dog, they thought they could get big bucks for the puppies.   Defendant claims the three puppies died, and it would have cost $600 to save one, and he didn't have the money, so all three died.  

Defendant claims all three puppies died, and later says he gave a puppy to someone, but that puppy died too.  Defendant claims he doesn't like spay surgery, so his female has puppies frequently, and then gives them all away (Guess who I wish Officer Byrd would beat to a bloody pulp in court? I dislike the plaintiff, this was a planned mating of two dogs, to get sellable mutts, she's rotten too).  

Plaintiff case dismissed, and both litigants are dog abusing A-holes.   

Camper vs. Computer-Plaintiff Theresa Mugrace suing ex-boyfriend William Ansel IV for an unpaid loan to buy a laptop.   They also bought a camper together in 2014, and made joint payments for the camper.   Plaintiff wants money for a loan she made defendant for a laptop, about the time they bought the camper.   After $1690 in payments on camper, over 13 months, defendant stopped paying.  Defendant wants money back he paid on the camper.

Computer was $3260, and only plaintiff paid for it.   It wasn't until they broke up that plaintiff wanted loan payments for the laptop.   Plaintiff and boyfriend used the camper together, until the break up.   Plaintiff still has the camper, and still uses it.    Defendant had a garnishment against him, and plaintiff said as soon as the garnishment was over, then he would pay every payment on the camper, while she paid for the laptop.    However, defendant only paid 13 of the 22 payments for the camper, and then they broke up. 

$3260 to plaintiff for the laptop, plaintiff keeps the camper, and defendant keeps the laptop.

Second (2017)-

Sick Cat Travel Alert-Plaintiff Blair Buder wanted a specific kind of female cat (Devon Cat) from the defendant/cat breeder Rebecca Ansari, for vet bills, fraud, and a refund of the cat price.    Defendant says plaintiff wanted the male cat at first, then said she wanted the female cat, but it was sick so it couldn't be sold.   Plaintiff flew from California to Minnesota, there were two females, and one male in the litter.     Defendant says the cat had a cold, and she never offered the female cat for sale.   Defendant was not offering the other female for sale, because she kept her for breeding.    (this happened in Minnesota).

The plaintiff's witness is holding the cat.   Devon Rex is the breed.  Picture of cat is of the male, and text says it's the boy cat.   That she's buying the male is clearly stated by the defendant's text to the plaintiff, and plaintiff's response.   

When she arrived, the plaintiff demanded the sick female, and now wants to be paid for the medical care.   

Plaintiff is given choice of keeping cat, or giving the cat back, and getting a refund.    Plaintiff keeps the cat, and gets nothing else.  Plaintiff does get the registration papers for the cat.

96 Year-Old Wants What She Wants-Plaintiff Richard Perricone is suing his mother's granddaughter/defendant Nicole Bradshaw for not providing for his 96-year-old mother in assisted living, and for stealing his mother’s money.   For a time, the granddaughter was responsible for grandmother's care.    Plaintiff claims defendant stole money from grandmother, before she went in a care home. 

 Plaintiff took mother out of the NC assisted living.  Plaintiff didn't visit while his mother while she was in NC, including for her 95th birthday.   Plaintiff has a disabled daughter who lives with him, and his wife, but he still never visited the mother.  

Plaintiff says defendant wouldn't provide the grandmother's beloved Club Crackers (grandmother wants exactly 19 with each meal), and other items grandmother wanted.   Granddaughter says she bought what the grandmother wanted, and grandmother would then deny granddaughter bought the items that were right next to her.    Grandmother is now in a care home within driving distance from plaintiff/son.  Plaintiff claims he visits his mother three times a week. 

Plaintiff case dismissed.  (Audience applauds)

[CrazyInAlabama]

4 p.m. episodes-

First (2014)-

Furniture Feud! -Plaintiff/former tenant Aja Fendt suing defendants/former landlords Rebecca Emerson (Becca Seidl is her facebook name) and Tim Seidl  (now husband I guess)  for rent, furniture, harassment, security deposit, and false charges. Plaintiff only lived with the defendants for four weeks, and she claims she moved out after she saw defendants dealing drugs.   Defendants claim the tenant.   Plaintiff, husband and children lived in a rental house owned by her mother, house was put on the market, and plaintiff found the defendants’ place.

Plaintiff claims she moved in beds, crib, kitchen table and dishes.    However, defendant claims tenants only moved into their area room in the house with garbage bags of clothes.   There is no lease, defendant was going to have plaintiff sign a lease at the beginning of the next month.   

Defendants claim plaintiff didn’t move in beds, because they furnished the beds.   Defendants deny that plaintiffs ever gave them rent, security deposit, and they furnished the apartment.  

Plaintiff’s story is there was an argument with defendants, she alleged they were selling drugs out of the garage, so plaintiff called the police.   Defendant says he was afraid for their safety, and the kids, after plaintiff husband threatened to kill people. Defendants changed one lock, and police told them they couldn’t evict the plaintiffs.   Defendants and children moved to a relative’s house to get away from the plaintiffs.       Later the police came to the house, and there was a protective order banning the defendants from their own house.  

Defendant husband says when the plaintiffs left, they only left a couple of TVs, and mattresses that the defendants had furnished, and garbage.    However, there is a facebook message about the mattress being given to plaintiffs.  There is also a kitchen table loaned to plaintiff.  

Defendants lived in the basement level, and plaintiff and family lived on the main floor.  

JJ gives the plaintiff five days to pick up their property with a marshal’s help, everything else dismissed.

Deportation and Disability -Plaintiff Michelle Quiterio suing  defendants Sara Ulloa and her daughter,  Noehmi Galan, for a settlement owed to her husband, that they were holding for plaintiff.  Husband was deported before he could receive the settlement.   Plaintiff’s husband received the settlement of $9700 while he was in Mexico, wife cashed the check with husband’s POA, spend some, and only had $5,000 left.    The settlement was for a disabling back injury while in the U.S.

Because plaintiff and husband didn’t have a bank account, so plaintiff asked Ulloa to keep the money in her account for her, but Ulloa doesn’t have a bank account.   So, defendant Ulloa suggested that since her daughter had a bank account, that she would hold the $5,000 left from the settlement (what an amazing coincidence, it’s the same amount as the limit in JJ’s court).    Then, the husband returned to the U.S. after two years, and wanted the $5,000.   

Husband was a salesman in Mexico, and that didn’t injure his back. 

Wife hasn’t worked for three years.    She did receive public assistance, and didn’t want the money to get confiscated to repay her benefits.   Plaintiff claims defendant’s house was raided by police, and money was confiscated.   

Either defendants were hiding the money from the government for plaintiff to avoid benefits being ended, or defendants stole the money.  Defendants claim they never had the $5,000.

Plaintiff case dismissed.

Second (2014)-

Landlord Scammed? -Plaintiff/former tenants Whitney Turnbull and Samuel Robles are suing defendant/former landlord Fred Kaczmarek for the return of their security deposit.  $1645 was security, and defendant wants $864 to pay for damages.   

The pictures at move out aren’t bad damages, minor stuff.   Defendant denies their dog chewed anything.   Previous minor dog damages were fixed before signing the third lease, and defendant agreed they were done properly after a mutual walk through.   There are texts from defendant saying the damage repairs between lease year 2 and year 3, that damage repair was acceptable.

When JJ tells defendant not to use “basically”, he agrees, and then uses “basically” in every single sentence, multiple times.   I hate the defendant for that.

Defendant claims the walk through was not to resign the year 3 lease, but a move out walk-through, and then plaintiff woman changed her mind and they decided to stay and resign the lease.

Text messages say defendant let plaintiffs out of the lease, and defendant claims there was domestic violence.  Right after resigning the lease for year 3, defendant let plaintiffs leave early.

Security back to plaintiffs $1650, defendant case dismissed.  

Injured Pleasure Horse -Plaintiff/buyer Lori Harl and daughter Jessica Hickman suing defendant/seller Ladonna Hulsey over the health of a horse plaintiff bought for the mother.  

Horse was purchased in Tehachapi, CA. and defendant had three horses.   Plaintiff claims horse was lame and wants her money back.   Before purchase, plaintiff daughter rode horse in the round pen for a while, and testifies she never has a vet check on any horse she’s purchased. 

 Judith Harniman, plaintiff’s witness, was another boarder at the boarding stable defendant keeps her horses at.   Plaintiff witness rode horse before the sale, because she was planning to buy the same horse.   Plaintiff witness arranged for a vet check on the horse, and pre-purchase exam (PPE), and after vet said horse had a failed exam on one leg, plaintiff witness passed. Plaintiff witness says she talked to vet who explained the horse’s conditions.  

 As always, buyer says horse is unsuitable, and seller says horse was fine until after the sale to plaintiff.

Defendant had three other horses, but sold the horse the case is about the quickest.   (This isn’t uncommon, you may buy a horse to get it away from a bad owner, or because you think it might work out for a specific mode of riding, but for a variety of reasons, horse isn’t a match for you, and you don’t develop a working relationship, so you sell the horse to someone else).  

JJ thinks defendant knew horse was defective, and still sold it, but plaintiffs didn’t have a vet check the horse.  Plaintiffs claims horse trips, but have they had his hooves redone?  

Plaintiff case dismissed.

5 p.m. episodes-

First (2017)-

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Everything dismissed, because it's all incredibly stupid.

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

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

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

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

Second (2017)-

Teen Fighting, Lying and Pregnancy-Plaintiff Barbara David and Alexxis Sandoval 17-year-old granddaughter, are suing defendants/her cousin Irene Sandoval, 16 years old, and Anita Morgan her grandmother for breaking her phone.   The litigants are teenage cousins, fighting over the same loser.  Defendant dated loser, and then plaintiff started dating loser, apparently there was some overlap, then plaintiff heard defendant was dating the loser again.  (Loser is named Blake).

A fight started with defendant and some other girl named Julia (she’s the sister of Blake the Loser’s other girlfriend), at Nicholas Park, then the plaintiff got involved in the fight too.      Everyone went to defendant's place, but she was staying at her aunt's house.  Defendant claims loser knocked up plaintiff, and that she later miscarried.    Defendant says about midnight plaintiff, and her posse of 20 girls showed up at the defendant's house.   Included in the posse was the loser's new girlfriend.     

Defendant claims plaintiff and friends attacked the car that defendant, friend, and driven by friend's mother, were in.    Plaintiff claims defendant had 15 people at the fight too.    Nasty defendant has to bring up that plaintiff was pregnant, and miscarried.  

Plaintiff claims defendant broke her phone.    Police report says defendant admits tossing the phone in the trash, and it's in the police report.     The grandmother of defendant claims defendant didn't break the phone, but JJ points out she took the police to the exact trash can where broken phone was.    Of course, the phone was an iPhone.   

(I have to say the litigants have the worst micro bladed eyebrows I’ve ever seen).

Plaintiff gets $699 for the phone.  

Alabama Landlord Shakedown-Plaintiff Liya Gonzalez suing former landlord/defendant Jasmine Horton for return of security deposit.   Defendant/landlord says there was a lot of damage, and improper notice of move out was given (15 days written notice required by lease).    Plaintiff signed the lease, and she lived in the single-family home with husband, and five children.   

Plaintiff's move out text was 5-days-notice, not 15 and written, and she didn't pay for the days covered by the lease terms.   Written lease has tenant notice crossed out, and 30 days was on the lease for landlord notice to tenant to leave.  The litigants won’t admit who did the crossing out, and change to 30-days for notice.     

Plaintiff asked for a walk through on move out, but landlord didn't come to do the inspection, and landlady claims she found damages later.    JJ's theory is landlady spent the security deposit.     As JJ says, declining to do the walk through cancelled any right to damages, because she had no way to prove when the damages happened, and landlord waived her rights.   

 Landlord didn't even bring a copy of the lease to court.   Defendant wasn't the owner of home, and rented it with her ex-husband, and never owned the home.   I wonder if she had the right to legally lease the house?   Defendant claims she sent the letter to plaintiff, but there is no proof.   Plaintiff offered to have a walk through, but defendant didn’t want one. 

Under Alabama law, landlords have to document damages in 30 days, and this didn't happen, so former tenant gets double the security deposit. I bet the owner defendant was leasing from passed the damages along to defendant too, since she was leasing the house from the owner.

Plaintiff receives $2400.   (Double her security deposit).

(Starting Monday, the 5 p.m. episodes, that are the ones most people can view, will switch to 2012 episodes.  However, starting Monday the 10th will be back to 2017).

Edited October 5, 2022 by CrazyInAlabama

[CrazyInAlabama]

This week’s schedule has 2012 episodes for the 5 pm slot in my time zone, which are the usual episodes if you only have one hour of JJ daily.  I remember everyone of these so far.  However, starting Monday the 10th, back to 2017 episodes.)

4 p.m. episodes-

First (2014)-

Doused with Gasoline -Plaintiff Ashely Clonch suing defendant/ex-boyfriend Daniel McCracken for damaging  her car’s paint, and pouring gasoline around her house.    Plaintiff and defendant were shacking up, she sold her 1990’s BMW, and bought a Dodge Caravan for $1300, there is dispute over which litigant paid for the car.   Defendant has an air duct cleaning business, and plaintiff hasn’t worked outside the home for 9 years.    Plaintiff claims the $1200 (he says $1300), came from her mother, and selling her BMW. 

 Defendant admits he poured gasoline on the minivan, damaging the paint, but title isn’t in his name, so he’s not getting the car.   Plaintiff suing defendant for pouring gasoline on her car, and damaging the paint. Plaintiff wants $800 for the paint repair, on a car bought for $1200 or $1300.

JJ gives plaintiff $100 for the paint damage.  Plaintiff also wants a bedroom set back.  When plaintiff starting shacking up with defendant, she took the bedroom set, but couldn’t get it back after the fight.  Plaintiff also had a protection order, and a police standby to supervise move out, plaintiff took pictures of the furniture, but didn’t take it.    Defendant says the bedroom set, and everything else is in his garage. (This happened in Charleston, SC).  

Defendant claims he only poured gas on ground around the car.  For the restraining order they both appeared in court, and judge granted plaintiff a 1-year restraining order. 

JJ gives plaintiff $100 for car damage, and $1500 for the furniture. 

Pit Bull vs. Bijon –(It’s Pit Bull vs. Bichon, not Bijon) Plaintiff/ Bijon owner Yashar Ahmadpour suing defendant/Pit Bull owner Josephine Carig for vet bills, and his medical bills after an attack near the dog park.   BooBoo the Bichon was savagely attacked by defendant’s pit bull. 

Plaintiff says the Pit Bull ran up, and grabbed little Boo Boo up in its jaws and shook the poor dog like a chew toy.    They were on the outskirts of the non-leashed area, there is an off-leash dog park.   Plaintiff says defendant’s dog was off-leash, but it wasn’t the off-leash part of the park. 

Sorry JJ, if the dog is vicious, you don’t take them to a dog park, and let them off leash.  Plaintiff’s wife saw the attack and tried to get Boo Boo away from Cujo the Pit, and her hand was injured.

Vet bills are, $5 , and medical bills are $32 (with over  total is $569 to come).  (This happened in San Diego).

Sorry JJ, taking a Pit Bull to an off leash dog park isn’t just dogs being dogs, and if a 50 lb. plus dog ripped one of her Yorkies to shreds, she wouldn’t think it was “dogs being dogs”.  Plaintiff got the dog for protection. 

Plaintiff gets $2500 with punitive damages.

Second (2014)-

Domestic Violence or Victimized Father? -Plaintiff/ex-boyfriend Jonathan Plasky suing defendant/ex-girlfriend Lori Gabb for obtaining a false restraining order, and falsely claimed domestic violence and had him arrested.  Plaintiff was arrested for domestic violence.  

 The two litigants have a child together.    The litigants lived together, with her mother, plus defendant’s two older children by someone else.   Plaintiff and defendant’s mother argued, and plaintiff went to stay with a friend, and defendant told him she was breaking up with plaintiff.  

Defendant and mother put a chair under the front doorknob, so she claims she thought it was a burglar, and plaintiff broke in.  Defendant says plaintiff went back to their bedroom, and they slept until the next morning, he was packing up to move out, and defendant called police and claimed domestic violence against plaintiff, and filed for a protective order.   This was to keep the mutual infant from plaintiff’s custody.  

JJ asks defendant if she ever filed against the other two fathers of her older children, for restraining orders to get self-help to get exclusive possession of the residence, and sole custody of the children.  JJ asks defendant if she filed the same restraining order allegations against the two fathers of her other two children, and the answer is yes.

Plaintiff doesn’t even need to testify. Plaintiff was a legal resident of the house.  Plaintiff can only see his son with supervised visitation after this all happened.

Plaintiff receives $1500 for attorney’s fees, JJ would have given him more if he had asked for more.    

JJ reams out the defendant for her behavior, and her smiling after the decision.

Pedestrian Meets Hood of Car -Plaintiff/injured pedestrian April Hart suing defendant /driver Teandre Cooksie-Jackson over a him hitting her with his car in a crosswalk.  Plaintiff had substantial hospital bills.  Defendant claims the plaintiff was at fault, and wants car damages.    Defendant didn’t have insurance at the time of the accident.

Police report says it was raining, but plaintiff says it started to rain after she was hit.  Defendant claims plaintiff stepped into traffic, and darted in front of him.   Plaintiff says she was in the crosswalk, and was in the middle when defendant hit her.   Plaintiff ended up on the hood of defendant’s car, and he wants $2,000 for the damages. 

If defendant had insurance, the plaintiff’s medical bills would have been paid for.   Defendant claims he can’t drive now, JJ doesn’t believe him, and I don’t either.

$5,000 to plaintiff.  Defendant’s ridiculous claim for $2,000 worth of damages to his uninsured car is dismissed, and he still says it’s plaintiff’s fault.

5 p.m. episodes-

First (2012)-

Road Rage Cat Fight -Plaintiff Melissa Hill suing defendant Helen Evans assaulting her and damaging her car during a road rage incident.  Plaintiff claims she was dragged 30 yards while hanging out of a truck window during a fight with a fellow motorist.  Plaintiff says defendant reached in her car window, grabbed her by the hair, and pulled her out.  Defendant pled guilty to pulling the hair, and leaving the scene of an accident.  Defendant says “look at her hair, how could you not pull a head of hair like that!”.  (This was near Norman, OK, and Noble, OK).

This happened in Norman, OK (plaintiff is a banker, driving a Firebird), plaintiff says defendant cut her off, started brake checking her, plaintiff passed defendant, and defendant passed her and started brake checking her again.   Defendant was driving a 2000 Nissan pickup truck.     

Plaintiff says defendant and witness both were cussing her out, flipping her off.   When plaintiff drove home, defendant turned right from the left hand lane, and followed defendant home.   When plaintiff pulled over defendant rear ended her, while plaintiff was stopped, trying to call 911.   Window was down a little on plaintiff’s car, when defendant dragged her out of her car.  Plaintiff says defendant kept screaming about her dead children.  People came to help the plaintiff, and defendant left when people tried to get defendant’s license plate.   Defendant’s passenger and witness stayed in the truck the whole time. 

 Plaintiff’s iPhone fell into the defendant’s truck bed, and when plaintiff reached for the phone defendant took off, dragging plaintiff until she fell on the road.    Plaintiff’s tooth was injured, she has a lot of road rash.

Defendant says plaintiff was in instigator, and was mean to her.  

Sorry, JJ is right, stay in your car, and get away if you can.   Never get out of your car and confront anyone.   You can end up dead from confronting people.

Defendant followed plaintiff only to confront her.  Defendant claims plaintiff “destroyed her car”.  There is no way that a Nissan pickup will be damaged, or as defendant says ‘destroyed’ by minimal contact with a small car.  Defendant pled guilty to assaulting plaintiff with force and violence.

Defendant witness Douglas Real, claims plaintiff turned right from the left lane in front of the defendant.   Witness says plaintiff broke the truck door handle, but plaintiff says she never touched anything but the truck bed to retrieve her phone. 

Sadly, defendant was a school teacher for almost 30 years.    Plaintiff says she already received treble car damages and defendant paid $500 deductible, judge gave her treble damages, so $1500. 

Plaintiff receives $4,000. (She got her iPhone back).  Defendant on hall-terview says plaintiff “posts on FB when she gets a new pair of shoes”, so what?  

Second (2012)-

Racecar Collision -Plaintiff Jennifer Landrum suing defendant Jeffrey Hannum for an accident outside the pit area of a race track, and wants $5,000.    Plaintiff was coming out of the pits, when defendant hit her.   Plaintiff says defendant has no valid license, and shouldn’t have been driving.   Stepfather and husband both testify for the plaintiff.   She’s an amateur, pays to race.  Plaintiff has her arm in a sling, but from a household accident, nothing race related.  Plaintiff drove out of the pits, when defendant hit her on pit road, and did a hit-and-run.      After the accident plaintiff’s husband Mr. Shaw,  came to see if she was OK.   Plaintiff admits she saw defendant coming, but still turned onto pit lane.

Defendant is part of his cousin’s pit crew.  Defendant says plaintiff couldn’t see her because of his witness’s motorhome.    Witness is a member of another pit crew.  Another pit crew member saw the wreck, saw defendant on pit road, and says she saw plaintiff just pull out in front of defendant.

Stepfather testifies, but he wasn’t at the track until after the accident, but took photos.  (Is stepfather falling asleep?   It looks like it).   (This was in Strasburg, CO or however it’s spelled). 

Obviously this was plaintiff’s fault.  She admits she saw defendant, and pulled out anyway.  Defendant’s damages were $5900 to his car.    

Plaintiff case dismissed.  Defendant receives $5,000.

Teenage Joy Ride Wreck -Plaintiff Jessica Ontiveros (mother of passenger Alissa, sister-in-law to defendant) suing defendant Elana Orozco for wrecking plaintiff’s truck.   Alissa is the passenger, 13-years-old.   Alissa was learning how to drive, she’s 13, and can’t have a license until 17.   Alisa’s aunt is Elana, and her mom and truck owner is Jessica.    Jessica, mom to Alissa lets her 13-year-old drive around town, claims she only does it when Jessica is in the truck and supervising.  

Plaintiff says defendant took her daughter driving, and defendant and aunt Elana both lied to plaintiff about hitting a deer.   Jessica is mother of seven, and is clueless.   

Plaintiff blames the defendant, but it’s what the mother lets the child do. 

I hope everything is dismissed.

However, JJ will give some money to plaintiff.   Daughter hit some small pines, and in someone’s yard. 

$2500 to plaintiff, minus $1000 because teen shouldn’t have been driving.   

Edited October 5, 2022 by CrazyInAlabama

[chenoa333]

1 hour ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

Second (2012)-

Racecar Collision -Plaintiff Jennifer Landrum suing defendant Jeffrey Hannum for an accident outside the pit area of a race track, and wants $5,000.   

I would be forever grateful if someone could post a pic of Plaintiff Jennifer Landrum.

I am still hypnotized by her bizarre physical appearance and would love to know how she got that fairly handsome man to marry her.

Thanks

[CrazyInAlabama]

4 p.m. episodes-

First (2014)-

Lose the Puppy! -Plaintiff/former tenant Cheryl Pederson (mother) and (daughter) Caitlin Addie are   suing defendants/former tenants Jade Cowdery and Talie Wardle for property, rent, bills. Tenants/defendants paid $200 twice a month for rent.    In May, defendants had a puppy, not in the lease, and were told to get the puppy out of the house, and defendants took puppy and moved out.     Moving out was a big dust up too.  Plaintiff daughter was convicted of domestic violence, overturned on appeal, but the fine paid by daughter was part of the plea settlement.   

Jade worked for plaintiff mother for a year before this all happened, Jade is a pastry chef.   Plaintiff daughter says defendant didn’t pay the last 30-day’s notice.   When defendants were packing up, plaintiff daughter grabbed one of the defendants’ laptop, until they paid the rent.    Plaintiff daughter claims she was attacked, but was the one arrested by police, and plea bargained it out.   Plaintiff Caitlin says Talie’s police report claims plaintiff threatened her with a knife. 

Plaintiff daughter claims one of the defendants stole her antique opera glasses, and pawned them across the street.   Both defendants claims they never pawned anything, or ever possessed the opera glasses.   Plaintiff daughter would have to buy the opera glasses back from pawn shop proprietor, and she can’t afford that.  Pawn shop has no receipt for the opera glasses, so how does plaintiff daughter know they’re actually her glasses?     I bet the pawn shop owner bought the glasses at an estate sale, yard sale, or where ever they buy stock from.

Defendant is firing for wrongful termination, property, etc. Defendant claim dismissed. 

Defendants didn’t file a police report on Caitlin’s assault on Talie.

Everything dismissed.    

Boxer on Steroids? -Plaintiff/boxer Alex Rozman. suing defendant/former promoter Philip Armer lost fight wages for claiming plaintiff is on steroids.  Boxer claims that the trainer’s rumor about steroid use tanked his fight.   JJ wants boxer to prove he’s not on steroids.  

Plaintiff is a pro fighter.    Litigants were splitting the ticket sales 50/50. 

Plaintiff wants $4,000.    However, Mr. Rozman was under suspension in Michigan.    (Alex has also appeared in MMA bouts too.)

No proof he’s not on steroids, or proof that defendant told anyone about the possible steroid use. 

Plaintiff case dismissed.

Second (2014)-

Calling the Cops on a Cop! -Plaintiff/former tenant and police officer Francine Briscoe suing defendant/former landlady Millie Huntley for filing false charges against plaintiff with internal affairs, and that it was defamation.    Plaintiff says the investigations took a year, and everything was dismissed.   

Tenant police officer says landlord filed false charges and defamed her character after she moved out of the house, in a ploy to get more money out of plaintiff.   Landlord only reported police officer to her boss after defendant wanted more money, and thought she could get more money to leave plaintiff alone.  Defendant wants $4900, in damages, but not until six months after plaintiff moved out.

After three years, plaintiff notified defendant that she wasn’t going to renew her lease, and move out.  Defendant claims plaintiff fraudulently transferred power bill back to landlady’s name a month before the end of the lease.    However, plaintiff’s brother also lived in the house, so it could have been brother, or anyone else that changed the address on the power bill.

Defendant gives JJ a letter from the police, but it doesn’t say plaintiff changed the account, but plaintiff paid the $98 to defendant to get the charge to go away.   $2100 was security deposit, and landlady didn’t use that for the power bill.   Defendant also claims two bounced rent checks, but she only complained over the phone, not in writing.    However, plaintiff paid the checks to the defendant, and landlady still took rent, but not personal checks.  

JJ has defendant’s email, she’s alleging all kinds of damages, but six months after plaintiff left the property.     The captions are wrong, defendant complained to internal affairs, not just plaintiff’s supervisor.   Defendant also threatened to file a complaint about worker’s comp about plaintiff’s bunion surgery.    Defendant also threatened to notify the national news shows, newspapers, etc.  about plaintiff’s issues.

Instead of suing for damages, defendant went to Internal Affairs.    Defendant made a lot of unfounded allegations, and JJ says it was to get $4900 from plaintiff, months after tenant moved out.  Then, defendant claims plaintiff’s girlfriend called her complaining, so I’m suspecting another reason to make false allegations.    Defendant made no allegations while plaintiff was a tenant, but only six months after plaintiff moved out.   

JJ says instead of going to court and filing for damages, defendant tried to extort plaintiff for the money to fix her house, and six month’s after plaintiff moved out.   Defendant claims she was being a Good Samaritan and good citizen filing the complaints, and that’s bull pucky!

Plaintiff receives $5000.      Defendant case dismissed.

5 p.m. episodes-

First (2012)-

Pit Bull Gunfire -Plaintiff Rickey Harvey suing defendant/neighbor Marcus Ford (Pit Bull owner, 3 dogs) for damages to garage door of another neighbor when plaintiff fired his pistol to scare defendant’s Pit Bull away from his house.   Plaintiff was on his own property when defendant’s attacking Pit Bull came after plaintiff.   Defendant has a counter complaint claiming this dog incident was the reason defendant was evicted.     This was in Lithonia, GA.

Plaintiff was on his own property, coming out from under his garage door, when one of Ford’s dog came after him.  Plaintiff shot off three rounds, hitting the neighbor’s garage door.    Plaintiff says dog owner have received two citations before this.    The attacking dog was a breeding female.     Plaintiff says on the day the family moved into their house, that one of defendant’s dogs bit one of the movers.  Pit Bulls have to be in enclosures unless they are supervised by owner, and under control.   Defendant’s female dog had 13 puppies, and his brother had three more Pits, on the first day when the mover was bitten.   Plaintiff says there have been three reports to Animal Control about defendant’s dogs, in the three months that plaintiff has lived there. 

  Sorry JJ, carrying a gun on your own property in Georgia, is legal.    JJ says plaintiff should apply for a carry permit, but not required on your own property.

Defendant’s ridiculous counter claim about plaintiff’s complaints getting him evicted, is dismissed.

People have the right to feel safe in their own home, and having some Pit Bull chase you around in your own garage, or bite someone on your property on the first day you live there is disgusting.   

JJ doesn’t have to worry about Pit Bull attacks on her property, I bet her army of security guards would take care of that.   Plaintiff needs shooting lessons.

Plaintiff case dismissed. 

Baby Not on Board -Plaintiff/former landlord Robert Keyser suing defendant/former tenant Katrina Mannara for unpaid rent, cleaning and repair costs, $1540.   Former tenant says she moved out to protect her baby from plaintiff’s excessive pot smoking.   No written lease.   

Plaintiff gets $1300 for unpaid rent.

Second (2012)-

Biting and Fighting -Plaintiff Sarah Budney suing ex-boyfriend / defendant Montreale Rucker for an assault during a property exchange.   Defendant says plaintiff bit him during a fight over a DVD.  Police escorted plaintiff off the property.   However, after plaintiff’s allegations, defendant was arrested, held for three days in jail, and released when charges were dismissed.     Litigants had a very short relationship, she left some property at defendant’s place, everything was returned to plaintiff, but DVD was missed.   Then, plaintiff kept demanding the DVD back.   She also refused and still does think he doesn’t mean it when he says he doesn’t want a relationship with her.  

When plaintiff went to defendant’s place, he was home, but she tried to kick the door in, and police were called by a neighbor.   Police escorted her off of defendant’s property.   Then, she contacted defendant through friends, and wanted the DVD back.  

So, the two met to give plaintiff the DVD.    DVD was given back to plaintiff, put in her car, and she claims defendant pinned her against her car, was yelling in her face.  Then, plaintiff hit defendant in the neck.  Plaintiff claims defendant punched her, and she bit him.   Plaintiff claims while she was still biting defendant, he hit her.   She wants her hospital bills.

Defendant’s story is dramatically different. Day after police escorted plaintiff off of defendant’s property, they met outside the defendant’s mother’s house.   When plaintiff bit defendant on the arm, she left a scar.   JJ allows defendant to approach her Bench of Justice, and at he shows JJ his bite mark scar.   Defendant tells JJ “she’s a pretty woman” and JJ says he was ahead of the game without that remark.

Defendant only defended himself from plaintiff’s attack.

Plaintiff case dismissed, because it’s garbage.

Impounded Puppy -Plaintiff/daughter Malissa Heath is suing defendant/father Nathan Peterson for the value of her car and contents, including the loss of her puppy, property, and other items in her car.  Car was driven by the father, who was driving when it was impounded when father was arrested for DUI.

Defendant was driving, was drunk, pulled into a McDonald’s turned around and the police said he was under arrest for drunk driving, and Mr. Smart Ass said, “I’m not driving drunk, I’m standing in the middle of McDonald’s drunk”.     

The defendant’s father was driving, his uncle was in the car with the puppy under the seat.   Plaintiff only had the puppy for one day, the car was impounded.     Father ended up jailed for 90 days.  Tow yard finally sold the car.      So, car disappeared, and plaintiff didn’t call police and report it stolen?   Or ask anyone where the car and dog went?    

I’m really hating everyone in this case.  Best case scenario is when car was impounded, that either police or tow yard found the puppy, and rescued it.  

$2750 to plaintiff.   

Edited October 4, 2022 by CrazyInAlabama

[DjamillasMan]

Gina Imperial and the impression she made on me is coming soon.....

This was my first time seeing this episode and....wow....Gina is a piece of work. 

[DjamillasMan]

On 10/3/2022 at 8:41 PM, chenoa333 said:

I would be forever grateful if someone could post a pic of Plaintiff Jennifer Landrum.

I am still hypnotized by her bizarre physical appearance and would love to know how she got that fairly handsome man to marry her.

Thanks

I agree. This eppy premiered today. Jennifer Landrum is a very gaunt, very strange looking woman. She looks like an oversized Hobbit or Gimli's oversized cousin who plays in the WNBA. 

Edited October 5, 2022 by DjamillasMan

[CrazyInAlabama]

4 p.m. episodes-

First (2014)-

The New Wife -Plaintiff/ex wife and  mother of three kids with ex-husband, Teresa Martin, and Trenton Dorsey(17-year-old son) suing defendants father, Jeff Dorsey, and (stepmother) Dayna Dorsey for the bank overage, filing a false restraining order against the plaintiff mother.   The litigants had 3 children. Trenton is 17, Tyler is 21, and another son who is 8. 

 Trenton moved in with dad because mother was too bossy, and had too many rules.  He took his clothes, and Xbox.   Teresa Martin is suing defendant stepmother because son and stepmother had a joint bank account.    Ms. Martin accidentally overdrew the account, son Trenton had to pay $287 to get father’s jeep out of impound (driving 65 in a 35 zone).      Overdraw amount was $558, and son has to repay that.  

Plaintiff mother also claims defendants filed a false restraining order against her.   Son didn’t take any furniture to dad’s house, but one or more sons burglarized son’s former room at dad’s house.   Furniture suddenly appeared in mother’s/plaintiff’s house, that was taken out of defendants’ home without permission.

Trenton also went back to father’s house to get the Xbox.   Door was locked at dad’s house, and Trenton cut through the screen to enter and take his property back.  That’s burglary.     Defendants are counter suing for school fees, and theft of property. 

Stepmother filed against plaintiff and Trenton, because of the burglary.  

Defendant stepmother wants money for the stolen games taken by Trenton.  She says her 13-year-old is afraid of Trenton, and has to go to private school to keep from running into Trenton at school.   JJ says stepmother is out to get plaintiff.   So, JJ has no issue with plaintiff and thieving sons breaking into father's house and stealing furniture?   

Audience agrees with JJ.  I don't. 

$558 for plaintiff for the overdraft.  

Debit Card Downer -Plaintiff Dustin Baptiste suing defendant/ ex-wife Samatha Baptiste for misuse of his healthcare debit card.    Apparently, the plaintiff didn’t know card worked for anything, but ex-wife used the debit card to get breakfast and snacks for the kids, McDonald’s, etc.    Debit card was not allowed to be used for this purpose.

Ex-wife had card for about 18 months, and plaintiff didn’t check the statements, so wife was doing this for a long time.    However, the random use for food, etc. was only right after the divorce when plaintiff checked his statements.

JJ really doesn’t understand the way debit cards for health care work.   Plaintiff wants $1900 for bills ex-wife ran up in a very short time after the divorce.   I think it’s revenge by the ex-wife.

Plaintiff case dismissed.

Second (2014)-

Babysitting Debacle -Plaintiff/babysitter Sierra Booth suing defendant Adam Hageman for unpaid babysitting fees, and emotional distress.   

This case was supposed to be heard the week before, but had to wait until plaintiff got out of jail for lying to a police officer about her identity.  Plaintiff was arrested for using an I.D. from someone else, to visit her boyfriend in jail.

Defendant says plaintiff violated his house rules while she was babysitting his children in his home, claims her boyfriend stole from the house, and she damaged his truck.

Defendant submits the police report about plaintiff’s boyfriend.   Missing items an iPod, cell phone, Xbox, controllers, clothing, piggy bank money from kids, and other items. Defendant’s witness is his girlfriend, and went to the house to watch the kids, and make a list.

Plaintiff case dismissed.  

Unwed Parents’ Bitter Breakup! -Plaintiff David Brown suing defendant Michelle Marek for a computer, and false arrest and restraining order, and return of property.   Litigants have a 14-year-old together.  They had an on and off again relationship for about 20 years total.

When plaintiff moved out, he claims defendant agreed to store his property, but says defendant won’t give his property back. 

This was two years ago he moved out, and that means his furniture and property case is dismissed.

Restraining order wasn’t served on plaintiff, but when he went to their daughter’s middle school graduation police escorted him out, but he was released after it was discovered that the restraining order was never served on plaintiff.

Defendant gave plaintiff a check for the daughter’s computer, did a stop payment, and so check bounced.

Plaintiff gets $366 for the check for the computer. Defendant’s ridiculous counter claim is dismissed.

Shoplifting Among Friends -Plaintiff Stephanie Razo suing defendant Taylor Peavy after both women were arrested for shoplifting.    Plaintiff blames the defendant for her arrest, but plaintiff took a plea, and paid a fine.  Plaintiff wants the defendant to pay her fines.   Then, plaintiff claims she bought a cell phone for defendant, after the shoplifting arrest, and JJ dismisses that (I’m so glad, I hate cell phone cases).

Plaintiff claims while defendant was holding her satchel for her, while plaintiff was in the fitting room, that defendant put stolen items in the purse.    Defendant says they both shoplifted. JJ is right, why would plaintiff still buy a cell phone for defendant and be friends if defendant did frame her for shoplifting?

Everything dismissed.

5 p.m. episodes-

First (2012)-

Drunken Stupor Maneuver? -Plaintiff Matthew Miller/ex-boyfriend suing defendant/ex-girlfriend Kayla Rias for car damages, after she grabbed the wheel while he was driving, and wrecked his car.   Car was totaled.   Defendant says plaintiff did it, not her, and she’s innocent.    It was after a graduation party.  He wants $3300 for the car damages.   Plaintiff finally admits he had one or two beers at the party. 

Plaintiff says defendant was drunk and out of control.  Plaintiff was taking defendant home.  Plaintiff claims defendant has a history of blackout drinking.  They’re in his car, about a block from the party, when defendant grabbed the wheel, and she stomped on the accelerator.  He tried to take it out of ‘drive’, they’re on the sidewalk, hit a parked truck, and hit a parked car.   Plaintiff had liability, not collision or full coverage.   His insurance covered the $10k in damages to the other truck and car. 

Defendant admits she has no job, not going to school, or doing anything else.  JJ is going after plaintiff harder than the defendant.  Defendant claims plaintiff tried to get her to take the blame.

Defendant says she did have something to drink, they left the party, and claims plaintiff was yelling at her, and wouldn’t let her out of the car.    Defendant claims she never touched the steering wheel, or the accelerator, but police report says she admitted grabbing the steering wheel, and stomping on the accelerator. 

A neighbor on the street says they heard defendant say “I pulled the wheel” and she appeared drunk.   Defendant had a fight with the police.

2000 Chevy Impala was the vehicle.

Plaintiff receives $3000.    

Fraudulent Family Feud -Plaintiff Victoria Peterson suing defendant/former family friend Kay Mann for cashing a bad money order for defendant, $946, and the bank fees.   Defendant doesn’t have a bank account, and doesn’t want an account.  Defendant gets social security for herself, some for her children, and $400 a month for child support.   Defendant is on social security disability.

After the money order was cashed by plaintiff, bank found out it was bad, and wanted their money back.  Defendant says it’s the bank, and plaintiff’s problem.   Defendant says she spent the money on her children.

Plaintiff receives $956, so since the show pays the award defendant comes out ahead.    

Second (2012)-

Divorcees Drama- Plaintiff Brad Johnson suing defendant/ex-wife Tera Andrews half the cost of a truck purchased for their daughter. The litigants have a 15- and 14-year-old together.      They split up 12 years ago, plaintiff has full custody.    Defendant has alternate weekend visitation.   Child support order is $25 a week, $100 a month.   

Defendant has been unemployed for over a year, and works for a family member occasionally.  

Oldest child wanted a car, the litigants agreed to split the cost.   They were considering a $900 truck, but decided another truck was a better choice.   Current wife testifies.   Defendant claims she never discussed truck purchase with plaintiff or his wife, didn’t know truck was purchased.

$300 to plaintiff.

Broken Hearts -Plaintiff Tripti Marhatta suing defendant/ex-boyfriend Xavier Colman for unpaid loans to pay his gambling bills and expenses.  Defendant says he borrowed $500, and repaid plaintiff immediately.   (This happened in Detroit).

Plaintiff says she made loans totaling $2100, and defendant never repaid anything. 

Plaintiff claims she bought defendant an entire outfit, but he denies that.    Plaintiff has proof of the statement by defendant.  However, defendant did pay for the suit with his debit card.  Plaintiff withdrew the $300 the day after the suit was purchased by defendant.

There is a photo of defendant holding a lot of money, and saying “I’m not going to give you your money back”.   

Everything dismissed.

Edited October 5, 2022 by CrazyInAlabama

[CrazyInAlabama]

4 p.m. episodes-

First (2014)-

Legal Battle -Plaintiff/former client Joseph  Price suing his former attorney /defendant Matthew Bellmer for return of his retainer fee, in a domestic violence case, and restraining order defense.  Defendant/attorney disputes the return, because he only met with plaintiff once, but attorney claims he did a lot of work and research on the case.   Retainer was $3,000 ($243 per hour).    (Tumwater, Pierce County,  Washington)

Plaintiff signed the retainer with defendant. Plaintiff wants the entire $3,000 back.   Initial work was $1500, and then billed the rest at $243 an hour.    Plaintiff eventually employed another attorney, and defendant withdrew from the case.  

Plaintiff appeared in court for an hour long hearing that lasted one hour, and another meeting for an hour, and the initial meeting of one hour.     Defendant says he was hired for the protection of a domestic violence protection order, and this was dismissed, but prosecuting attorney never sent the restraint agreement, and case was dismissed.   Attorney can’t show billing  log.   Right before going back to court, plaintiff fired him.     JJ isn’t sympathetic to defendant charging by the hour, instead of fixed fee by case.

Litigants had a written retainer agreement, and that will not be modified by an oral contract change. 

Defendant only can account for $610, unless he shows his record of services to plaintiff.

$2400 to plaintiff.

Car Crash into a Cemetery! -Plaintiff Wade Sharp III (car owner) and son Wade Sharp IV (car driver, age 17) suing defendant Michael Goransson for car damages.   In the accident a car full of teenagers goes airborne and slams into a tombstone.  Plaintiff had two passengers, says he was turning left with the light, was hit, went airborne, flew over the cemetery wall, and hit a tombstone.   He was hit on the front driver’s side.  

Defendant’s lame explanation is he was making a left turn, sitting in intersection when the light started to change, when plaintiff hit him on the front driver’s side, and claims he was only going 1 to 2 miles an hour.    Defendant claims plaintiff was speeding, but from the damages, defendant was speeding.  Defendant’s statement about the accident is ridiculous.   Defendant is counter suing for damages.  Goransson claims plaintiff ran the red light, and was speeding.

There’s a video, but it didn’t show the traffic light.

Defendant hit the plaintiff so hard, that it was impossible that defendant was going slowly or almost stopped. 

Plaintiff car hit a tombstone and broke it, and airbags deployed.

Defendant brought his mommy to court, and she’s making excuses for him.

JJ looks at plaintiff car first, and then defendant car.  No one was cited by police, at least no one was injured. 

Plaintiff receives $2,000

Second (2014)-

Stolen Heart Medication? -Plaintiff /former renter Justin Whiting suing defendants/landlords, Kevin and Karen Fieseler evicted tenant, but plaintiff claims they had no reason to evict him, and kept his property.    Defendants said they did evict him, they told him to pick up his property, but he never did, after the legally required period, the property was considered abandoned, and they trashed it.   There is a written lease through 30 June, and plaintiff paid through June, but refused to leave in July, and didn’t pay rent.   Plaintiff claims he was forced by Mr. Fieseler to move out, and was harassed at work by him also.  

Plaintiff claims the day he was leaving, after the end of the lease into July, that Karen F. was videoing him, and a gang of people rushed him, and harassed him to leave.   Plaintiff took his piano (electronic keyboard), TVs, pictures, in plaintiff’s two vehicles, but left behind items like his heart medication. Plaintiff’s witness helped plaintiff load his vehicles in four hours.   This case is in April, move out was previous July, so I guess he didn’t need his heart medication he left behind.   I really hate the professional tenants, like this man. 

JJ asks plaintiff why the landlords would want to get rid of a paying tenant?   JJ says defendants claim they had many complaints about constant visits, and other issues.

Defendant stored left behind property for 28 days, notified plaintiff to pick up items, and he never did.   Lease said no pets, and there were three pets there (two cats and a dog).   Plaintiff claims the pets were only there for a few days, and are his parents’.  The pictures on move in, and move out are so awful.    Plaintiff says the mess in the move out pictures is from defendants throwing his stuff in the basement corner.   However, the move out picture has a cat that was left behind too.    Plaintiff is whining that when defendants mowed his yard, they decimated his garden.

House was a mess on moveout.   

Plaintiff case dismissed. 

Online Love Gone Wrong -Plaintiff Alicia Young suing defendant/former boyfriend, and current deadbeat, Ramon King for repayment of a loan to get his car fixed.     Plaintiff is a single mother, made less than $12k when this case was filmed, and took out a bank loan to finance the car repair.    They met in August, and she took out the loan a month later.   Loan was $1400, and he only repaid $100.

Defendant claims he never asked plaintiff for the money, and so he shouldn’t have to repay anything. 

How despicable, defendant took money from a woman who makes $12k a year. 

Plaintiff gets $1300.   

5 p.m. episodes-

First (2012)-

Burned -Plaintiff Anne Cozza suing defendant/ex-boyfriend Mathew Burns for credit card debt, parking tickets, impound fees and car-repair costs.  Defendant is whining he paid for the car for four-and-a-half years, and then stopped paying.    Plaintiff bought a car and TV for defendant.   He’s a full-time student, and ran out of loan money.    Car was not properly registered, and it was not registered for six months.   Car is registered in both names, and loan is in both names, so since plaintiff has a job, the loan people went be after her.    Car was impounded because of the tickets and registration issue, and plaintiff got the car out of impound.

JJ tells defendant the truth, work full time, and do school part time. He went to University of California, Santa Cruz.   

Defendant whines that she took his car and left him carless.

Plaintiff wants to be paid for the TV on the Best Buy card, $1300, plus it went into collections, the collections people settled for $752 with plaintiff, and she paid this off.   Impound fees for plaintiff to get the car was $2230, plus $519.  19 parking citations cost $1600.    Plaintiff wants repair costs to fix up and sell the car.  Repair costs dismissed without prejudice, so after she fixes the car, and sells it, if there’s a shortfall then she needs to file again.

$3500 to plaintiff for car payments, TV from Best Buy, impound costs.

Lovers no More -Plaintiff/ex-girlfriend Annaliza Posadas suing defendant/ex-boyfriend Angel Arroyo for money plaintiff spent on him, $1000 for his old car to pay the bank off.  Plaintiff gave him money to pay his rent, his car payments for five months.    

This episode from 2012 was before JJ accepted text messages as evidence.

$2755 to plaintiff.

Second (2012)-

Crazy Love -Plaintiff Chelsea Hansen suing defendant/ex-boyfriend Antonio Reed for a forged promissory note to repay car payments for his car.   He accuses her of vandalizing his car and stealing his belongings.   

Three car payments of $440 each, $300 Honda repair, and lawyer fees.  The defendant flipped cars, and apparently sucked at it, so $2400 for a Saturn.   Total is $5600.

Defendant claims he signed the note for the car payment, and a couple of smaller bills, and claims plaintiff added other debts above his signature.

(This happened in Burbank, CA).

$5,000 to plaintiff, $5000 to defendant for car, so no one gets anything.

Frat House Car Block -Plaintiff Amanda Sacknitz suing defendant Matthew Perkins for damaging her car when he backed her car out of a parking spot, and car was hit.  Car was illegally parked.      $700 is the cost, JJ finds both liable.  

The drivers at the lot would leave their car keys in a box, and if someone needed to move cars, they would grab the keys, move the car, get their car out.     Defendant needed to get his car out, plaintiff’s car was blocking him, so he fished the keys out of the box, moved her car, and while backing out of the space, someone hit him.   

JJ finds each litigant partially responsible, so she splits the $700 repair costs in half, so plaintiff gets $350.

[Jcarp]

On 4/9/2018 at 7:11 PM, Brattinella said:

He was just enjoying his face on the monitor; REALLY enjoying seeing it.  So was the plaintiff, actually.  How do you go on Natl TV and get mesmerized by your own face?

What episode was this?? 

[CrazyInAlabama]

4 p.m. episodes-

First (2014)-

Rescue Pit Bull Euthanized -Plaintiff/dog attack victim Keyala Shaw and her mother, are suing defendant/Pit Bull owner George Crawford, for an attack, and $5000 for medical bills.    Defendant didn’t see the attack, but his teen son did, Taliq Crawford, age 15.  Taliq invited plaintiff over to the house.    Plaintiff had met the dog on several occasions. Savanna Ware is plaintiff’s witness to the attack.  A few days before the attack, dog was tethered to the house, and nothing happened.   (This was in Honolulu).

Then, Taliq wanted to go to his house to pick up a shirt for tie-dying.   Keyala was roller-blading to the house.    Taliq went to his dad’s room to get the shirt, and he called the dog, Charity, to come downstairs.   Taliq went to the kitchen, put Charity on her leash at the front door.   Then Keyala, and Savanna came to the house, they were on the porch, with the screen door closed, and the front door open.  Then Keyala says the dog jumped against the screen door, it opened, and Charity went out, and bit her several times.       Defendant George says the plaintiff and witness were tormenting the dog, kicking the screen door.  

 Counterclaim is animal control took the dog away, and dog was euthanized.   George wasn’t present when the attack happened, and son Taliq was in the kitchen.  

$5,000 to plaintiff.

Bikini Swap -Plaintiff Alexandra ”Ali” DePari and her mother Karyn DePari are suing defendant Daimi Aricchio  for stealing clothes from her two daughters, Alexandra “Ali” DePari, and Jacqueline DePari.   Litigants trade accusations of lying and trespassing.  Defendant is counterclaiming for $1000 for attorney’s fees.

Plaintiff mother can’t prove clothes weren’t just a borrowing situation, but mother maintains that defendant used their spare key and stole the clothes.   Defendant borrowed clothes from plaintiff daughter to wear to dinner with her mother, and forgot to return them.

Clothes included a bathing suit, two leggings, and a skirt.    Plaintiff daughter claims defendant borrowed the bathing suit, defendant told the plaintiff she didn’t have it, and a week later daughter saw defendant at a pool party wearing the swim suit.   

Plaintiff admits she used the spare key defendant gave her to enter the defendant’s  house, which is burglary when you take property.   Plaintiff daughter says she looked in the defendant’s closet, and found multiple items, some loaned but a lot borrowed.  Sister Jacqueline DePari identifies her clothes that defendant had but were not loaned to her.

JJ is upset that mother and daughters are trying to ruin someone’s reputation over a few clothes that could have been borrowed, but there is no proof of theft.   What Ali DePari did was use a key for emergencies, to commit criminal trespass at defendant’s house. 

Plaintiff mother didn’t press charges against defendant, but she did make a police report

Plaintiff receives $1. 

Second (2014)-

Military Kick Out! – Plaintiff Janna Paris is suing defendant/ex-boyfriend and child’s father Antonio Jackson for half of a house down payment $3500, home improvement costs, and the return of property.    She says he used her $3500 for a down payment, and defendant bought a home with her money when she was away in military training. House was only in his name.    Purchase was in April 2012, when plaintiff was in Virginia in training.   Total house cost was $65,000, and down payment was 3% and all of the down payment came from plaintiff.  Both litigants are in the military, have a 3-year-old child, and have been in a relationship for six years.    He had good credit, but plaintiff had the down payment.  House cost $65000, down payment was $3500 by plaintiff (This was in Philadelphia).

She’s an E-4 reservist, and a Department of Defense employee.   He is also a reservist, and a city of Philadelphia employee.   He paid the mortgage, she paid for groceries, utilities, etc.   However, they each paid one-third, because they had a roommate.   Sorry JJ, but when someone signs the statement saying the down payment or other fees on a house are gifts, it’s a legal gift.

Plaintiff says house was supposed to be in both of their names, but it was only in defendant’s name. Then, after they argued, defendant tossed her out of the house, and kept the house.  JJ will not give money for the repairs. 

Defendant wants money for a TV plaintiff broke.  Plaintiff admits the TV broke, but claims it was from defendant throwing her against it.

JJ says the eviction of plaintiff was illegal.  

$3500 to plaintiff. 

Ex-Fiance Assault Charges -Plaintiff Krystal Ruggiero suing defendant/ex-fiance for an unpaid car loan, and for an assault six months ago, rupturing her eardrum. and she wants to be paid for a play station. (Queensbury, NY)

Car loan was for a car that was put in plaintiff’s name, and that car was sold, and second car was put in defendant’s name, and he put $400 down, and $250 a month.  First car was a trade-in for the second car, while they lived together, so that’s dismissed.

There was a burglary at their apartment, and plaintiff wants to be paid for her $1,000 insurance deductible.  Plaintiff wants medical bills, and pain and suffering for an assault by defendant, this happened six months ago.   Plaintiff claims the assault ruptured her eardrum. 

The items plaintiff is claiming for were originally purchased by defendant, stolen in the burglary, and replaced by plaintiff.   Claim dismissed.

Plaintiff case dismissed. (I wish her the best in life, just grateful it’s not in my life)

5 p.m. episodes-

First (2012)-

Risque Internet Pics -Plaintiff Tamily Anderson Chaz Elbert suing defendant/ex-boyfriend for car damages, claims he keyed her car, stolen property, and private (nekkid) pictures defendant posted on the internet.    (Naked is when you don’t have any clothes on, nekkid is when you don’t have clothes on, and you’re up to something-Jeff Foxworthy).   Defendant agreed to pay for the damages to the car.

(This was in New Haven, CT).   After plaintiff went out with her friends, and defendant got upset.  JJ warns her during dating is the best behavior, and it only gets worse later, and you’ll feel like Hannibal Lecter’s prisoner.  

She gets her Play Station 3 back.

They argued over the phone, she didn’t even go out after all.   She went out and saw her car was keyed.  Then she calls JJ “Judy” and is corrected by JJ.  Plaintiff called police and made a report, but no one saw anyone damage the car.   Plaintiff claims she talked to defendant on phone, and she claims he admitted the damages to her car.   

My prediction is JJ will say if you don’t want nasty pictures on the internet, then don’t pose for them.  She posed for one picture, and doesn’t have a copy of the second one to show JJ.

$318 to fix car, Play Station 3 back to plaintiff

Terrorist Facebook Threats -Plaintiff Kimberly Barnes suing defendant Shemika Brown for making a complaint to police, resulting in a false arrest for making threats.   The two were friends, and plaintiff claims when she had a new friend to ‘hang’ with, that Shemika argued with plaintiff.  Then, defendant made a police report about plaintiff making threats, and plaintiff was arrested for making terrorist threats on Facebook.

JJ is executing a fly, with extreme prejudice.  

There is no proof that the message wasn’t from plaintiff.

JJ reads the police report.   Defendant says threat was to hang and beat defendant until she was dead, and so badly no one would recognize her body.  Message was posted on plaintiff’s best friends Facebook page, but plaintiff claims she didn’t do it.   However, the only ‘proof’ was defendant’s statement.   Case was dropped after Shemika didn’t show for the third hearing on the case.

Plaintiff case dismissed.

Second (2012)-

Father Hates Daughter’s Boyfriend -Plaintiff Richard Marston (father) is suing defendant /daughter’s boyfriend Anthony  Ringering for trashing his home.   Daughter of plaintiff is Karissa Marston, and son is Jeremy Marston.    (This happened in Washougal, WA)

  Defendant denies trashing the girlfriend father’s house, and he claims the father went after him in a rage after discovering the damage to his home.  Defendant claims he didn’t trash the house, but claims the son of plaintiff did it.

Plaintiff and wife went out, defendant, and son and daughter Marston were in the house.  Plaintiff says he and wife left at 9:30 am, and returned about noon.   Daughter says boyfriend came to the house briefly, and came back to the house later, about the time parents came home.   Son says he was out of the house, when he came back was about the time the parents came home, and when he came in the house only Carissa and Anthony were in the house upstairs.    Flat screen TV had a huge hole in it, and the china closet was overturned. 

I don’t blame the father for hating Anthony, I’m not liking Anthony much either.  Daddy Marston says he came home saw the destruction in his house, and then when Anthony came out of the kitchen, he claims Anthony said, “I did it, I’m sorry”.

Carissa admits she was there, and heard Anthony say he did it to the plaintiff.   Carissa claims it was an accident.  

Plaintiff receives $750.

(Next week the 5 p.m. episodes that most people can view, go back to 2017 dates).