All Episodes Talk: All Rise

[CrazyInAlabama]

4 p.m. episodes-

First (2014)-

Sisters’ Pepper Spray Fight! -Plaintiff /sister Christina Trujillo (retired correctional officer)  and Ray  Trujillo, (husband) are suing defendant/sister Stephanie Keys-Elam for assault.    Sisters are twins.  Defendant is counter claiming for stolen property, by plaintiffs. Defendant says plaintiff husband assaulted her, and plaintiff sister did too.   Plaintiff was at mother’s house, defendant was already there, the defendant then arrived.    The assault happened at the mother’s house, where mother, their father, and older sister were there.    (This happened in Albuquerque, NM).

Defendant says someone pepper sprayed her, and then reached over and rubbed the pepper spray into her eyes, and it turned out to be plaintiff sister.   (Sister being retired correctional officer, makes me think she has a lot of pepper spray experience).   Defendant was sending texts to plaintiff sister about her husband being a worthless loser, and claims both plaintiffs steal from the parents. 

 Defendant was sitting at the dining table, plaintiffs walked into the dining room, and plaintiff husband threw a coke into her face.   She claims Ray Trujillo threw her to the floor, and kicked her repeatedly.  Then, defendant grabbed her taser, but didn’t realize it needed batteries.   Then, defendant claims plaintiff husband sprayed her in the face with pepper spray, and someone was rubbing the pepper spray in her eyes, so she bit the person.   The person who was bitten was plaintiff sister.   

Plaintiff sister called police two days later about the bite by defendant.  Plaintiff husband admits assaulting defendant with the coke in the face, and admits the pepper spray, and kicking the defendant.    

Plaintiff husband says he carries pepper spray, while shopping, and claims he works repo jobs on the side, so he carries pepper spray.  

Police officer report confirms the statements of defendant, defendant had been pepper sprayed according to officer.   Police report says plaintiff husband went to his vehicle to get the pepper spray, plaintiff sister rubbed it in defendant’s eyes, and then defendant was kicked in the head.   Plaintiff sister claims defendant hit first, which is a lie.   Charges were dropped against plaintiff husband, and defendant.

Because of the bite mark, defendant was arrested for assault.  Plaintiff husband was also taken into custody.   Defendant claims sister and husband stole her cell phone wallet, with her driver’s license, cell phone, credit cards, and casino cards.   Defendant says her phone was used after she was at the jail, but no proof of who used the phone.

Both cases dismissed.  (in the hall-terview, both sisters claim the other has a long criminal record).

Second (2014)-

Kitten Custody Dispute! -Plaintiffs/neighbors Zoey Masselli and fiance Jonathan Versiackas, suing defendant Jennifer Engle as a of plaintiffs paying vet bills, resulting from finding defendant’s lost cat.  Defendant has the kitten, kitten had no collar and got out.  Plaintiffs found kitten on street, took it to vet for neutering and shots.     Defendant daughter tries to tell JJ her rehearsed story from her mother’s indoctrination.   While Officer Byrd shows her out, he says “Nice try” to the little girl.

Defendant purchases a six-week-old kitten, for $50, and had kitten for two months, and never took kitten to vet.   There was no collar on kitten, but let it out.   Plaintiff found the kitten, but she says plaintiffs saw the kitten running the streets regularly.    So, finally plaintiff woman kept the kitten, and check for missing cat ads, no signs in the neighborhood.   Landlord gave plaintiffs permission to keep kitten, and a month later took kitten to vet for shots, neutering, and an eye infection, $160. Plus, regular nail trims at the vet’s, $ .   Then, kitten got out of plaintiff’s house, after 3 months.   Then, plaintiff saw kitten in defendant’s window.  Note to plaintiff, scapegoat doesn’t mean the kitten escaped.   The second they pulled in the driveway from hunting for kitten, making signs. 

Defendant’s counter claim is for lost wages for one day off work.   Plaintiffs want to be repaid for vet costs, nail trims.  

$196 to plaintiffs.  Plaintiffs would waive the award, if they could have kitten back, JJ says no.  JJ says if the plaintiffs see kitten wandering again, and it’s not microchipped, to come back and see JJ.

Queen Esther Window Buster?! -Plaintiff Sharvell Brown suing defendant/brother’s ex Kwahniqua Rowland for breaking her car windows.    

JJ tells defendant Rowland that her outfit is the strangest JJ has ever seen in court.   JJ says defendant’s outfit looks like a costume for a Purim party, coming as Queen Esther.

Defendant is ex of plaintiff’s brother, they have a child together.    Plaintiff says after defendant had a fight with the brother, that defendant smashed the windows on two cars at plaintiff’s house.   Brother isn’t in court because he’s incarcerated.

The brother and defendant fought later, brother pepper sprayed defendant.   Defendant says plaintiff was trying to hit defendant and missed, and plaintiff hit her own car window with the tool.   Then, plaintiff saw defendant and three men pull up outside the house, and defendant broke out first car’s windows, then the second car’s windows were broken out.  Plaintiff admits she only saw the first car window smashing, but a neighbor saw the second car windows smashed out by the men and defendant.

$1382 to plaintiff.

5 p.m. episodes-

First (2017)-

Knife Fight! Woman Stabs Herself in the Neck?! - (This is Part 1, and Part 2 is tomorrow at the same time)-Plaintiff Kayesha Hedgeman is suing Neshdae Denson (her ex-girlfriend's sister)  for stabbing plaintiff.   This happened in Little Rock, I'm guessing.   Plaintiff was hospitalized for the stabbing in 2015.   

Sister Nishundera  Denson,  is the defendant's witness.   Plaintiff left town for two weeks, and then when she returned to town, they resumed their relationship.    Plaintiff was also pregnant by some unnamed man.    Then litigants, and defendant sister had an argument.   Defendant claims plaintiff didn't stay at the defendant's place, and the police were called when the argument started.   (Is this the biggest entourage of witnesses?   Three women, plus defendant, another sister Maleah Denson).   Plaintiff's scar on her neck goes all of the way horizontally across her lower neck.    

Defendant says plaintiff came in her home, pulled a knife out of her bosom, a big folding knife (Is she like Angela from "90 Day Fiance, the Other Way", and carries everything in her bra?).   Then the fight (altercation) started with yelling, and went to physical, and stabbing.    Defendant claims plaintiff hit her in the face, and the physical fight was on, and the knife was pulled.    Defendant swears plaintiff started cutting her own neck, and slashed defendant's pinkie finger.   

 Defendant claims the fight happened outside of her house, not inside.   Defendant says after her finger got cut, she went to the hospital, and doesn't know what happened with the plaintiff's neck wounds.   At the hospital plaintiff went to surgery, and defendant and her tiny pinkie cut went to jail.  Plaintiff went to the hospital in an ambulance, with severe wounds.    

Police came to the apartment, and to the hospital.  Plaintiff had two bad neck wounds, and was in the hospital for a month.    This happened almost two years ago, and defendants still live in Arkansas.  Plaintiff now lives in Los Angeles.   

Police report says plaintiff was stabbed by defendant, according to her sister/girlfriend.    Then ex-girlfriend changed her story to the police, and lied. 

Case will be continued tomorrow, and we find out where plaintiff carried the knife, because she claims it wasn't in her bra.

Second (2017)-

From Homeless to Helpless?!-Plaintiff /former day care worker Daisyrain Lyle suing Megan Kelly, and 15 year old son Austin Kelly for return of property, and assault by son.   (Daisyrain is the real name, no spaces in it either).   Defendant mother was pals with plaintiff's incarcerated father, but only friends, and only when he was in jail.   Plaintiff moved in with defendant mother, because plaintiff was short on cash. 

 Plaintiff claims there was no rental or other agreements.    Defendant is a CNA, and has children that needed care, so she had plaintiff certified to collect state day care for the defendant's children, for $2,000 a month from the state.  Defendant claims plaintiff was evicted from previous apartment.

Plaintiff claims she gave defendant money every month, plus $400 to plaintiff's aunt.    Plaintiff claims defendant kept all of her belongings when she moved out.     Plaintiff claims she moved out of house, and was still collecting state money for babysitting that was being done by someone else for defendant.

JJ dismisses the property plaintiff claims defendant kept, defendant says she doesn't have it.    Plaintiff is claiming for anonymous tire slashing, but no proof who did that.    Plaintiff claims the defendant son assaulted her, when plaintiff was trespassing getting her stuff.  Plaintiff claims son pushed and hit her, broke her glasses, but she was trespassing.    Anthony Ehli, plaintiff witness was also with her during the trespass and assault.     

Defendant son says his siblings were yelling, and saw plaintiff and her witness trespassing and stealing items from the house, and then witness and two other men assaulted the son, and threatened him with Anthony Ehli's gun (he has a concealed carry permit).  Defendant says plaintiff took her children's car seats, and a stroller with her when she left.   

JJ says neither litigant came to court with clean hands, cases dismissed. 

Hush Money?!-Plaintiff Dawn Kasner suing her daughter's ex Maxim Bellyy suing for an unpaid $2,000 loan.     However, the loan was for bills when defendant, and the daughter were living together (plaintiff daughter is plaintiff's witness, Kristina Kasner).  Defendant claims he paid $1,200 back to plaintiff.    Defendant claims he was still seeing the plaintiff's daughter, and claims plaintiff said if he stopped seeing daughter loan would be forgiven.

$800 to plaintiff.

(This week my JJ channel is only running Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday.   Thursday and Friday are both football). 

[CrazyInAlabama]

4 p.m. episodes-

First (2014)-

Tree Hugger Skirmish! -Plaintiffs Jacquelynn and Eric Zito (he’s a specialty cheese steward) suing defendant/neighbor Drew Arneson  for cutting down 8 trees that are on plaintiff’s property.    Defendant says the trees were on his side of the property line, but plaintiffs claim the trees are on their property.    Defendant says the trees that were trimmed, were hanging over his side of the property line, and only trimmed them to the property line.   Defendant says he didn’t cut any tree down entirely, and the green part was still fully visible to plaintiffs.    The tall juniper trees are next to the driveways, and defendant says the property line is right in the middle.  Plaintiff wife claims defendant cut 8 trees down to the ground, in two sessions.  

Picture of the two houses, with the tall trees in the middle look like they are on defendant’s side of the line.   Defendant picture shows he cut the junipers right next to the property line to stop the branches from hitting his car, and him, when he was getting in and out of his car in the driveway.

This happened in Oregon.    Plaintiff wife says defendant did it while they were on vacation, but never discussed anything with plaintiffs.   Defendant says the one tree that was taken down had a fire caused by fireworks, on July 4th.  Defendant is counter-suing for tree removal costs.  Plaintiff husband says defendant talked to his wife when they saw the tree was gone.   Defendant said at that time that they needed to talk about possible tree trimming.

Plaintiff Jacquelynn is ousted by JJ, for lying.  

Defendant says he talked to plaintiff husband.   Wife lies to Judy, and says defendant never talked to them, and husband has to tell the truth, that he did talk to defendant about a possible solution to the tree trimming issue.  

Plaintiff husband claims defendant said he would petition the city to remove the trees by his driveway.  JJ tells plaintiff that his wife is out of court, and he can tell the truth.  From the photo, it looks like the trees on plaintiff’s side are fine, and the only branches defendant cut down were on defendant’s side. 

Plaintiff case dismissed, defendant case dismissed.    

Pit Bull Bully? -Plaintiff Derek Dyrenforth suing defendant/dog owner Breck Roberts over a dog attack for vet bills, medical bills, lost wages, and pain and suffering.   Plaintiff saw two Pit Bulls run out of defendant’s door, and attack plaintiff’s on-leash Labrador.  Defendant claims there was only one Pit Bull.   Pit Bull attacked plaintiff, and his dog. Plaintiff was walking his Labrador Barnaby, on leash, and defendant’s two Pits attacked plaintiff and his dog.   Plaintiff fell over trying to rescue his dog. 

 Defendant claims she only has one Pit Bull, not two.  She has Dax, and a female Kenley (this is her father’s dog).    She also claims her no attack happened, and claims plaintiff’s dog wasn’t on a leash.  Animal Control report statement from defendant says plaintiff dog was on leash, and her dogs didn’t attack.    Documents submitted to JJ show everything defendant is testifying about is a lie.

Defendant statement says Dax (her dog) came out to sniff Barnaby, and didn’t attack.

$1800 for plaintiff.

Second (2014)-

Public Humiliation at the Race Track? -Plaintiff Joshua Pacada suing defendant/ Anthony Catalano for driving over his duffle bag at the pits of a racing event, for $965.    Defendant is counter suing for public humiliation by plaintiff.   

Plaintiff had a back pack, put it on the ground, and defendant accidentally drove over the bag.   Then, plaintiff tried to claim on defendant’s insurance, but claims was denied (disclaimed).    Plaintiff’s father is his witness.  The track has a course area for designated participant parking, and plaintiff claims this includes his equipment, including his spare tire, backpack, and jack. 

JJ and Officer Byrd say the parking area is a big open, lined parking lot.    Plaintiff’s father looks like he’s having a bad day, having his son shown to be an idiot on national TV. 

Defendant says plaintiff made such a big deal about the bag being run over, including a police report, the insurance claim.   Defendant counter claim dismissed.   

Defendant pulled into an empty parking space, without a car in it.   

Plaintiff case dismissed.

Truck Trap! -Plaintiff Layla King suing defendant Vincent Bradley for $880 for towing fees and parts after he conned her into letting her fix her truck.   Truck 2009 Chevy Silverado.  Ms. King had the broken down truck, towed by defendant to his body shop.   He had car for 2 weeks.   Plaintiff was dating defendant’s brother.

Truck came in at a higher cost than the estimate, so $1500.   

$550 to plaintiff.

5 p.m. episodes-

First (2017)-

 Knife Fight Part 2 (part 1 was yesterday, and was equally bizarre).  -(Plaintiff Kayesha Hedgeman is suing her ex-girlfriend’s sister, Neshdae Denson over her stabbing two years ago, in Little Rock (2015).    Ex-girlfriend Nishundera Denson is witness for her sister, and lied to the police after the stabbing.   Plaintiff was in the hospital for a month after the attack.  Defendant stabber also claims the plaintiff pulled the folding blade knife out of her own bra, and stabbed herself.)

In Part 2, Plaintiff Kayesha Hedgeman is telling about the assault by her former girlfriend's (Nishundera Denson) sister, Neshae Denson.    Kayesha says she carried a knife, because that part of Little Rock is dangerous, and says knife was closed in her pocket (not in her bra).   Neshae Denson ended up with a tiny cut on her pinkie.   

Nishundera  (ex-girlfriend) changed her story to the police, after plaintiff was taken to hospital.    Defendant was arrested, and charged.  Plaintiff took knife out of her pocket, and opened it during the argument.    Plaintiff claims ex, and sister were arguing, says Neshae was blocking her in the corner, and threatening her.   

Plaintiff case dismissed.

Food Stamp Treachery-Next part, plaintiff is now ex-girlfriend Nishundera Denson, suing defendant Kayesha Hedgeman, for return of property.   Hedgeman had moved to L.A., was living off, and on with her baby's father, but claims plaintiff still wanted to rekindle their relationship, and at first agreed plaintiff should come to L.A.,     Then defendant said she didn't want plaintiff to move to L.A., and didn't want to continue the relationship, and defendant wanted to try to make relationship with baby daddy work.

Then plaintiff is suing defendant, because defendant cancelled plaintiff's EBT card (Food Stamps, according to defendant).  Plaintiff claims defendant has her clothes, car key, shoes, etc.  Defendant claims plaintiff took everything when they both moved out of their mutual apartment.   Plaintiff was getting General Relief, and defendant cancelled the EBT card plaintiff had too.  When plaintiff applied for GR, and the EBT card, defendant says plaintiff used defendant's address.  

Plaintiff case dismissed, and everyone shown out of the courtroom.

Second (2017)-

 Security Guards Turned Roommates-Plaintiff Leila Smith rented a room to homeless co-worker Jordan Parker, and is now suing him for threats, unpaid rent.   Rent was $475 a month.   Plaintiff claims on move in defendant paid her half a month's rent, defendant denies this.   Co-worker moved in with two dogs, and girlfriend, into plaintiff's house (she lived alone at the time).     Defendant claims rent was never mentioned to him by plaintiff, and claims plaintiff said he didn't have to worry about the rent.   Plaintiff admits defendant paid her $525.     He owes plaintiff $900 for remaining rent.  

Plaintiff says defendant and fiance, Kelsey McCoy, damaged tables and other furniture plaintiff let them use.   Table damage looks like the dogs chomped it, not a cat.    Defendant has a Labrador Retriever (girlfriend's dog), and carpets were nailed by dog.    Defendant claims plaintiff had six cats, and only five animals are allowed in the home.   Then defendant brought two dogs in.   So, house had eight animals in a five pet maximum area?  

Defendant claims when he was forced out by the police, he left his uniforms (defendant says the uniforms are military, not the security guard uniforms) behind, but plaintiff's witness says he saw defendant take the clothes with him when he left.   

$900 for rent, $250 for mattress damage, total is $1150 for plaintiff, defendant case dismissed. 

Excuses Central-Plaintiff Reginald Benjamin suing former tenant/ defendant Jennifer Shealey SSMOF (Sainted Single Mother of Four) for unpaid rent, and stolen appliances (refrigerator and stove).       

Defendant and her four kids lived in another house (I bet a trailer, since she said it needed to be jacked up and leveled periodically).    Defendant says she moved in to the plaintiff's property with her four children, but claims it wasn't up to her standards.  So, plaintiff paid for defendant and her children to stay in a motel for a weekend before move in.   Plaintiff put them in a motel over the weekend because defendant had a plumber look at the drains, and fix it.     Plaintiff says defendant paid a $400 deposit, $850 rent was paid for July only.    

Defendant stayed through August, September, October, and moved out in November.   Defendant claims she only paid $850 in September, but not the other three months.    Plaintiff claims defendant stole stove, and refrigerator on move out, and he has receipts for replacements.   Plaintiff says defendant, and her children actually lived in his home until January, not first part of November. 

Defendant claims she moved out when the house got shot up, and says she has a police report to prove it.  Plaintiff claims he was going to evict defendant, and her kids, after many calls from neighbors of the rental house, telling him about activities going on at his rental house. (Giving the neighbors your contact information is a great idea when you rent a property out).    

Plaintiff says defendant and children actually lived in his home until January, not first part of November.   JJ will confirm actual move in date with apartment landlord.     (If I hear about SSMOF's four kids again, I'm screaming!).   JJ wants to contact landlord of apartment rental (six months and out there too), and apartment landlord says defendant moved in ("Honorable Citizens" is the name of the realty company).    My guess is defendant knows exactly who shot the place up, and why.   She didn't mention day care costs for her four young kids, did she?   Wonder if the kids are raising themselves?  

Plaintiff receives $3830 for the rent, and appliances.   

[CrazyInAlabama]

4 p.m. episodes-

First (2014)-

Repo Man Runaround -Plaintiff John Conkle suing defendant Dante Hill for parking tickets, tow fees and damages to an SUV plaintiff was selling.  Car was sold for $1,000.  Defendant never registered vehicle in his name, and was pulled over 26 times, and ticketed, and the tickets went to plaintiff.  Plaintiff says defendant was buying the Dodge Durango owing $600 on the payments, and didn’t pay $895 for the repairs.

Defendant claims the Durango was paid off, and he had the title.   Plaintiff says part of the title copy is missing, the lien on the back of the title.    So, plaintiff had to apply for a repossession title for the car.

JJ is fixated on the remaining price of the vehicle, and doesn’t discuss the repair bill.  

Since defendant didn’t register the car to his name, so all of the traffic tickets came back to the plaintiff.

Since defendant didn’t register the car in his name, then the DMV could have put a lien on plaintiff’s house, suspended his driver’s license, etc.   Defendant says ‘he just didn’t get around to registering the car”

JJ refuses to discuss the impound fees, repair costs after defendant’s girlfriend was in a hit-and-run accident in the car.

Plaintiff gets the first repair, $632.

Burglary and a False Arrest -Plaintiff Jeremy Ball suing defendant Nichole Cheney for return of belongings left behind after she served him with a restraining order, and he had to move out.   They had an argument, she was arrested.   Then she filed for a protective order against plaintiff, and he had to move out.   

How did defendant get a protective order, when she was arrested.    Plaintiff wants his mattress set back, but he says it was dumped outside, and ruined.   Plaintiff had a civil standby, and didn’t get everything of his out of defendant’s house.  Defendant is counter suing for a false arrest, and a burglary.

Everything he left behind is supposed to be in defendant’s garage.

Plaintiff has five days to arrange for a civil standby and pick up his stuff.   Defendant’s claims dismissed, because she brought no police reports.

Second (2014)-

Abandoned or Stolen Property? -Plaintiffs Anthony Nesmith suing defendant/ Deirdre Skelton (a long time school counselor) for stealing his property.     Ms. Skelton has no police record, ever.   Plaintiff is 18, a full-time student at Pasadena City College, and plays football.   Brinton Reed, a long time family friend “godson” of defendant, is witness for the plaintiff.     Defendant let Brinton move in free to her home.  So, Nesmith and Reed both lived with Miss Skelton, Reed for a couple of months, and Nesmith spent two nights, and defendant noticed  things missing from her garage.   Nesmith wasn’t talking to defendant, and he claims defendant gave permission to store his stuff at the garage.

Then Nesmith flew to visit in Florida, leaving his stuff at defendant’s place.   Defendant says Nesmith left a black duffle bag, and a suitcase.    Then, defendant missed his flight, but finally left.  

So, defendant tried to give Nesmith the duffle bag, and suitcase as he was leaving for the airport.   After Nesmith left, a week later Brinton Reed moved out, and refused to pick up anything.   Anthony Nesmith claims defendant gave away his stuff, after Brinton Reed told defendant it was Anthony Nesmith’s stuff, not his.

Defendant says Brinton Reed didn’t tell her that the stuff in the room was Anthony Nesmith, and said he didn’t want it. 

Defendant says Anthony abandoned the property.

Plaintiff case dismissed.

Delinquent Roommates -Plaintiffs /roommates Joshua Ressling and Scott Lee suing defendant/former roommate   Joe Avila for unpaid rent and bills, stolen property and damages. Defendant was divorcing, and stayed with Michael Borsellino for a month or so, and then Borsellino told defendant about the vacancy at plaintiffs’ place.    

Defendant needed a place for a short time, until he could find a place to live with his girlfriend and her two kids.  However, plaintiffs say Avila’s girlfriend and her kids were not visiting, but virtually moved in to the apartment.  Plaintiff Ressling says he reminded Avila about turning off his ceiling fan when his room was empty, then defendant texted back about turning the TV off.  Then, plaintiff says defendant came into the living room, and broke plaintiff’s recliner.      

Defendant says after the argument, plaintiff was sitting in his chair, claims plaintiff chest bumped him, and that plaintiff broke his own chair with a hammer.  

Plaintiffs’ claim he owes for one month’s rent, $650, utilities $, a broken recliner, two folding chairs.

Plaintiffs get $650 for rent.

5 p.m. episodes-

First (2017)-

Man Has No Clue Why Girlfriend is Mad!- Plaintiff Kenneth Starks suing ex-girlfriend Rachelle Martin over her breaking his TV.   This all started over him eating something that disagreed with him, after his girlfriend told him not to eat it.   When girlfriend started arguing, he told her to leave, and that's when she broke his TV.    

They were dating, had an argument, at his apartment, and plaintiff claims defendant grabbed his TV off the mantle.  After defendant broke the TV, she still stayed at plaintiff's apartment that night.  

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

$1,380 to plaintiff for his TV.

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

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

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

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

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

$600 to defendant, plaintiff case dismissed. 

Second (2017)-

Snake in the Basement! -Plaintiff/former tenant Tara Davis suing defendant Jeaneches Perry/ former friend and  tenant but sort of landlady,  (defendant is renting the house from someone else, and subletting the basement) for her property left behind after a two month tenancy. and her dog.   Plaintiff says her son saw a snake, and defendant says there was only one snake.  

Defendant gets SS disability, and rents the house, and her brother is paroled to the house.  Rent from defendant is $750, and her disability is $925, and she gets by renting rooms.    The basement is a big open room, and everyone shared the bedroom.  Brother lives in the attic.  Defendant says basement is finished, plaintiff says basement is an unfinished basement, and picture shows a big empty basement. 

  Plaintiff moved in with her 6 year old son, and a dog.    Plaintiff says she paid the $175 rent, a month late.    A month after move in plaintiff gave defendant $195, but should have paid $590.  Plaintiff is a CNA, and home health aide.     Rent was supposed to be $350. 

Plaintiff says she moved out after she saw snakes in the basement.   Defendant claims the landlord removed the one snake, and blocked the hole it entered through.  Then, plaintiff and son moved back in. Plaintiff claims the son saw the snake again.   

Plaintiff claims defendant wouldn't let her take her dog or her property, unless she paid the $240 she owed.     Plaintiff now says she doesn't want her property back, because it might have snakes in it, so that's dismissed.

Pit Bull was left behind for days after plaintiff left, and claims plaintiff wouldn't pick up the dog.   Defendant Jeaneches Perry says dog was put in the back yard, and ran off.

$45 to defendant, nothing to plaintiff.

Truck Driving School Payback! -Plaintiff Grace Garcia suing former boyfriend Rafael Mendoza for loans for truck driving school, DMV fees.    They moved in together, he paid $831 for rent, and she paid food, and some utilities.   They only lived together for two months.  Plaintiff made a loan to defendant for truck driving school, for $4,000 (to qualify for truck driving jobs).   This loan was for their future together.

Defendant now has a truck driving job, and litigants split up, after two months.   Plaintiff put the loan for $4,000 on her credit card, and he repaid $300.    Defendant owes plaintiff $4500 (he makes about $10k a month now).  

$4200 to plaintiff, plus interest=$4500. 

(Due to football, no Thursday or Friday JJ episodes where I live).

[One Tough Cookie]

So last nite I caught up on some episodes and have this t say;

I MOURN IN DEATH OF THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE

[DjamillasMan]

*Happy Thanksgiving to my JJ family! I had to cut this one a bit short tonight as I'm helping in the kitchen and people are coming over tomorrow afternoon. I promise to have more reviews up Friday and Saturday. I hope everyone has a great Thanksgiving!*

Plaintiff: Sheri Webster from Apple Valley, CA. Sheri looks like a sexy nurse/ bank teller. She is wearing some cute glasses and a black shirt/skirt combo from Kohl’s that she picked up during an MLK Day sale. You see, Sheri is suing today because she got caught up in a sexual relationship with the defendant’s hubby, which resulted in a fight between the two women. Sheri got beat up, but she isn’t about to take that lying down, which is why she has brought suit against the defendant. The defendant’s husband and Sheri worked at the same medical care office together. Sheri had no idea that the defendant’s husband was married and Sheri didn’t want to be labeled as a homewrecker.

Defendant: Nancy Marquez from Apple Valley, CA. Nancy is wearing some sort of investigative journalist outfit, as if she’s on the hunt for an HH Holmes copycat killer or she’s going to host a brand new season of Unsolved Mysteries. Nancy is completely delusional, thinking her husband really loves her and hasn’t cheated on her. She has a height/weight advantage over Sheri, which is why she kicked her ass. Nancy even makes it a point to mention that to JJ, as if that makes her the better person. Like I said, she’s in complete denial about her hubby stepping out on her to the point where it’s comical. She has a very nasty attitude about it, too, which makes me think she knows it but doesn’t want to accept that her marriage is failing. Nancy looks like a cross between The Penguin, a bloated Jeff Goldblum in The Fly, and a pre-Nurtisystem spokeswoman Marie Osmond with a bad spray tan.  Also, Nancy must love her ‘80s fashions, because her investigative journalist outfit has some huge shoulder pads, like she was going to do her investigations and then hit a neon lighted disco to dance the night away to some Pat Benatar.

The Complaint: Sheri is up in court suing Nancy for an assault.

What Does He/She want: Sheri wants $5000. If she gets it, we have to down the entire drink.

Countersuit?: No  

Puppy Multiplier: N/A

Driving Around Without Insurance: N/A

What Went Down: JJ kicks things off by asking Nancy if her witness is indeed her husband (take a shot! JJ started with the defendant). Nancy confirms this. JJ then turns her attention to Sheri. She asks Sheri if she knew that Mr. Marquez was married. Sheri denies this. Sheri gives a little background stating that they were coworkers and that’s how they got romantically involved. Sheri states she started working at the medical office in October of 2012. She states that she doesn’t remember when Desean started working there, as they worked in different departments; she worked in the primary care side (I knew she was a sexy nurse!) and he worked in urgent care side.

JJ asks Desean when he started working at the medical office, to which he replies that he started working there in January of 2011. JJ asks Nancy if Desean wears a wedding band. She states that he doesn’t. I wouldn’t be caught dead without my wedding band on, but that’s just me.  If I came home without my wedding band, I’d be buried in the backyard under three feet of concrete.

JJ gets to the crux of the case; Sheri is claiming that Nancy assaulted her because she figured out that Sheri and her husband, Desean, were fooling around behind Nancy’s back. Sheri states that the assault took place on March 22nd, 2014. Sheri and Desean had been messing around since December of 2013. Sheri and Desean had gone out to dinner about three times; she came to his place a few times, he’s come to hers, then they would go to a hotel. Okay, I’m not understanding why you guys would fool around at a hotel if both of you are supposedly single with your own places, but I can only speculate that Desean tried to do that as a romantic weekend getaway or something like that because Nancy was off that weekend. JJ wants to know if Sheri saw any photographs or anything like that (of the marriage and kids), which Sheri denies.

JJ turns her attention to Nancy and asks her when did she realize that her husband was stepping out on her. Nancy claims that she had no knowledge of an affair. Oh, bullshit. She knows Desean is stepping out on her, she’s just in deep denial. Denial just isn’t a river in Egypt, Nancy! Nancy claims that Sheri was the one who brought the affair to her attention. The damndest thing is though, is that Nancy goes straight into politician mode and claims “I don’t recall”, when she is prompted by JJ to tell her when Sheri let Nancy know when Sheri allegedly confessed to the affair. JJ isn’t going to let that go and keeps badgering Nancy on when Sheri told her about the affair. Nancy claims it was in February.

Now, Nancy claims that Sheri sent her a message on Facebook (it’s always Facebook), stating that Sheri was sleeping with her husband. JJ asks if Nancy has that message, but Nancy denies it, stating that she didn’t feel it was relevant to the case (take two shots for Nancy’s being a dumb ass). Nancy, listen lady, how is it not germane to the entire case? This is what sparked you acting like a goddamn pit bull and attacking someone else. I think Nancy is either a bad liar, delusional, or knows her husband is sleeping around but doesn’t care. Are they swingers? Nah….if they were, then Nancy wouldn’t be in court today. I mean, unless they started out as swingers and Nancy was getting left out of the threesomes then became jealous. I mean, look at her. LOL. I mean Sheri isn’t all that, but she’s a hell of a lot better looking than Nancy. At least Sheri isn’t fuckin cosplaying as Sherlock Holmes.

JJ wants to know what the messages stated on Facebook. Nancy, again, reverts to politician mode and keeps saying “I don’t recall”. Since JJ isn’t going to get anything out of Mrs. Columbo, she asks Sheri what the FB message stated. Sheri states that she asked if Nancy and Desean were married, as Sheri wanted to get to the bottom of the whole ordeal. Sheri states that she told Nancy that they were romantically involved and had been seeing each other for the past few months. Nancy responded to the FB message by saying that Nancy knows who she is as she is the one who picks up Desean in the morning and if she drives a burgundy car. Sheri told her yes. The two had an entire conversation revolving around Desean.

Sheri states that she took the photos she and Desean had up together down from FB at Nancy’s request. JJ asks Nancy if that refreshes her recollection, with Nancy admitting that it does. This is when Nancy starts giving all sorts of attitude and acting like her shit doesn’t stink. It’s your husband who was stepping out on you. You should be mad at him, not Sheri The Nurse.  JJ even begins to tell Nancy this, with Nancy acting like she is hot to trot.

Sheri claims that she confronted Desean on him being married with him showing her proof of his tax returns that he filed single. The audience giggles a bit at this (take two shots!). JJ surmises that this is not the first time that Desean has cheated, it’s just the first time he got caught. JJ tricks Nancy into revealing how they file, with Nancy stating that they file separately. Are they even married? I mean, they can’t be married for tax breaks, clearly. Are they married for the financial benefit of two incomes? Come to think of it, Nancy never claimed that she worked. I don’t even think Desean loves her, with him sitting over there looking like a playa, and Nancy turning a blind eye to all of her husband’s BS. If I don’t text Djamilla back within an hour, there’s absolute hell to pay. I get it, everyone’s marriage is different, but you’ll bet a dollar to a fuckin donut, I’m filing my taxes jointly to get all the tax breaks that I can.

Meanwhile, JJ is lecturing Nancy on her turning a blind eye to her husband’s wandering eye. LOL. She is going in on Nancy, with Nancy just sitting there stonefaced. She is not even bothered by any of this. Sheri also lets in on the little fact that Desean told her that Nancy was some crazy stalker lady who wouldn’t leave him alone. LOL!!! Take a shot for that. Sheri also says that Nancy sent her a copy of the marriage certificate at her request. She couldn’t see the signatures on it. Sheri wanted a meeting between the three of them so she could get to the bottom of it, as she is not a homewrecker and doesn’t want to be identified as one. Sheri claims that this was all on a phone she doesn’t have anymore (take a shot!). Sheri had Nancy’s phone number. When Sheri showed Desean the photo of the marriage license, he said that anyone can make those up online. LMAO!!! Desean is a playa, man. He played Sheri like a damn game.

Sheri again reiterates that Desean claimed that Nancy was an ex-girlfriend who was miserable and wanted Desean to be miserable. After all, misery wants company, right? Sheri states that she never got to meet with the both of them in the same room. Sheri states that in February, she was on medical leave and that’s when she spotted Nancy. Nancy walked up to her car. I bet Nancy was wearing that weird investigative journalist outfit as if she were on the trail of Buffalo Bill/Jame Gumb. Sheri states that the conversation led to Nancy confirming and denying some things and that Desean had lied about going back into the military (he does look like he came out of the Army). Nancy and Desean have been married since 2009. Sheri states that her daughter was in the car at the time and that Nancy claimed that Desean was not going to stop bothering her.

Yo, no BS, I can see Nancy outside on a dreary February evening with mist and fog obscuring the parking lot, with her damn The Equalizer overcoat on, smoking a cigarette, telling Sheri all there was to know about Desean. I mean, after all, didn’t the inkling of them being married cross into Sheri’s mind at that point?

Nancy claims she didn’t recall the conversation like that. She said that Sheri called her to meet with her at the job. She does give credit to Sheri that Sheri’s daughter was in the car. JJ then states: “Don’t look down! Look at me!” (take a shot!). JJ wants to know what the conversation was, not what it was not. Nancy is having memory issues all over the place. JJ then tells Nancy again what she remembers, not what she doesn’t remember. Nancy states that she just remembers talking to Sheri and that is all. Okay…talking to her about what? JJ loses patience with Nancy and states “I got it! I got it! I got it!”

After the commercial break (with another ‘The General’ commercial with Shaq (take a shot!)), we get back to the case.

JJ wants to know what happened on March 22nd. Sheri begins to tell the tale about how she was texting Desean earlier in the day. She was going to be in area and asked Desean if he has a ride home. Desean stated that he did need a ride home. Sheri claims that she got done with her appointment early and went to the medical office. That’s where she spotted Nancy’s car. I think Nancy drives a 1988 Mercury Sable Station Wagon. I’m going to be honest. Sheri claims that she pulled to the back where everyone clocks in and out. Sheri texted Desean, stating that Nancy is there and why did he text her asking for a ride if Nancy was already there. He did respond to poor Sheri, stating that he was in the front of the building. When Sheri pulled up to the front, Desean claimed that he was at the bank across the street. Before this, however, Nancy was screaming at Desean as Sheri listened in. She knows this, because she could hear Nancy call Desean “Carlos”. Sheri tried to remove herself from the situation, but then an angry, bloated, pissed-off Nancy pulled up to her, their vehicles facing different directions. That’s when Nancy just went apeshit.

Nancy got out of her car (probably dressed in some sort of Robert Stack/Agent Mulder/ Inspector Gadget overcoat), walked over to Sheri’s car, and began laying the smackdown on her ass. Nancy grabbed Sheri by the shirt, scratching her in the process, then pinned her down in the passenger seat, and started beating her face in. This was all through the window as Sheri was still buckled into her seatbelt. As Sheri is giving testimony, the audience murmurs in shock (take a shot!). Sheri claims that she was able to put her car in reverse to get away.

After yet another commercial break, we cut back to the case.

Sheri happily hands her medical records over to JJ via Officer Byrd. She asks if JJ would also like the pictures to go along with that, which JJ says “Mhm”, while giving a stank eye to Nancy. I don’t think JJ is mad at this point, but clearly disappointed in Nancy’s behavior that day. Meanwhile, Nancy isn’t fazed at all by her actions. It’s almost like she has Stockholm Syndrome or something. We see that Sheri’s medical bills total 3k.

JJ asks for Nancy’s side of the story. Nancy begins by remembering the date. JJ tries to make fun of Nancy by stating that Nancy remembers the date she beat Sheri’s ass, but not the date that she had the convo with Sheri while Sheri’s daughter was in the car. Nancy is now portraying some arrogant attitude for no reason. I guess because Desean “Carlos” is in her corner or something. Like she won something. That dude is a fuckin playa.

Nancy states that Desean asked her to come pick her up, but he wasn’t ready, and that their daughter lives up the street from the medical office. Desean then texted Nancy to come back to pick him up, so Nancy turned around to come back to the medical office. This is when Nancy and Sheri allegedly have a verbal altercation. Nancy claimed that Sheri “hit me with her car”, which I doubt. If Sheri hit Nancy with her car, that car would have folded like fuckin tin foil. Sheri burst out laughing on that, too (take a shot for Sheri laughing hard, then take another shot for Sheri apologizing to JJ for it). Nancy states she fell down (which would have left a crater in that parking lot, so I don’t believe her on that, either), and she states that she defended herself.  Then Nancy has the audacity to claim that it’s not her fault that Sheri can’t fight. The audience again, erupts into uproarious laughter (take two shots!).

JJ then lays into Nancy for what seems like an eternity, telling her that Desean is the piece of trash and that she’s stupid for attacking Sheri when she should have attacked Desean. Nancy is not moved by any portion of JJ’s lecture. Meanwhile, the crowd is giggling at Nancy’s stupidity (take a shot!). JJ even reiterates to Nancy that her husband referred to his own wife as some crazy, ex-girlfriend  stalker who was trying to make his life miserable. JJ then calls Nancy an idiot before awarding the plaintiff $5000.

During the Hall-Ter-View, Nancy continues to lie (take a shot!) and defend her denial. Meanwhile, Sheri is stating that Desean is a scumbag and a piece of trash. Sheri says that Desean is the one who pursued her for 6-9 months. Nancy also comes off a stupid as fuck, while Sheri just comes off as naïve and not very worldly.

Verdict: Plaintiff awarded $5000. FINISH YOUR DRINK!!!

Did Auntie Judy say anything fucked up to anyone?: {to Nancy}: “ Let me tell you something, Mrs. Marquez. He’s the piece of garbage. He’s the garbage. He’s the one who broke your vows. You have to pin the label of garbage on the right person. That’s him. Now, if you wanted to have an altercation, why don’t you have an altercation with him. You want to have an altercation with him, pack his bags, toss them out the window, and say adios! I don’t live with garbage who make a fool out of me. What are you starting with her for? He’s the liar. He’s the conman. He’s the cheat. Use your brains. You don’t think you’ll find another star like him? Trust me. Trust me. You can find another piece of garbage like that. They’re all over the place!”

Edited November 25, 2022 by DjamillasMan

[Tom1mac2]

12 hours ago, DjamillasMan said:

*Happy Thanksgiving to my JJ family! I had to cut this one a bit short tonight as I'm helping in the kitchen and people are coming over tomorrow afternoon. I promise to have more reviews up Friday and Saturday. I hope everyone has a great Thanksgiving!*

Plaintiff: Sheri Webster from Apple Valley, CA. Sheri looks like a sexy nurse/ bank teller. She is wearing some cute glasses and a black shirt/skirt combo from Kohl’s during an MLK Day sale. You see, Sheri is suing today because she got caught up in a sexual relationship with the defendant’s hubby, which resulted in a fight between the two women. Sheri got beat up, but she isn’t about to take that lying down, which is why she has brought suit against the defendant. The defendant’s husband and Sheri worked at the same medical care office together. Sheri had no idea that the defendant’s husband was married and Sheri didn’t want to be labeled as a homewrecker.

Defendant: Nancy Marquez from Apple Valley, CA. Nancy is wearing some sort of investigative journalist outfit, as if she’s on the hunt for an HH Holmes copycat killer or she’s going to host a brand new season of Unsolved Mysteries. Nancy is completely delusional, thinking her husband really loves her and hasn’t cheated on her. She has a height/weight advantage over Sheri, which is why she kicked her ass. Nancy even makes it a point to mention that to JJ, as if that makes her the better person. Like I said, she’s in complete denial about her hubby stepping out on her to the point where it’s comical. She has a very nasty attitude about it, too, which makes me think she knows it but doesn’t want to accept that her marriage is failing. Nancy looks like a cross between The Penguin, a bloated Jeff Goldblum in The Fly, and a pre-Nurtisystem spokeswoman Marie Osmond with a bad spray tan.  Also, Nancy must love her ‘80s fashions, because her investigative journalist outfit has some huge shoulder pads, like she was going to do her investigations and then hit a neon lighted disco to dance the night away to some Pat Benatar.

The Complaint: Sheri is up in court suing Nancy for an assault.

What Does He/She want: Sheri wants $5000. If she gets it, we have to down the entire drink.

Countersuit?: No  

Puppy Multiplier: N/A

Driving Around Without Insurance: N/A

What Went Down: JJ kicks things off by asking Nancy if her witness is indeed her husband (take a shot! JJ started with the defendant). Nancy confirms this. JJ then turns her attention to Sheri. She asks Sheri if she knew that Mr. Marquez was married. Sheri denies this. Sheri gives a little background stating that they were coworkers and that’s how they got romantically involved. Sheri states she started working at the medical office in October of 2012. She states that she doesn’t remember when Desean started working there, as they worked in different departments; she worked in the primary care side (I knew she was a sexy nurse!) and he worked in urgent care side.

JJ asks Desean when he started working at the medical office, to which he replies that he started working there in January of 2011. JJ asks Nancy if Desean wears a wedding band. She states that he doesn’t. I wouldn’t be caught dead without my wedding band on, but that’s just me.  If I came home without my wedding band, I’d be buried in the backyard under three feet of concrete.

JJ gets to the crux of the case; Sheri is claiming that Nancy assaulted her because she figured out that Sheri and her husband, Desean, were fooling around behind Nancy’s back. Sheri states that the assault took place on March 22nd, 2014. Sheri and Desean had been messing around since December of 2013. Sheri and Desean had gone out to dinner about three times; she came to his place a few times, he’s come to hers, then they would go to a hotel. Okay, I’m not understanding why you guys would fool around at a hotel if both of you are supposedly single with your own places, but I can only speculate that Desean tried to do that as a romantic weekend getaway or something like that because Nancy was off that weekend. JJ wants to know if Sheri saw any photographs or anything like that (of the marriage and kids), which Sheri denies.

JJ turns her attention to Nancy and asks her when did she realize that her husband was stepping out on her. Nancy claims that she had no knowledge of an affair. Oh, bullshit. She knows Desean is stepping out on her, she’s just in deep denial. Denial just isn’t a river in Egypt, Nancy! Nancy claims that Sheri was the one who brought the affair to her attention. The damndest thing is though, is that Nancy goes straight into politician mode and claims “I don’t recall”, when she is prompted by JJ to tell her when Sheri let Nancy know when Sheri allegedly confessed to the affair. JJ isn’t going to let that go and keeps badgering Nancy on when Sheri told her about the affair. Nancy claims it was in February.

Now, Nancy claims that Sheri sent her a message on Facebook (it’s always Facebook), stating that Sheri was sleeping with her husband. JJ asks if Nancy has that message, but Nancy denies it, stating that she didn’t feel it was relevant to the case (take two shots for Nancy’s being a dumb ass). Nancy, listen lady, how is it not germane to the entire case? This is what sparked you acting like a goddamn pit bull and attacking someone else. I think Nancy is either a bad liar, delusional, or knows her husband is sleeping around but doesn’t care. Are they swingers? Nah….if they were, then Nancy wouldn’t be in court today. I mean, unless they started out as swingers and Nancy was getting left out of the threesomes then became jealous. I mean, look at her. LOL. I mean Sheri isn’t all that, but she’s a hell of a lot better looking than Nancy. At least Sheri isn’t fuckin cosplaying as Sherlock Holmes.

JJ wants to know what the messages stated on Facebook. Nancy, again, reverts to politician mode and keeps saying “I don’t recall”. Since JJ isn’t going to get anything out of Mrs. Columbo, she asks Sheri what the FB message stated. Sheri states that she asked if Nancy and Desean were married, as Sheri wanted to get to the bottom of the whole ordeal. Sheri states that she told Nancy that they were romantically involved and had been seeing each other for the past few months. Nancy responded to the FB message by saying that Nancy knows who she is as she is the one who picks up Desean in the morning and if she drives a burgundy car. Sheri told her yes. The two had an entire conversation revolving around Desean.

Sheri states that she took the photos she and Desean had up together down from FB at Nancy’s request. JJ asks Nancy if that refreshes her recollection, with Nancy admitting that it does. This is when Nancy starts giving all sorts of attitude and acting like her shit doesn’t stink. It’s your husband who was stepping out on you. You should be mad at him, not Sheri The Nurse.  JJ even begins to tell Nancy this, with Nancy acting like she is hot to trot.

Sheri claims that she confronted Desean on him being married with him showing her proof of his tax returns that he filed single. The audience giggles a bit at this (take two shots!). JJ surmises that this is not the first time that Desean has cheated, it’s just the first time he got caught. JJ tricks Nancy into revealing how they file, with Nancy stating that they file separately. Are they even married? I mean, they can’t be married for tax breaks, clearly. Are they married for the financial benefit of two incomes? Come to think of it, Nancy never claimed that she worked. I don’t even think Desean loves her, with him sitting over there looking like a playa, and Nancy turning a blind eye to all of her husband’s BS. If I don’t text Djamilla back within an hour, there’s absolute hell to pay. I get it, everyone’s marriage is different, but you’ll bet a dollar to a fuckin donut, I’m filing my taxes jointly to get all the tax breaks that I can.

Meanwhile, JJ is lecturing Nancy on her turning a blind eye to her husband’s wandering eye. LOL. She is going in on Nancy, with Nancy just sitting there stonefaced. She is not even bothered by any of this. Sheri also lets in on the little fact that Desean told her that Nancy was some crazy stalker lady who wouldn’t leave him alone. LOL!!! Take a shot for that. Sheri also says that Nancy sent her a copy of the marriage certificate at her request. She couldn’t see the signatures on it. Sheri wanted a meeting between the three of them so she could get to the bottom of it, as she is not a homewrecker and doesn’t want to be identified as one. Sheri claims that this was all on a phone she doesn’t have anymore (take a shot!). Sheri had Nancy’s phone number. When Sheri showed Desean the photo of the marriage license, he said that anyone can make those up online. LMAO!!! Desean is a playa, man. He played Sheri like a damn game.

Sheri again reiterates that Desean claimed that Nancy was an ex-girlfriend who was miserable and wanted Desean to be miserable. After all, misery wants company, right? Sheri states that she never got to meet with the both of them in the same room. Sheri states that in February, she was on medical leave and that’s when she spotted Nancy. Nancy walked up to her car. I bet Nancy was wearing that weird investigative journalist outfit as if she were on the trail of Buffalo Bill/Jame Gumb. Sheri states that the conversation led to Nancy confirming and denying some things and that Desean had lied about going back into the military (he does look like he came out of the Army). Nancy and Desean have been married since 2009. Sheri states that her daughter was in the car at the time and that Nancy claimed that Desean was not going to stop bother her.

Yo, no BS, I can see Nancy outside on a dreary February evening with mist and fog obscuring the parking lot, with her damn The Equalizer overcoat on, smoking a cigarette, telling Sheri all there was to know about Desean. I mean, after all, didn’t the inkling of them being married cross into Sheri’s mind at that point?

Nancy claims she didn’t recall the conversation like that. She said that Sheri called her to meet with her at the job. She does give credit to Sheri that Sheri’s daughter was in the car. JJ then states: “Don’t look down! Look at me!” (take a shot!). JJ wants to know what the conversation was, not what it was not. Nancy is having memory issues all over the place. JJ then tells Nancy again what she remembers, not what she doesn’t remember. Nancy states that she just remembers talking to Sheri and that is all. Okay…talking to her about what? JJ loses patience with Nancy and states “I got it! I got it! I got it!”

After the commercial break (with another ‘The General’ commercial with Shaq (take a shot!)), we get back to the case.

JJ wants to know what happened on March 22nd. Sheri begins to tell the tale about how she was texting Desean earlier in the day. She was going to be in area and asked Desean if he has a ride home. Desean stated that he did need a ride home. Sheri claims that she got done with her appointment early and went to the medical office. That’s where she spotted Nancy’s car. I think Nancy drives a 1988 Mercury Sable Station Wagon. I’m going to be honest. Sheri claims that she pulled to the back where everyone clocks in and out. Sheri texted Desean, stating that Nancy is there and why did he text her asking for a ride if Nancy was already there. He did respond to poor Sheri, stating that he was in the front of the building. When Sheri pulled up to the front, Desean claimed that he was at the bank across the street. Before this, however, Nancy was screaming at Desean as Sheri listened in. She knows this, because she could hear Nancy call Desean “Carlos”. Sheri tried to remove herself from the situation, but then an angry, bloated, pissed-off Nancy pulled up to her, their vehicles facing different directions. That’s when Nancy just went apeshit.

Nancy got out of her car (probably dressed in some sort of Robert Stack/Agent Mulder overcoat), walked over to Sheri’s car, and began laying the smackdown on her ass. Nancy grabbed her by Sheri’s shirt, scratching her in the process, then pinned her down in the passenger seat, and started beating her face in. This was all through the window as Sheri was still buckled into her seatbelt. As Sheri is giving testimony, the audience murmurs in shock (take a shot!). Sheri claims that she was able to put her car in reverse to get away.

After yet another commercial break, we cut back to the case.

Sheri happily hands her medical records over to JJ via Officer Byrd. She asks if JJ would also like the pictures to go along with that, which JJ says “Mhm”, while giving a stank eye to Nancy. I don’t think JJ is mad at this point, but clearly disappointed in Nancy’s behavior that day. Meanwhile, Nancy isn’t fazed at all by her actions. It’s almost like she has Stockholm Syndrome or something. We see that Sheri’s medical bills total 3k.

JJ asks for Nancy’s side of the story. Nancy begins by remembering the date. JJ tries to make fun of Nancy by stating that Nancy remembers the date she beat Sheri’s ass, but not the date that she had the convo with Sheri while Sheri’s daughter was in the car. Nancy is now portraying some arrogant attitude for no reason. I guess because Desean “Carlos” is in her corner or something. Like she won something. That dude is a fuckin playa.

Nancy states that Desean asked her to come pick her up, but he wasn’t ready, and that their daughter lives up the street from the medical office. Desean then texted Nancy to come back to pick him up, so Nancy turned around to come back to the medical office. This is when Nancy and Sheri allegedly have a verbal altercation. Nancy claimed that Sheri “hit me with her car”, which I doubt. If Sheri hit Nancy with her car, that car would have folded like fuckin tin foil. Sheri burst out laughing on that, too (take a shot for Sheri laughing hard, then take another shot for Sheri apologizing to JJ for it). Nancy states she fell down (which would have left a crater in that parking lot, so I don’t believe her on that, either), and she states that she defended herself.  Then Nancy has the audacity to claim that it’s not her fault that Sheri can’t fight. The audience again, erupts into uproarious laughter (take two shots!).

JJ then lays into Nancy for what seems like an eternity, telling her that Desean is the piece of trash and that she’s stupid for attacking Sheri when she should have attacked Desean. Nancy is not moved by any portion of JJ’s lecture. Meanwhile, the crowd is giggling at Nancy’s stupidity (take a shot!). JJ even reiterates to Nancy that her husband referred to his own wife as some crazy, ex-girlfriend  stalker who was trying to make his life miserable. JJ then calls Nancy an idiot before awarding the plaintiff $5000.

During the Hall-Ter-View, Nancy continues to lie (take a shot!) and defend her denial. Meanwhile, Sheri is stating that Desean is a scumbag and a piece of trash. Sheri says that Desean is the one who pursued her for 6-9 months. Nancy also comes off a stupid as fuck, while Sheri just comes off as naïve and not very worldly.

Verdict: Plaintiff awarded $5000. FINISH YOUR DRINK!!!

Did Auntie Judy say anything fucked up to anyone?: {to Nancy}: “ Let me tell you something, Mrs. Marquez. He’s the piece of garbage. He’s the garbage. He’s the one who broke your vows. You have to pin the label of garbage on the right person. That’s him. Now, if you wanted to have an altercation, why don’t you have an altercation with him. You want to have an altercation with him, pack his bags, toss them out the window, and say adios! I don’t live with garbage who make a fool out of me. What are you starting with her for? He’s the liar. He’s the conman. He’s the cheat. Use your brains. You don’t think you’ll find another star like him? Trust me. Trust me. You can find another piece of garbage like that. They’re all over the place!”

I am thankful for your hilarious recaps! 🍾

[One Tough Cookie]

14 hours ago, DjamillasMan said:

*Happy Thanksgiving to my JJ family! I had to cut this one a bit short tonight as I'm helping in the kitchen and people are coming over tomorrow afternoon. I promise to have more reviews up Friday and Saturday. I hope everyone has a great Thanksgiving!*

Plaintiff: Sheri Webster from Apple Valley, CA. Sheri looks like a sexy nurse/ bank teller. She is wearing some cute glasses and a black shirt/skirt combo from Kohl’s during an MLK Day sale. You see, Sheri is suing today because she got caught up in a sexual relationship with the defendant’s hubby, which resulted in a fight between the two women. Sheri got beat up, but she isn’t about to take that lying down, which is why she has brought suit against the defendant. The defendant’s husband and Sheri worked at the same medical care office together. Sheri had no idea that the defendant’s husband was married and Sheri didn’t want to be labeled as a homewrecker.

Defendant: Nancy Marquez from Apple Valley, CA. Nancy is wearing some sort of investigative journalist outfit, as if she’s on the hunt for an HH Holmes copycat killer or she’s going to host a brand new season of Unsolved Mysteries. Nancy is completely delusional, thinking her husband really loves her and hasn’t cheated on her. She has a height/weight advantage over Sheri, which is why she kicked her ass. Nancy even makes it a point to mention that to JJ, as if that makes her the better person. Like I said, she’s in complete denial about her hubby stepping out on her to the point where it’s comical. She has a very nasty attitude about it, too, which makes me think she knows it but doesn’t want to accept that her marriage is failing. Nancy looks like a cross between The Penguin, a bloated Jeff Goldblum in The Fly, and a pre-Nurtisystem spokeswoman Marie Osmond with a bad spray tan.  Also, Nancy must love her ‘80s fashions, because her investigative journalist outfit has some huge shoulder pads, like she was going to do her investigations and then hit a neon lighted disco to dance the night away to some Pat Benatar.

The Complaint: Sheri is up in court suing Nancy for an assault.

What Does He/She want: Sheri wants $5000. If she gets it, we have to down the entire drink.

Countersuit?: No  

Puppy Multiplier: N/A

Driving Around Without Insurance: N/A

What Went Down: JJ kicks things off by asking Nancy if her witness is indeed her husband (take a shot! JJ started with the defendant). Nancy confirms this. JJ then turns her attention to Sheri. She asks Sheri if she knew that Mr. Marquez was married. Sheri denies this. Sheri gives a little background stating that they were coworkers and that’s how they got romantically involved. Sheri states she started working at the medical office in October of 2012. She states that she doesn’t remember when Desean started working there, as they worked in different departments; she worked in the primary care side (I knew she was a sexy nurse!) and he worked in urgent care side.

JJ asks Desean when he started working at the medical office, to which he replies that he started working there in January of 2011. JJ asks Nancy if Desean wears a wedding band. She states that he doesn’t. I wouldn’t be caught dead without my wedding band on, but that’s just me.  If I came home without my wedding band, I’d be buried in the backyard under three feet of concrete.

JJ gets to the crux of the case; Sheri is claiming that Nancy assaulted her because she figured out that Sheri and her husband, Desean, were fooling around behind Nancy’s back. Sheri states that the assault took place on March 22nd, 2014. Sheri and Desean had been messing around since December of 2013. Sheri and Desean had gone out to dinner about three times; she came to his place a few times, he’s come to hers, then they would go to a hotel. Okay, I’m not understanding why you guys would fool around at a hotel if both of you are supposedly single with your own places, but I can only speculate that Desean tried to do that as a romantic weekend getaway or something like that because Nancy was off that weekend. JJ wants to know if Sheri saw any photographs or anything like that (of the marriage and kids), which Sheri denies.

JJ turns her attention to Nancy and asks her when did she realize that her husband was stepping out on her. Nancy claims that she had no knowledge of an affair. Oh, bullshit. She knows Desean is stepping out on her, she’s just in deep denial. Denial just isn’t a river in Egypt, Nancy! Nancy claims that Sheri was the one who brought the affair to her attention. The damndest thing is though, is that Nancy goes straight into politician mode and claims “I don’t recall”, when she is prompted by JJ to tell her when Sheri let Nancy know when Sheri allegedly confessed to the affair. JJ isn’t going to let that go and keeps badgering Nancy on when Sheri told her about the affair. Nancy claims it was in February.

Now, Nancy claims that Sheri sent her a message on Facebook (it’s always Facebook), stating that Sheri was sleeping with her husband. JJ asks if Nancy has that message, but Nancy denies it, stating that she didn’t feel it was relevant to the case (take two shots for Nancy’s being a dumb ass). Nancy, listen lady, how is it not germane to the entire case? This is what sparked you acting like a goddamn pit bull and attacking someone else. I think Nancy is either a bad liar, delusional, or knows her husband is sleeping around but doesn’t care. Are they swingers? Nah….if they were, then Nancy wouldn’t be in court today. I mean, unless they started out as swingers and Nancy was getting left out of the threesomes then became jealous. I mean, look at her. LOL. I mean Sheri isn’t all that, but she’s a hell of a lot better looking than Nancy. At least Sheri isn’t fuckin cosplaying as Sherlock Holmes.

JJ wants to know what the messages stated on Facebook. Nancy, again, reverts to politician mode and keeps saying “I don’t recall”. Since JJ isn’t going to get anything out of Mrs. Columbo, she asks Sheri what the FB message stated. Sheri states that she asked if Nancy and Desean were married, as Sheri wanted to get to the bottom of the whole ordeal. Sheri states that she told Nancy that they were romantically involved and had been seeing each other for the past few months. Nancy responded to the FB message by saying that Nancy knows who she is as she is the one who picks up Desean in the morning and if she drives a burgundy car. Sheri told her yes. The two had an entire conversation revolving around Desean.

Sheri states that she took the photos she and Desean had up together down from FB at Nancy’s request. JJ asks Nancy if that refreshes her recollection, with Nancy admitting that it does. This is when Nancy starts giving all sorts of attitude and acting like her shit doesn’t stink. It’s your husband who was stepping out on you. You should be mad at him, not Sheri The Nurse.  JJ even begins to tell Nancy this, with Nancy acting like she is hot to trot.

Sheri claims that she confronted Desean on him being married with him showing her proof of his tax returns that he filed single. The audience giggles a bit at this (take two shots!). JJ surmises that this is not the first time that Desean has cheated, it’s just the first time he got caught. JJ tricks Nancy into revealing how they file, with Nancy stating that they file separately. Are they even married? I mean, they can’t be married for tax breaks, clearly. Are they married for the financial benefit of two incomes? Come to think of it, Nancy never claimed that she worked. I don’t even think Desean loves her, with him sitting over there looking like a playa, and Nancy turning a blind eye to all of her husband’s BS. If I don’t text Djamilla back within an hour, there’s absolute hell to pay. I get it, everyone’s marriage is different, but you’ll bet a dollar to a fuckin donut, I’m filing my taxes jointly to get all the tax breaks that I can.

Meanwhile, JJ is lecturing Nancy on her turning a blind eye to her husband’s wandering eye. LOL. She is going in on Nancy, with Nancy just sitting there stonefaced. She is not even bothered by any of this. Sheri also lets in on the little fact that Desean told her that Nancy was some crazy stalker lady who wouldn’t leave him alone. LOL!!! Take a shot for that. Sheri also says that Nancy sent her a copy of the marriage certificate at her request. She couldn’t see the signatures on it. Sheri wanted a meeting between the three of them so she could get to the bottom of it, as she is not a homewrecker and doesn’t want to be identified as one. Sheri claims that this was all on a phone she doesn’t have anymore (take a shot!). Sheri had Nancy’s phone number. When Sheri showed Desean the photo of the marriage license, he said that anyone can make those up online. LMAO!!! Desean is a playa, man. He played Sheri like a damn game.

Sheri again reiterates that Desean claimed that Nancy was an ex-girlfriend who was miserable and wanted Desean to be miserable. After all, misery wants company, right? Sheri states that she never got to meet with the both of them in the same room. Sheri states that in February, she was on medical leave and that’s when she spotted Nancy. Nancy walked up to her car. I bet Nancy was wearing that weird investigative journalist outfit as if she were on the trail of Buffalo Bill/Jame Gumb. Sheri states that the conversation led to Nancy confirming and denying some things and that Desean had lied about going back into the military (he does look like he came out of the Army). Nancy and Desean have been married since 2009. Sheri states that her daughter was in the car at the time and that Nancy claimed that Desean was not going to stop bother her.

Yo, no BS, I can see Nancy outside on a dreary February evening with mist and fog obscuring the parking lot, with her damn The Equalizer overcoat on, smoking a cigarette, telling Sheri all there was to know about Desean. I mean, after all, didn’t the inkling of them being married cross into Sheri’s mind at that point?

Nancy claims she didn’t recall the conversation like that. She said that Sheri called her to meet with her at the job. She does give credit to Sheri that Sheri’s daughter was in the car. JJ then states: “Don’t look down! Look at me!” (take a shot!). JJ wants to know what the conversation was, not what it was not. Nancy is having memory issues all over the place. JJ then tells Nancy again what she remembers, not what she doesn’t remember. Nancy states that she just remembers talking to Sheri and that is all. Okay…talking to her about what? JJ loses patience with Nancy and states “I got it! I got it! I got it!”

After the commercial break (with another ‘The General’ commercial with Shaq (take a shot!)), we get back to the case.

JJ wants to know what happened on March 22nd. Sheri begins to tell the tale about how she was texting Desean earlier in the day. She was going to be in area and asked Desean if he has a ride home. Desean stated that he did need a ride home. Sheri claims that she got done with her appointment early and went to the medical office. That’s where she spotted Nancy’s car. I think Nancy drives a 1988 Mercury Sable Station Wagon. I’m going to be honest. Sheri claims that she pulled to the back where everyone clocks in and out. Sheri texted Desean, stating that Nancy is there and why did he text her asking for a ride if Nancy was already there. He did respond to poor Sheri, stating that he was in the front of the building. When Sheri pulled up to the front, Desean claimed that he was at the bank across the street. Before this, however, Nancy was screaming at Desean as Sheri listened in. She knows this, because she could hear Nancy call Desean “Carlos”. Sheri tried to remove herself from the situation, but then an angry, bloated, pissed-off Nancy pulled up to her, their vehicles facing different directions. That’s when Nancy just went apeshit.

Nancy got out of her car (probably dressed in some sort of Robert Stack/Agent Mulder overcoat), walked over to Sheri’s car, and began laying the smackdown on her ass. Nancy grabbed her by Sheri’s shirt, scratching her in the process, then pinned her down in the passenger seat, and started beating her face in. This was all through the window as Sheri was still buckled into her seatbelt. As Sheri is giving testimony, the audience murmurs in shock (take a shot!). Sheri claims that she was able to put her car in reverse to get away.

After yet another commercial break, we cut back to the case.

Sheri happily hands her medical records over to JJ via Officer Byrd. She asks if JJ would also like the pictures to go along with that, which JJ says “Mhm”, while giving a stank eye to Nancy. I don’t think JJ is mad at this point, but clearly disappointed in Nancy’s behavior that day. Meanwhile, Nancy isn’t fazed at all by her actions. It’s almost like she has Stockholm Syndrome or something. We see that Sheri’s medical bills total 3k.

JJ asks for Nancy’s side of the story. Nancy begins by remembering the date. JJ tries to make fun of Nancy by stating that Nancy remembers the date she beat Sheri’s ass, but not the date that she had the convo with Sheri while Sheri’s daughter was in the car. Nancy is now portraying some arrogant attitude for no reason. I guess because Desean “Carlos” is in her corner or something. Like she won something. That dude is a fuckin playa.

Nancy states that Desean asked her to come pick her up, but he wasn’t ready, and that their daughter lives up the street from the medical office. Desean then texted Nancy to come back to pick him up, so Nancy turned around to come back to the medical office. This is when Nancy and Sheri allegedly have a verbal altercation. Nancy claimed that Sheri “hit me with her car”, which I doubt. If Sheri hit Nancy with her car, that car would have folded like fuckin tin foil. Sheri burst out laughing on that, too (take a shot for Sheri laughing hard, then take another shot for Sheri apologizing to JJ for it). Nancy states she fell down (which would have left a crater in that parking lot, so I don’t believe her on that, either), and she states that she defended herself.  Then Nancy has the audacity to claim that it’s not her fault that Sheri can’t fight. The audience again, erupts into uproarious laughter (take two shots!).

JJ then lays into Nancy for what seems like an eternity, telling her that Desean is the piece of trash and that she’s stupid for attacking Sheri when she should have attacked Desean. Nancy is not moved by any portion of JJ’s lecture. Meanwhile, the crowd is giggling at Nancy’s stupidity (take a shot!). JJ even reiterates to Nancy that her husband referred to his own wife as some crazy, ex-girlfriend  stalker who was trying to make his life miserable. JJ then calls Nancy an idiot before awarding the plaintiff $5000.

During the Hall-Ter-View, Nancy continues to lie (take a shot!) and defend her denial. Meanwhile, Sheri is stating that Desean is a scumbag and a piece of trash. Sheri says that Desean is the one who pursued her for 6-9 months. Nancy also comes off a stupid as fuck, while Sheri just comes off as naïve and not very worldly.

Verdict: Plaintiff awarded $5000. FINISH YOUR DRINK!!!

Did Auntie Judy say anything fucked up to anyone?: {to Nancy}: “ Let me tell you something, Mrs. Marquez. He’s the piece of garbage. He’s the garbage. He’s the one who broke your vows. You have to pin the label of garbage on the right person. That’s him. Now, if you wanted to have an altercation, why don’t you have an altercation with him. You want to have an altercation with him, pack his bags, toss them out the window, and say adios! I don’t live with garbage who make a fool out of me. What are you starting with her for? He’s the liar. He’s the conman. He’s the cheat. Use your brains. You don’t think you’ll find another star like him? Trust me. Trust me. You can find another piece of garbage like that. They’re all over the place!”

/dead/!

[DjamillasMan]

On 11/24/2022 at 8:56 AM, Tom1mac2 said:

I am thankful for your hilarious recaps! 🍾

Thank you. I really appreciate that. I don't think I'm that funny at all. In fact, I believe quite the contrary. I'm glad you, and the rest of the JJ Family on here are enjoying these recaps. 

On 11/24/2022 at 11:07 AM, One Tough Cookie said:

/dead/!

LOL!!!

[Tom1mac2]

45 minutes ago, DjamillasMan said:

Thank you. I really appreciate that. I don't think I'm that funny at all. In fact, I believe quite the contrary. I'm glad you, and the rest of the JJ Family on here are enjoying these recaps. 

LOL!!!

You are more than welcome!  I truly meant it, and please keep them coming🤗🤗🤗.

[One Tough Cookie]

well, couldn't sleep last nite wand  watched a few more  episode  . The editors must have combed thru various epis and decided one entire show-was dedicated to, how can I say it--rather large women,one who made me rethink my use of leopard print as  a fashion choice

And the woman whose brother trashed her car/  i wouldn't given her one thin dime as she was driving without insurance.  Clean hands didn't apply there?

Edited November 26, 2022 by One Tough Cookie

[DjamillasMan]

***Hey JJ Family!! I hope you all had a wonderful Thanksgiving holiday! Djamilla is making blue crabs tonight and texted everyone and their mother (literally and figuratively), so everyone is coming back over to the house tonight. Smh. I had to cut this one short as well. Grab your favorite drink and LET'S GOOOOOOO!* 

Back Kicking a Toddler?! (2013)

“I considered him not a tenant, your honor, but a lodger, because we were also living in the home.” –Jillian Delgado

Plaintiff: Timothy McCarty from Los Angeles, CA. Tim comes into court wearing a suit that he picked up at Belk. Tim is a 47 year old man who has no place to go and is suffering from severe arrested development issues. He has two kids, both of which are homeless because of his said issues. Tim is in the medicinal marijuana business, but also collects welfare. He is accused of assaulting not only the Defendant, but also her two year old daughter. Tim kinda looks like a sleazy guy, like a ‘70s porn director or something. He has known the defendants for quite some time.

Defendant(s): Jillian and Salvador Delgado from North Hills, CA. Jillian is a full on drama queen. She is wearing some cute glasses and a pantsuit from Penney's. Sal is wearing a burgundy dress shirt and tie straight off the rack at Ross. Jillian insists that she had the right to throw Tim out of the house, even though he’s a paying tenant and was current on his rent. Sal, meanwhile, comes across a bully and a thug. Jillian also recorded her altercation with Tim earlier in the day so that she can let Sal hear it later, probably as an attempt to get Sal all riled up so he could kick Tim’s ass. Something about Sal strikes me as a violent mechanic/mechanic’s apprentice. Jillian does not like it when you go into her fridge and toss out moldy food, as apparently, this is what kicked the whole “back kicking” incident off. Jillian looks sullen, with her crying on cue at each appropriate opportunity. She thinks Tim is a mooch

The Complaint: Tim is up in court suing for the return of a deposit, storage fees, and damages from an assault.

What Does He/She want: Tim wants $5000 from the court. If he gets it, we have to down the entire drink!

Countersuit?: Yes. The Delgados want cash (it's never specified how much) for Tim back kicking their toddler and a broken door.  

Puppy Multiplier: N/A

Driving Around Without Insurance: N/A

What Went Down: JJ kicks this one off by going over the background of the case. That Tim rented a room from the Defendants. Tim explains that he has known the Delgados for about 13 years. He moved into the residence on July 21st, but only stayed there for 3 weeks. After the altercation, he moved out. Tim was only being charged $300 a month for his room, but the Delgados also asked him for a deposit, which was also $300. Jeez, all of that just to get a room? $600 for a room? He could have rented an apartment with a $300 security deposit.

Tim said that he didn’t pay the $300 security deposit, just the monthly rent (I stand corrected). JJ then gets a bit annoyed at him, barking that his complaint stated something about a security deposit. Tim corrects himself and states that that was most likely a misunderstanding. JJ, who doesn’t like being lied to, chastises Tim. She says that English is her primary language and gathers that it’s Tim’s primary language. Tim agrees that it is. JJ gets frustrated and says that Tim lived there for three weeks, paid his $300, but didn’t give a security deposit, so he’s not entitled to that back. JJ asks what does Tim want from the Delgados.

Tim says that he was also seeking punitive damages for his children and him being homeless for a few months. JJ counters that and states that Tim shouldn’t put his children in that sort of situation. I agree with that. Tim should have, at that point, relinquished the children back to their mother since his situation was so dire. You don’t do that to your children. I would rather walk through broken glass barefoot with a double handed sword up my ass before I see any of my kids suffer like that because of a mistake I made. Fuck all that noise.

JJ then asks how old Tim is. Tim mentions that he’s 47 years old. JJ makes fun of Tim by saying if he’s 47, then he should be in control of his own life, not out here bouncing from place to place. He should at least be stable enough to have his own shit sorted out. Again, I agree. JJ dismisses Tim’s bullshit and goes to the Delgados for their countersuit.

The Delgados claim on the night of the altercation, that Mr. McCarty broke their door. Jillian states that the night of the confrontation took place on August 11th, 2013. Jillian looks like she’s trying to think of something that is going to make her cry. I can tell. She looks like she’s plotting some big dramatic breakdown, which we’ll see in a bit.

It all started by Tim disposing of rotten food in the fridge (which will stink up a house something terrible), and Jillian got pissed off about it. Instead of, you know, going through the food and seeing what can be salvaged and what can be thrown out, it seems this pushed Jill over the edge. JJ exclaims that this created a big “brouhaha” (take a shot!). JJ says that it reached a boiling point to where Tim was pushed out of the residence. Jillian denies this. Jillian states that Tim was momentarily outside on the phone. That’s when Jill locked the door. Tim’s kids were upstairs in the shower at the time. I’ll be damned if someone locks me out of their house with my children still in the house. I’d go the fuck off, too.

Jillian changes her story and claims that she locked the door after Tim assaulted her and her daughter. JJ wants to hear Jillian’s version of how Tim assaulted Jillian and her child. Jillian claims that on the morning of August 11th, both she and Sal explained to Tim that the situation was no longer sustainable and they wanted him to pack his bags and roll. I mean, Tim was already a paying tenant by then, so he couldn’t leave that day, or so you would think. JJ brings this up to Jillian, but Jillian, who is super headstrong or hardheaded as fuck, says that Tim had violated the rules of the home, thus his need to vacate the residence immediately.

LOL. Oh, Jillian. You don’t know shit about landlord/tenant law. LOL.

You cannot just kick someone who is paying rent out. You have to move to evict that person through the courts. That’s why some people take advantage of that and become squatters. Yeah, they’ll get kicked out eventually, but you cannot remove them in the month that they paid rent. You also have to give them notice that the lease is being terminated. The Delgados should have never tried to be landlords.

JJ then gives Jillian a dressing down on landlord/tenant law. Jillian, ever defiant, claims that she doesn’t need to give Tim a 30 day notice. JJ gets pissed from that comment and again lectures Jillian on how landlord/tenant relationships work. JJ states that the moment Jillian accepted Tim’s rent, she became a landlord. Jillian just starts doing the ‘bobblehead’ while JJ is explaining this to her (take a shot!).

Jillian claims that Tim says that he wasn’t leaving, which JJ interjects and states that that’s Tim’s right. Jillian then begins to say that she asked Tim how much time did he need to get his shit together. JJ queries were they talking hours, days, or months for Tim to vacate. Jillian states days. Jillian says that her two children were standing next to her. Jillian then tries to fix her story (most likely from JJ admonishing her lack of knowledge on how to be a landlord), stating that she asked Tim how much time did he need. JJ immediately spots this and tells Jillian that she didn’t say that. She then asks Tim if Jillian said that to him (take a shot!). Tim denies Jillian ever said that to him. Jillian says that during this conversation, Tim was still standing outside. JJ asks why didn’t Jillian let Tim in. Jill states that she needed to have a conversation with Tim. JJ cuts her off by saying “No, no, no, no, no! You can’t keep him outside. That’s his home!” Sal is over there crossing his arms. JJ spots this and tells Sal to uncross his arms (take two shots!). Sal does as he is told, while chuckling a bit.

Jill says that she considered Tim a ‘lodger’ since he was living in their home. Um….since when has anyone used the word “lodger” in this century? LOL. No, Jillian, you stupid woman. You had a tenant. Arguably, Tim could be considered a roommate. Jillian, you were not running an inn, lady, this was a private residence. Stupid lady.

Moving on, JJ is still battling with Jillian on what the definition of tenant means. I can’t believe she has to explain this to a grown woman. JJ ends the debate by saying “Unless you go to a school that tells you you’re right…” and Jillian shuts up about it, taking the L (take a shot! JJ implied that Jillian hasn’t been to law school). Since things aren’t going the way Jillian wants them to go, she tries a new tactic (KAREN ALERT! Take a shot!). Jillian makes mention that she didn’t feel comfortable with Tim in the home until Sal got back home. While she’s saying this, she looks up at Sal with adoring eyes. JJ rebuts this by saying that her comfort is irrelevant (take a shot! JJ doesn’t care how you feel!) . JJ again states that Tim paid rent and he has a right to access the home. Why do I feel like I’m on Groundhog Day with Bill Murray? Jillian is fuckin so hardheaded, bro. If Jillian’s brains were ink, she couldn’t even dot an i. I think Jill and Sal share a brain. Apparently, the brain is on vacation this day. Tim’s not so bright, either, but he stayed well within the law.

JJ says at some point, Jillian started to record the conversation. Clearly, this segment was taped in either the early morning, or around early afternoon, as we see JJ sipping on a cup of coffee (take two shots!). JJ wants to know why Jill recorded the conversation. At first, Jillian says it is so her husband can listen to it later on. JJ, not being satisfied with that answer, asks why again. Jillian then starts dishing the dirt on Tim, with him being a mooch, angry, and living off the system. She states that Tim is very manipulative. Personally, I think you both are very manipulative.

JJ then turns her attention back to Tim, asking him where he got the money from rent. Tim answers ‘Um’ at first. JJ says that “Um is not an answer!” (take a shot!). Tim then states that it was the returned deposit from another place that he had in the amount of $1500. JJ wants to know where he got that. Tim claims that is from work. JJ wants to know what kinda work he does. Tim says that he works for the ‘California Correctives’. JJ asks what that is. He states that it’s ‘medical collectives’. JJ, on the verge of losing her patience with him, asks him to explain that to her. Tim finally relents and tells her that he works in the medicinal marijuana business. Jesus, Tim, was that so hard? Take a shot for Tim being a dumbass, too.

I don’t know about you guys, but I have asked my doctor repeatedly for medicinal marijuana for my migraines. I don’t like the crap that they give me now (which has side effects that overpower the migraine, such as drowsiness, nausea, lightheadedness, dizziness, isolation, and can be highly, highly addictive) for my migraines, and I noticed that marijuana will just knock the migraine out completely, and I’m feeling much, much better afterwards. JJ scolds Tim for being so bashful and tells him to get the name of the company out there. She then just shakes her head (take a shot!). Meanwhile, Tim is all smiles and is acting all lighthearted. I still think he’s creepy.

JJ asks Tim if he gets any welfare from the state of California. He answers with “Um”, to which JJ states “Um? It’s either a yes or a no!” (take a shot!). Tim admits that he gets food stamps, and JJ tells him that that’s welfare. Tim just says “Yeah”. Tim also admits that he gets GR, which JJ quickly surmises is ‘General Relief’, which is also welfare. She admonishes Tim that he should just call a spade a spade. She makes it a point to say that even if he calls it ‘ballet lessons’, it’s still welfare at the end of the day.

Tim states that he gets $175 cash and $200 for food. JJ asks what else he gets for the children. He begins with “Um”, and JJ again says “Um is not an answer” (take a two shots now, because it’s starting to rack up). Tim states he receives nothing for the children because they are under the mother. He doesn’t claim them on anything. He claims that the mother and he have joint custody, but he doesn’t claim them for aid. Tim is a real fuckin prize.

After JJ is done fuckin with Tim, she turns her attention back to Jill and Sal. She wants to know about the broken door. Jill claims that she locked the door while Tim was on the phone with the police while his children were upstairs in the shower. She states that he told the police that Jillian had assaulted him. JJ asks if she or daughter go to the hospital on the evening of August 11th, 2013. Jill denies both. Jillian then says that she filed a police report, however. Then she tries to hand JJ a novel (take two shots!). JJ says she only wants to see the police report.  The police report is so smudged and had been written over so many times, I’m shocked that JJ didn’t call it a fake right then and there. Jillian claims that she can read it. Jillian says that she can’t read it, which JJ all but tells her “Yeah, I know you can’t!”

After a commercial break (that had not one, but two Life Alert commercials (take a shot!)), we cut back to the case.

JJ wants to know how Tim assaulted Jillian. She advises Jill to tell her fast, as she has other things to do today. It must be sushi day (so take a shot for that!) and we all know that JJ loves her sushi.

Jillian begins her first real testimony here, as she describes that Tim claimed that he would never be leaving. She then threatened that the police or their attorney (LOL. Like you guys have a personal attorney at your beck and call. Please) would kick him out. Jillian then says something about how many days that Tim needed to get his shit together. God, this case just keeps spinning its tires. JJ claims that she can guarantee that she won’t hear the word “days” on that tape that Jillian insists that JJ listen to. Jill states that she hasn’t ever heard the tape because it’s “hard for me to listen to”. Okay, then don’t make claims to things that you haven’t fact checked yourself. Gah! Both of these litigants are so dumb, I’m totally neutral at this point.

Jillian claimed that Tim lost his shit and grabbed her by the wrists and entered her home. She says that he was kicking her at her feet (was he trying to do a Jean-Claude Van Dam sweep or something?) while also trying to bring her down to ground. That’s when he “back kicked” her two year old. JJ wants to know what Jillian means by Tim performing a “back kick”.

I mean, it’s funny, but it’s not, as a child could have been seriously injured (apparently not, since Jillian couldn’t be assed to take her child to the hospital that evening), but I just see Tim summoning the spirit of Steven Seagal and back kicking her child like this is Marked for Death.

JJ is incredulous, stating that she doesn’t understand how he had Jillian by the wrists, flinging her around the living room, and then had the presence of mind to back kick the child. Jill says that the child was behind Tim, trying to “get to her mommy”, and that’s when Jill warned Tim about her daughter. She claims that Tim said “This is not about your fuckin daughter!” then put his foot back and kicked the child. That’s not a “back kick”. That’s more or less a mule kick.

JJ asks Tim if he did that. He adamantly denies this. JJ asks if she listens to the tape, will she hear that. Tim says that the child reached around his leg and he just shook the child off, while being assaulted, and then picked the child up after the child fell and said “Awww….sweetie!”. Either way, both parties are in the wrong.

After the commercial break, we cut back to the case.

We actually hear the tape (take two shots since a tape is played in court!). JJ says that Jill made mention that Tim was not welcome in the house. The tape sounds like fuckin anxiety and craziness, with Tim and Jill arguing in the beginning, and then Jill loses her fuckin shit and starts screaming fuckin bloody murder while a baby is crying in the background. Tim is going off, Jillian is going off (while screaming her head off), and a child just losing its mind in the background. Jillian pulls out her best daytime soap opera performance and begins crying on cue here. Sal tries to comfort her as Jill turns the tape off.

JJ advises Jill that Jill has two problems; that Tim behaved badly that day (that’s an understatement), and that Jill lied to her. She lied to JJ because Jill never asked Tim how much time he needed to get his ducks in a row to leave, although Jill stated that multiple times. So both are in the absolute wrong no matter how you slice it. Tim’s a piece of shit for kicking a kid and also for having his children suffer because of his boneheaded mistakes, while Jillian is a piece of shit for lying and acting all dramatic.

Sal then starts to interrupt JJ during her lecture, with JJ screaming “Listen to ME!” (take a shot!). Then she says “Mr. Delgado, I’m speaking!” (take a shot!).  Sal really wants to get his point across, but JJ is preventing him from doing such. She starts lecturing Sal on the fact that he only wanted to hear the tape to give him ammunition to attack Tim.

After yet another commercial break (this one featuring a commercial for ‘The Cleaning Lady’ (which I have never seen, but people tell me is okay, and a commercial for WBFF investigating some recent developments in a case from 1995), we get back to the episode.

JJ is still going in on Sal. She’s telling Sal that his wife should have went outside and called 911, even though the 5-0 would have sided with Tim, at least it would have been documented. Tim would have still had to have been let into the house. This is why I don’t invite people to come live with me. Tim starts to say something, but JJ silences him and says that Tim could have had a discussion with Sal when he came home (which, I think Tim did say on the tape; that he wanted to talk to Sal), and sorted things out from there. JJ tells Sal what his wife did was wrong. She excluded him while Tim’s children were upstairs. JJ states that their complaint says they want damages for a broken door. JJ then goes in on The Delgados and Tim for a bit before she dismisses the case.

During the Hall-Ter-View, Tim explains that all he did was throw away moldy food, which caused Jillian to flip out. Jillian, meanwhile, doubles down on her shit, claiming that Tim touched her shit, which she didn’t appreciate. Jillian didn’t want to be disrespected by someone who was a stranger in their home. I can get what Jillian was saying, however, I think I would be appreciative if someone threw out moldy food in my refrigerator. I mean, that’s just common sense. I don’t want a case of botulism or e-Coli. Simple as that. I didn’t have any dog in this fight in this case, as I think all three of them were idiots.

Verdict: Plaintiff and Defendants suits were dismissed. Neither party gets anything.

This was a hard choice:

Did Auntie Judy say anything fucked up to anyone?: {to Tim}: “ You lived there for most of the month. And I think this was handled wrong by the both of you. I suggest you not rent rooms to anyone anymore because you don’t understand what your responsibility is as a landlord. I would suggest to you, sir, at the age of 47, you can wear a suit and a tie to court, you should be in a position to get an apartment for your two children-with whom you share custody with their mother. So go out there and get yourself a good job!”

*Edit* : I must have really been in a rush when I wrote this. Those blue crabs were calling my name. I had to go back and edit this a bit. 

Edited November 26, 2022 by DjamillasMan

[One Tough Cookie]

On 11/16/2022 at 5:59 PM, CrazyInAlabama said:

Defendant should have tried eternity band on before buying. 

Plaintiff and defendant cases dismissed.

Didn't JJ look at the ring and had said it wasn't that bad?  From her that's high praise!

[CrazyInAlabama]

22 hours ago, One Tough Cookie said:

Didn't JJ look at the ring and had said it wasn't that bad?  From her that's high praise!

Yes, JJ said it looks like the ring had a lot of metal on the band, to hold the diamonds securely.   I'm sure JJ buys bigger diamonds, so less metal, and she said her band was smoother.  

4 p.m. episodes-

First (2014)-

Low Income or No Income? -Plaintiff /childcare Veronica Lomeli suing defendant Blanca Fermandez for childcare fees.   Defendant was supposed to fill out forms so state would pay plaintiff for the childcare.  State payments were supposed to be $22 an hour ($11 an hour for the two children), but defendant says she offered $50 a week.  (This was in Fillmore, California)

Plaintiff is not a friend or relative, and the only relationship with defendant was the childcare agreement.   Defendant says the $22 an hour for the two kids was a theoretical discussion with plaintiff’s mother, and not a promise to apply.    Defendant claims she filled out paperwork in May, and plaintiff babysat for eight weeks.  

Since defendant was working as a housecleaner, for cash.   She didn’t qualify for state help, because she had no reported income, so no subsidy to provide childcare for workers. 

Defendant said she would pay plaintiff $14 an hour.   She didn’t pay that again.   Since the $14 an hour was only for one week, that’s all plaintiff will receive for four days.

JJ would pay plaintiff for the one week, but she’s unable to figure out how many hours she took care of the two kids.   Plus, plaintiff should have pulled the plug after the first week.

Plaintiff case dismissed.

Tenant in the Hot Seat! -Plaintiff/landlord Marie Palacio (Vaziri) suing defendant/former tenant Odis Roquemore for unpaid rent for seven months, and cost to change the locks.  Signed lease was for one year, but tenant only stayed there for seven months.   (Why is defendant calling plaintiff Mrs. Vaziri? Or was that the previous rental owner).

Defendant, wife and four kids moved into the rental property, and never paid a penny.    Defendant claims the house was uninhabitable, because they had no air conditioning, but he moved in November, so unless he was very far south, that would have been a problem of no heat by then.  (This is in Bakersfield, CA).   House had a swamp cooler, and water, and everything was turned on when defendant moved in.  

Defendant is complaining about the swamp cooler (evaporative cooler), blowing dirt.  I lived with a swamp cooler for 10 years, the blowing crud happens for a day or so, no matter how clean the ducts are. 

Defendant says some government agency approved work on rental by him.  

Defendant is a gas station attendant, wife is stay at home mom to their four adopted children, and state pays for all four children. (children are siblings, and the state money is the primary income for the home).

Defendant claims the heater was red tagged by the gas company, and the agency refused to let them keep living there.     

 However, defendant has no proof of the red tag, or anything else.    So, how did the state agency allow them to live in an un-airconditioned home for seven months?   Defendant says he was relying on his witnesses, but they didn’t come to court.  The red tag for the furnace wouldn’t have had anything to do with the swamp cooler.

Plaintiff gets $4,400.

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 stoned.        Plaintiff pays $400 a month to leasor, 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)-

Bed bugs roaches and mold? -Plaintiff /mother landlord Lori Lambert suing defendant/daughter former tenant/ Amy Fruth for damages to her rental home.    Litigants are mother and daughter, house was rented from 2014 to 2017.   $900 a month was rent. 

Defendant moved to Kentucky, but refuses to say where, so the caption person says what city is, Madisonville,KY. Defendant says her former roommates, Edith and Eric were renters from mother after defendant moved out.    So, residents were defendant, husband, two kids, and Erick and Edith.    After defendant moved out, utilities were shut off.  Defendant claims there were bedbugs and roaches in the house, so she stayed for three years.  

Plaintiff says daughter moved out, but the roommates didn’t take over the lease.   Plaintiff says she didn’t know roommates were moving in, until well after.   Plaintiff was told by daughter that there was a family emergency, and that’s why daughter moved to Kentucky, and never returned.

Plaintiff realized daughter wasn’t moving back, so she contacted the roommates, and told them to get their stuff out.   Plaintiff claims a U-Haul was at the house, and daughter claimed she picked up everything.    When plaintiff went to the house, there were eight dogs in the house, and the next day she was going to call animal control, but the roommate came and picked up the dogs.  

Defendant claims she left everything behind, including the dogs for Edith.    The giant open construction dumpster is full of furniture. 

JJ will pay the exterminator’s bill, dumpster,

$806 to plaintiff.

Hit and Run Payback -Plaintiff Narkyssa Haskel suing defendant/her child’s father D’Shawn Joseph for rent, property damage and a totaled car.   Litigants were co-signers on plaintiff’s car, a Chevy Volt.     Police report says the reports say accident was a hit-and-run, and not defendant’s fault.   Defendant was driving with plaintiff’s permission, and car was insured.

Plaintiff wants the remainder on the car, so she didn’t have gap insurance?   Plaintiff moved out of the apartment they shared, and defendant couldn’t afford it but didn’t move out.

Defendant didn’t pay for two months, rent has gone into collections and plaintiff paid it off.

$1600.78 to plaintiff for the apartment rent.

Second (2017)-

Boss Steals Worker’s Car?! -Plaintiff /car buyer Ellamae Perez is suing defendant/car seller and former boss Larry McDonald for repossessing the car he was selling to her.   Defendant was her boss at a check cashing place, and plaintiff worked there.   Plaintiff claims all of her evidence was left in the car when it was repo’d.    Plaintiff claims she had an emergency, and couldn’t pay one month, December.   In January she paid $200, agreement was $100 per payday, so $200 or $300 in payments a month.   Defendant says plaintiff six payments behind.   (This was in Sacramento, CA).

Defendant says everything in the Jeep when it was repo’d, was given back to plaintiff.   Also, defendant says her insurance was cancelled and reinstate four different time.   Defendant told plaintiff he took the car, and when car disappeared, plaintiff reported car stolen, so it was impounded.   No impound fees for defendant, due to lack of notice.  Defendant told plaintiff after he repo’d the car,   Defendant was going to be fired right after the repo, and defendant knew that. 

Plaintiff case dismissed, she was behind on payments, so repo was justified.

Defendant is trying to show the damages to car while plaintiff had it.

Defendant told to use the $2500 deposit to fix the Jeep.   Plaintiff case dismissed.

Gimme Back My Camera -Plaintiff/professional photographer and former fiance/ Nadine Englund suing defendant   /former fiance Jonathan Kingsmore for return of a camera she loaned him.   

Plaintiff gave defendant an old 2010 Canon she had, and was going to train him on the Nikon, but he left first.   He took the Nikon, extra chips, and all of the lenses and accessories, and never returned them to the plaintiff.  Defendant claims the very expensive camera was a gift to him. Plaintiff loaned defendant  her expensive professional camera, 2006 Nikon, she uses for her business, to take family pictures at Christmas, and he reunited with the wife, and never returned her expensive camera.  

So, defendant went home for Christmas, and never came back to fiance/girlfriend.

I wonder if the defendant’s ex-wife, was really an ex? 

Officer Byrd exchanges the old camera, and the expensive camera between litigants.   

Defendant wants a lawnmower back, travel grill, stereo and surround sound,   However, defendant’s only lawn to mow is at plaintiff’s house.   Defendant wants his rent back.

Plaintiff gets the Nikon back, and defendant doesn’t want his property back, so defendant claim dismissed.   Defendant only wanted the money, not the property.

Edited November 29, 2022 by CrazyInAlabama

[CrazyInAlabama]

4 p.m. episodes-

First (2014)-

Judge Judy’s Lessons in Dentistry! –Plaintiff/Charessa Hahn (ex-girlfriend) and (her mother) Patricia Randolph  are suing  defendant/ex  Vincent Taylor for $828 for a dental procedure.  Defendant moved in with plaintiffs, he had a painful nerve and dental pain, and plaintiff Hahn asked her mother for a loan for defendant’s dental work.    Plaintiffs were in the room with defendant, and Hahn was signing with her mother about Taylor’s tooth pain.    For repayment for an emergency root canal.  Defendant denies he asked for money for the procedure, and owes nothing. This all happened in Vancouver, WA.  He went to Gentle Dental.

Defendant testifies that he’s lived with this pain on other teeth for a long time, so it wasn’t an emergency.   He also said that he just wanted to have the tooth pulled.   

Mother testifies she used the relay operator (mother is hearing impaired) to communicate with the dentist office, and they set her up with Care Credit.     Defendant was supposed to pay plaintiff mother back, but as always, they never did.   Defendant wasn’t even paying rent.  There was no expectation of repayment by defendant.

Plaintiff case dismissed, no expectation of repayment.  JJ is not right, depending on the nutrition you had, the water minerals, and other factors, your bad teeth may not really be your fault.

Vincent the Loser is counter suing for harassment. 

Vincent says Hahn wasn’t his girlfriend, but they only hooked up, and then he got another girlfriend.

Plaintiff and defendant cases dismissed.    (I don’t believe that the tooth was too small to pull).

Rottweiler Puppy Hit by Car! -Plaintiff/dog owner Malinda Cole and boyfriend Antoine Jackson are  suing defendant/former friend Ronette Vivier, for vet bills and pain and suffering,  for defendant leaving the house door open, and the puppy got out and was hit by a car.  Defendant goes to plaintiff’s home for hair care services, this day it was a perm.  Plaintiff doesn’t charge, it’s mostly for friends, and for barter.

Plaintiff Cole says when defendant went outside to smoke, the she let the two dogs got out.   One dog barely survived with lots of vet care, and the other dog died.  Defendant says she went outside, dogs broke through outside door, and were hit by a car.

(Defendant has the worse case of chapped lips I’ve ever seen. It looks painful).

Plaintiff says defendant asked if she should put the dogs out, plaintiff says put them in the backyard, but didn’t.  Defendant says the dogs got out, but she didn't do it.   The dogs were 10 month old Rottweilers, so very large puppies. 

Plaintiff case dismissed. 

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)-

Show Me the Damage-Plaintiff Dana Hamlett is suing a commercial property neighbor, Geoff Kaiser, for damages to his building from water coming from defendant's building.   Defendant's building was his father, the dentist's, and defendant inherited, and rents to a dentist now.  Plaintiff purchased his building (attached to defendant) for a future salon for wife and daughter, but never opened a business there, or leased it.  Plaintiff pays $3,000 in property taxes, and is behind.    Plaintiff claims damage to the building exceed $5,000, but JJ suspects fraud, by plaintiff.  

Plaintiff building is for sale, but never has sold.   Plaintiff bought building "as is" in 2014, for $40k.  He also reroofed in 2014, right after buying the building, so is water damage left over from roof leaks?    Plaintiff's witness is the wife, no contractor is present.    There are no photos of building on purchase, so no way to establish damages since then.   

Plaintiff is suing defendant about address conflict between buildings, in another court.   Plaintiff claims defendant's downspout water caused the damage, but no damages are shown in the photos, except plaintiff dug a big hole in his own parking lot.   The interior photo of wet carpet could be coming from the roof of the building, or any where else, no proof it's the defendant's fault.   

Defendant says plaintiff's building was vacant at least two years before plaintiff purchased it, and ever since.   Defendant moved the downspout location in October 2017, after city told him too.  Plaintiff still wants more money for damages.   

Plaintiff case dismissed.   

Don’t Trust Five-Star Reviews!-Plaintiff contractor Samuel Szpak suing former client Erin Bookey, for non-payment of charges for work he did in her home.    There are actually two contracts, and a final invoice.    However, plaintiff's 'signed contract' isn't signed by defendant, so not a contract.   Plaintiff says he did $475 from the contract work, but not a great majority of what he was supposed to do.   Plaintiff only should get $75 for work, and $350 for materials.   

$75 for plaintiff (no proof of materials purchase).

Second (2017)-

Great Childhood Friends, Lousy Roommates-Plaintiff Tierra Bunkley moved in with defendant, Christian Butler, and mother Vonda Butler, rent free, but was supposed to pay utilities.     Then plaintiff moved her boyfriend in for three or four days a week, and then when plaintiff was asked to leave, and claims it was an illegal lockout.   Plaintiff wants $5k for moving costs, illegal lockout, and other garbage.   Defendant inherited a house from her father, and she invited plaintiff to move in, but pay expenses (utilities, taxes) but pay no rent.  Plaintiff was saving at least $400 a month by living with the defendant.     Plaintiff financed everything off of her student loans, bad idea.   Defendant wanted plaintiff's boyfriend to pay one-third, plaintiff one-third, and defendant one third of house taxes, and utilities. 

Plaintiff gets $6k for one semester, and $3k for the second semester, and that's how she paid the utilities.   Plaintiff was saving a bundle by not paying rent, but just utilities.    Plaintiff claims when she received the $6k check, she loaned defendant $500.   However, defendant says the $6k was deposited in her account, and plaintiff took all of the money out immediately.    Money was all from FAFSA, and other federal student loans.   Loan is actually a parent loan, and plaintiff's mother is on the hook for the loans.   

Plaintiff boyfriend stayed in home 4 or more days a week, and was never a paying tenant, and when defendant said boyfriend had to help pay the bills, the argument via text messages started.   Defendant wanted plaintiff's boyfriend to pay one-third of the bills, and instead plaintiff and loser boyfriend left.     

JJ says she won't pay motel and moving costs, or pain and suffering, and plaintiff says "she won't allow it".   I hope JJ takes the money back.   The $500 was for half of the house taxes, not a loan.   Defendants are suing for unpaid bills, and lock changing fees.  

Plaintiff gets $500 for the loan, which was actually, from her student loans.  $150 for her TV.   Plaintiff gets $650, minus $92 for utilities, equaling $558.  No pain and suffering for plaintiff, or for me either. 

Short Temper, Long Rap Sheet-Plaintiff Chanel Karnes suing ex-boyfriend Joshua Walker, for vandalizing her home and car.  After the break up, the plaintiff claims the defendant showed up at her house, and plaintiff wouldn't let him into her home (apparently next boyfriend was there).    Then plaintiff says defendant damaged her house door, bashed her windshield, and damaged a tire.  Defendant was arrested, and pled out the case, and took a plea for the windshield damages.     Defendant was sent to anger management, which didn't work.  

Defendant had other domestic violence, and gun cases before this case.   

Plaintiff gets $1,036 for the front door.

[CrazyInAlabama]

4 p.m. episodes-

First (2014)-

Who’s Scamming Who? -Plaintiff/former renter Cima Johnson and Asia Johnson (daughter) is suing defendant/landlord Joshua LaJoie for defendant and daughter renting apartment in their names, and then letting several other people live in the apartment.    Landlord says he never saw the plaintiff before, and she let her boyfriend, and multiple other people live in the apartment, but neither plaintiff or daughter lived in the apartment.  

(My guess is daughter, boyfriend and a cast of many people didn't have credit to rent the apartment, so the mother was guaranteeing rent.)

Defendant witness Chuck Sloan, lives below the apartment unit that defendant used to live in, and rented out.  He says he never saw plaintiff mother, only the daughter and many other people.  Sloan’s unit was water damaged by the plaintiff’s apartment.

Tenants didn’t pay the last month, and daughter wanted, the rent taken out of the deposit.  Deposit was   $1500 for security deposit, and $500 non-refundable pet deposit.  

Defendant says the defendant’s received just over $100, of security, after HOA charged $5,000 and $1000 plumbing issues.    JJ is being difficult, again proving she thinks landlords should make nothing

Daughter Asia Johnson’s  chest tattoo says “Don’t Need a Reason”     Daughter says some woman last name Fisher stayed for six weeks total.   And the daughter’s boyfriend lived there, and others too.

JJ says defendant shouldn’t have passed the premises until all of the bills came from the HOA.  However, then if the defendant had gone past the legal time to notify tenant of security deposit deductions, then JJ would have dismissed the claims against plaintiff and probably awarded multiples of the security.

$895 to the plaintiff.  The only good part of this, is the show pays the $895, and landlord keeps the entire security deposit. 

Illegal Dog Stud? -Plaintiff Patricia McGill is suing defendant/former friend, tenant, and dog groomer Martha Brunette for putting her dog out to stud, without plaintiff’s permission.  Plaintiff wants damages to the apartment, and stud fees. Plaintiff owns a Shih Tzu, and tenant/defendant was putting the dog out to stud without plaintiff’s permission.

Plaintiff owns rental property, and let defendant move into a rental unit out of friendship, and defendant also groomed the Shih Tzu, and watched dog sometimes.   Then, plaintiff ran into someone who mentioned their dog had puppies from plaintiff’s Shih Tzu stud. 

Defendant says plaintiff wanted her to stud the dog out, but only once, while plaintiff was out of town, and defendant was dog sitting.  That was for defendant to get $350 to pay plaintiff back rent.

Plaintiff says she denies ever giving permission to stud the dog out.

Plaintiff shows awful photos of damages to the apartment.   Defendant says she didn’t do any of the damages.

Defendant says she left everything behind and only had three days notice to move out.   

$350 to plaintiff for stud fees, and $2,000 for the damages.

Designated Driver Damage -Plaintiff/car owner Iris Brown suing defendant /designated driver and former friend Cherryl Brongil for car damages to two of plaintiff’s cars,  from hitting a curb and scraping the side of the car, after plaintiff was too drunk to drive, and asked defendant to drive.  First car is dismissed because it happened in 2011.

After first car accident plaintiff was in jail, then in 2014 the two reconnected, and that’s when the designated driver damage happened to the second car.

Plaintiff refuses to make a claim against her insurance.  

Plaintiff case dismissed.   

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 camper 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 defense. 

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-year’s 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)-

Ex-Heroin Addict Tire-Slashing Mother?  -Plaintiff Robert Quaas (some kind of ice guide, whatever that is) is suing former roommate Jennifer Urrutia SSMOT (Sainted Single Mother of Three children, the youngest is less than a year old) for slashing his tires, and disposing of his ice fishing equipment,   Defendant had her children living with her after the kids spent a year in foster care.    Defendant has mental health and physical issues, and receives SS disability, and a son also has SSDI.    Litigants lived in the same rental house, plaintiff rented a room, defendant, her boyfriend (father of her youngest child), and her children lived in the same home.   

Plaintiff paid $3,000 for the season (March to August) for rent, in cash, paid to defendant.  Plaintiff says defendant trashed all of his property when he moved out.  Plaintiff says his new place didn't have enough space for all of his property, so he left it behind.   In October, plaintiff turned the defendant into CPS, (however, he moved out in August), and says plaintiff is vindictive.  Plaintiff claims defendant abused her children while he lived in the rented room, but he didn't turn the audio tapes to CPS until August.  Defendant says CPS visited her home in August, but the tire slashing happened the first of October.

Defendant is receiving rent assistance, and two disability checks, but her live-in boyfriend claims she's paying her own way.  She also says her children were taken away because she was a heroin addict for years, but claims to be clean now.   There is some letter from a social worker saying what a nice person the defendant is.     Defendant has nothing saying when her case was opened, and closed.    

Defendant has a counter claim for plaintiff filing a false police report against her, and a CPS complaint.  Defendant also says she gets respite care where her problem child is sent outside the home to stay overnight, so defendant gets a break.

Plaintiff made a police report about the tires, but has no proof of who slashed the tires.   He claims some woman was paid by defendant to slash the tires.   

Everything dismissed. 

Used Car Exploitation   -Plaintiff Letitia Contreras is suing Edward Wyrick Sr, and his fiance, Lorina Alexander, over a 17-year-old car she sold them.    Plaintiff wants the full Blue Book price on car, but sold it for a lower price to defendants.    No one can agree on the exact price, or how much was paid on the car, and how much is left to be paid.   Defendants want the payments, and repair costs back.   Plaintiff claims the defendants have the car, but they say they don't.   TItle is in plaintiff's name.   Plaintiff claims car price was $1700, defendant claims $1500, and defendant claims he paid $1400.   So defendant either owe $100, or $300.     JJ has plaintiff sign title over to defendants.

JJ says they don't keep her here because she's gorgeous, and plaintiff says "she's gorgeous too" (no, she isn't), and she interrupted JJ.      

Plaintiff claims defendants traded the car in, but how can they do it without the title?   Plaintiff bought the car at an auction, and sold to the defendant a little while later.   Defendants say they didn't trade the car in, but someone stole the license plates, and then the car disappeared. 

Plaintiff receives $100, and defendants get the signed title. 

Second (2017)-

Salon Thievery   -Plaintiff Valarie Fails suing former business partners, Erica Taniehill, and Marissa Lampkin, over a beauty salon business, alleging property stolen, and loss of income.   Plaintiff claims the two defendants illegally evicted her.  At one time both defendants worked for plaintiff, then they all decided to expand the salon, move to a new location, and become partners.    Plaintiff and husband did renovations on the new beauty shop, and she worked full time at the salon, but says defendants were only in the salon a day or two a week, and worked other jobs. 

 Lease still has two more years to run.   Taniehill is the only one who signed the lease, and had the lease before the other two decided to move in, and start the salon.  Taniehill and Lampkin are still operating the salon, without plaintiff.   Both sides are claiming breach of partnership agreement.  

Plaintiff claims the two defendants breached the partnership contract by working very few hours.    Plaintiff claims she paid the utilities, and in December she came to work, and the lights were cut off.  Plaintiff called one defendant and asked about power outage, then other issues happened with the plumbing, and the end of the month plaintiff left the salon.  

Plaintiff claims she owned all salon equipment and stations, except one sofa, and claims defendants kept everything after she left.      Defendants deny plaintiff left much behind.   Funny, the defendant who is talking doesn't look at JJ at all.   Plaintiff has order giving her furniture back, everything that she brought from the old salon she owned.   

I'm guessing anything belonging to plaintiff was gone before they got back to their city. 

Defendants get nothing for the breach of lease, because only one defendant signed the lease, and not plaintiff.     

Plaintiffs get some chairs, cash register, iPod station, salon shampoo chairs, hard hair dryers, stand up mirrors, and her remaining items she brought from the old salon.  Plaintiff gets her stuff back (what defendant didn't trash or sell).   Plaintiff gets $500 for her property.     

You're an Idiot    -Plaintiff Alison Williams Palmer suing ex-boyfriend Jordan Gilliam for an unpaid loan.    Defendant says the $800 loan for a car was a gift, not a loan.  Plaintiff, as usual, got a new phone since the loan, with text messages gone that prove $800 was a loan, not a gift.     (Plaintiff gave iPhone with messages to her 4 year old cousin, so we get to see them).   I'm almost as happy as JJ, when I hear that plaintiff still has the texts, making the 'gift' a loan. 

Texts were printed out, and show that it was a loan, so $800 to plaintiff. 

Edited December 1, 2022 by CrazyInAlabama

[One Tough Cookie]

On 11/29/2022 at 5:30 PM, CrazyInAlabama said:

Ronette Vivier,

Did she sing "Be my baby"?

[CrazyInAlabama]

4 p.m. episodes-

First (2014)-

PT Cruising for a Bruising -Plaintiff/employer and former friend Lorrie  Foster-O’Brien suing defendant/former employee Bonnie MacKenzie for an accident to plaintiff’s car while employee was driving.   This happened in Tehachapi.  Defendant lives with her two sons, in Tehachapi.  The litigants used to be friends, but no longer are.   This accident happened over a year ago, but plaintiff says defendant ‘disappeared’, but defendant has lived in the same house for 14 years (lived with father for years, and now inherited the house). 

Plaintiff says defendant stole her car while plaintiff was out of town, and had an accident, and refused to pay for the damages.   Plaintiff has a contract with a charter school, and defendant cleaned the school for her.    Defendant says she was the only employee at that time, so keys to the PT Cruiser were left in it, so defendant could drive the car with cleaning supplies left in it. 

Defendant says she was using a GPS system, not paying attention, and hit a rock or pothole, and it put a hole in the radiator, and she paid $25 to get the radiator patched.   Then they put Bars leak (Stop Leak?) in the radiator.   Then, when plaintiff returned home she says she didn’t know about the accident or patch job, car started running rough, only put 4.3 miles on the car, and they had to push it up the driveway, when all of the oil gushed out of it.    Plaintiff lying statement is that car started gushing oil immediately, and car had no insurance on it either, so plaintiff claims defendant knew not to drive the car.

Defendant didn’t steal the car, as part of her employment.  

Plaintiff claim dismissed, because her conflicting statement are full of Bull Pucky

When Friends Repossess Your Car! -Plaintiff James Ross suing Annette Jaramillo for car damages, missed payment (for one month), and missed insurance payments on an SUV he was selling her.     Defendant says no date to finish the payments, from the settlement she was expecting.    Payment for July was never made, so it was legal to repo the car.   Defendant claims plaintiff knew she was getting a pre-payment on a settlement, (so is J.D. Wentworth giving her money because she wants it now?).

Defendant wants registration fees, and other costs on car that she paid.   Plaintiff was to carry insurance in her name with him as lien holder.   Defendant only had insurance for one month, but car was covered by plaintiff’s insurance. 

Photo shows a seat torn up and ripped, and chewed.   There is a photo of the car right before she got the car, and defendant claims she didn’t damage the car seat.

Plaintiff receives $381 payment. 

Damages include a doggy chewed seat, and despite before and after pictures, defendant says it happened before she got the car. 

Plaintiff receives $381 for the missed payment, and $500 for seat damages, total $881 (In hall-terview plaintiff says defendant claimed to have  a $1.8 million settlement coming, and conned everyone into giving her things in anticipation of a settlement that never arrived) .

Second (2014)-

Incriminating Facebook Photo -Plaintiff Cynthia Santacroce suing defendants 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)-

German Shepherd Attacks Chihuahua?-Plaintiff Sheena Soldi suing former neighbor/landlord for his German Shepherd dog attacking her Chihuahua, and she wants vet bills paid.   They have common back yard unfenced.    Defendant says plaintiff's dog came on his property, and so it wasn't defendant's responsibility.    Plaintiff didn't see the attack, only the defendant saw it.   Defendant says Chihuahua was on his property, and came in his yard (Invisible Fence).   

 Plaintiff has two dogs, a bigger dog, and the Chihuahua, and switches them on a 60 foot lead, but was not on a leash, or with the plaintiff.   Plaintiff decided not to pay February's rent, until defendant paid the vet bills.   Big mistake to do a self-help rent strike in a tenant-at-will state.  Plaintiff did not pay February through July, claiming the housing (Board of Health) was substandard, and so she didn't pay rent, and had been given a 30 notice to quit in February.

Plaintiff claims taking black mold out of her basement exposed bare wires, but her boyfriend did the mold removal.   Sadly, this results in JJ bringing up the "Ate the Steak" story.   Her father only lives two miles from the rental house, and she moved in with him.   As JJ says, the back rent is over $6,000, the amount that plaintiff never paid will pay for her dog's vet bills.

Defendant says plaintiff and boyfriend built an illegal wall upstairs, that he had to remove, and you can see the marks where the wall was.

Defendant says the plaintiff's trip to the vet after the scuffle was the first time the unfixed dog was ever at the vet's office.   Defendant's dog has been deemed dangerous by animal control, however if this truly happened on his property, if the GSD didn't have a previous bite history, then I don't understand why that occurred.   Many places a dog biting another dog doesn't result in any charges.  

Both cases dismissed. 

Houston Hurricane Damage?-Plaintiff Gertrude Bush suing former landlord Marsha Muwwakki over house flooding that happened during Hurricane Harvey, she wants moving expenses, return of deposits.    Security was $650, and pet deposit $150, rent was $650.    Plaintiff didn't pay her June rent, and claims defendant told her not to, however, landlord says that's a lie.  When plaintiff moved in, she claimed the roof was leaking within a few days.   Defendant had the roof fixed before plaintiff moved in, and the leak started again after move in.   Plaintiff moved to Pine Bluff, Arkansas, and wants moving costs.   Plaintiff claims landlady forgave her rent for June, and wants moving costs for moving 5 hours away.

Defendant claims that plaintiff compromised the roof, and when Hurricane Harvey came through months later, it compromised the roof.  Defendant is suing for rent, bills, and other items.      

JJ reams out defendant for the roof problem, causing plaintiff to move.    

Defendant gets $2,000 moving costs, and $750 for deposits.

Second (2017)-

High at Work?  You're Fired-Plaintiff /former part-time employee Jason Furbush, was fired by John Klein,  defendant, for coming into work high.   Plaintiff is suing for a motorcycle, and tools that he stored at defendant's business warehouse.  Plaintiff admits he came to work high, and was terminated.      Plaintiff worked off the books.    It was three weeks after the termination that the plaintiff finally contacted the defendant about his stuff.   Everything was junked when defendant's business moved out of the warehouse/business.   However, defendant claims plaintiff stole a lot of auction inventory that defendant had purchased, and defendant only returned half of the items before the termination.   

Plaintiff case dismissed, after the photos are shown of the junk left by plaintiff, including used syringes.  

I'm Just Trying to Get Home-Plaintiff Marquis Brown Sr suing fellow motorist, Richard Stephan, after defendant crossed into plaintiff's lane, and hit his car.   Defendant claims plaintiff caused the accident.    Both drivers were legally turning left (multiple, legal turn lanes), and plaintiff was going to the gated entrance to where he lives, about 300 yds. down the road after he turned left.  Entrance was on the right side of the road.    Plaintiff was in the middle left turn lane, driver ahead of him put on flashers and stopped.   Plaintiff went into the far right turn lane, and did his turn.   Defendant (from the left side left turn lane) says plaintiff hit the left side of his car during the turn, and kept pushing his car until he hit the curb.   After the accident, defendant says he wanted to get into his gated community, and didn't want to stop.    

Plaintiff claims defendant was in the far left turn lane, and he was in the middle left turn lane.   Defendant car hit the plaintiff's car on the driver's side, clearly shown by photos of the damages.  

Defendant claims nothing is his fault, and he's wrong.   Defendant should give up driving, he's a menace. 

Plaintiff receives $1,722.

Raise Your Hand if You Were Sober-Plaintiff, Latia Juma, and defendant, Carlo Fearrington , were both drunk, and defendant was supposed to be less drunk, so he was driving plaintiff's car.   Plaintiff claims she was drunk, but didn't realize the defendant was drunk too.   

They hit a parked car, and plaintiff claims they left a note for the car owner.   Insurance never said anything about the other car, so they obviously didn't leave information for the poor car owner.   

Case dismissed.  

[CrazyInAlabama]

4 p.m. episodes-

First (2014)-

Big Dogs and Hot Tubs! -Plaintiff /hot tub and male dog owner Melody Wilson is suing defendant/dog owner  Kimberly Hopkins  female dog owner, for damages to a hot tub cover from defendant jumping on top of the cover to escape the two Cane Corso/Mastiff mixes.  Plaintiff has a big male dog, and defendant has a female dog, and after a session of doggy passion.   Plaintiff wants the cover repaired, and three months of pain and suffering because plaintiff couldn’t use her hot tub.

Defendant jumped on the hot tub because male dog was getting aggressive towards the female dog, and defendant jumped on the hot tub to get away from the aggression.    Defendant says she never met plaintiff’s male dog before.   Hot tub lid cracked, but plaintiff didn’t file against her homeowner’s insurance, but the deductible was $1,000, and hot tub lid was under the $1,000 deductible.

Plaintiff just purchased a new hot tub cover for $250, and that’s what plaintiff receives.  Plaintiff still wants her $1500,

Only Child vs. Only Dad -Plaintiff/father Gregory Johnson suing defendants (son) Joshua Johnson and (future daughter-in-law) Jessica Quick for repayment of a loan to buy windows for their trailer.   Son says it was a gift, not a loan.   Father says it was a loan.

The defendants’ earn about $40k a year, and claim father talked them into replacing the windows.  Plaintiff inherited $250k from his late mother.   Plaintiff said he would buy them a new HVAC unit and ducting, for $5250 and that was a gift.    Defendant’s house was a fixer upper, so litigants discussed getting replacement windows.

Plaintiff claims he would loan the couple money for one project after another on fixing up their house.

Plaintiff claims he talked to the defendants, and said he would loan them money for the windows, and installation, but they would have to pay him back, $100 a month. This was all in Lancaster, CA.  Son keeps swilling the ‘Water That Should Not Be Drunk”.  

JJ says no contract between litigants.    Son’s letter says we never had a contract, but father pushed the window replacement on them, so son enclosed $1,000 check with the letter to plaintiff.

JJ finds no contract, so plaintiff case dismissed.  However, JJ says if son wants to preserve the relationship, defendants should pay the money back.   Plaintiff says in hall-terview that they will go their separate ways. 

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).  This was in Santa Cruz, CA.

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)-

Divorcees Duke It Out!-Plaintiff Michelle Plater suing ex-husband Michael Plater for the remainder of a title loan.    Car is a 2013 Chevy Impala.  Litigants were co-owners on the car, and there was no settlement of marital property.   Defendant put down $3k on the car, and the loan was over $10k, but plaintiff (home health care, and pet care) paid for the payments on the title loan for a while, then turned the car in 2015 to the original dealership, because she had been in an accident, and couldn't pay for the car.   Defendant paid the $1700 back payments to get the car back from the dealer, and he had the car and paid the loan off, $10k+.     

Then litigants took out a title loan on the car, for $9k+.    Defendant paid on the loan for eight months, with a total of $3500 paid.   Title loan was $9k, and each litigant, and son in medical school took about $4,000, $1200 for plaintiff, and the rest for defendant.    Defendant paid a lot of the initial car loan, and he paid off the title loan on the car (yes, I know this is ridiculous, and confusing, but it's what happened).     Plaintiff has the car, and another husband, but is now unemployed.    Plaintiff also claims she paid $7k on the car but has no proof, but defendant does.   

Plaintiff has the car now, which is paid off.  Plaintiff claims she didn't know car title was still in her name, but that's impossible to change titles without her signature.

JJ tells plaintiff to sell the car, and split the proceeds.  

Muslim Mudslinging?!-Plaintiff Leticia Madden suing ex-boyfriend and live-in, Arthur Blount Jr. for rent after he moved out of the townhouse they were renting together.     Litigants, and plaintiff's cousin lived in a townhouse together.  Cousin, and defendant moved out about the same time.  Cousin paid no rent at any time.    Plaintiff wants defendant to pay half of the rent for over six months after he moved out.    Defendant claims plaintiff was abusive.   

Plaintiff claims that since the defendant is Muslim, that he wanted to turn her into a Muslim, and was mean to her (that's what the case title refers to).   

Defendant says she called him the R-word, ran around constantly, and was verbally abusive.   When plaintiff told defendant to hit the road, he moved out in October, and plaintiff stayed there for 10 months (cousin didn't move out actually).

Plaintiff case dismissed.       

Second (2017)-

Stealing Power- Plaintiff Jada Hunt suing former potential landlord, James Stacy, Jr.   for a refund of rent, and emotional distress for a house.   There was no power, and it would take a couple of weeks to get the lines connected. Hot water heater, and copper lines in house had been stolen.      Power line to house was disconnected because a previous tenant had stolen electricity from the city of Detroit.    House didn't have power until almost a month later. 

 The landlord also hadn't replaced the hot water heater, water line, plumbing, and fixtures, which had to be done before a certificate of occupancy could be issued.    Defendant claims the house has electric power now. 

When plaintiff gets back to Detroit, she and her family are homeless.    Plaintiff is no longer interested in moving into the landlord's slum.    Landlord bought house for $8k, a few years ago at auction, and it's been empty for several years now.    There is some evidence of repairs.

Defendant can shove his counter claim where the sun don't shine.    What a total slum lord. 

 $1200 to plaintiff.   I hope plaintiff and her family found a nice, safe place to stay after she went back to Detroit. 

Rats in the House-Plaintiff Tammy Hintzman was renting a beach house in Oceanside, CA from Elena Uranga.   Home was remodeled by the owner, and on the second year, plaintiff rented the house.   Plaintiff left a month early, and security deposit was used for last month's rent.   Plaintiff wants her security, and rent back.   

Plaintiff claims there were rats, and she should get her security deposit back because the home was infested with rats.  However, plaintiff says there weren't any rats until August of the lease year, which ran until 8 December. 

Lease says that pest control is tenant responsibility, inside or outside of the house.    Landlady had pipe holes filled in with foam (if anyone does this, then used the dark orange fire rated foam, it dries like concrete), and other holes patched. 

Plaintiff moved out a month early, but the rats were gone by then.   Plaintiff moved right into another rental home that was leased before the end of her lease from defendant.   

There is no way the plaintiff's timeline isn't a lie, because she sent notice with the new home address, when she gave notice to the landlady.   Defendant/landlady thinks plaintiff wanted to move closer to her sister, and new home is closer.  Lease was signed on the new place in the end of September.     Plaintiff sent an email to defendant asking about renewing the lease, and the monthly price, three weeks after plaintiff signed the lease on the next place, proving that tenant hadn't told defendant she was moving. 

Plaintiff case is dismissed, because she's a freaking liar. 

Edited December 2, 2022 by CrazyInAlabama

[CrazyInAlabama]

4 p.m. episodes-

First (2014)-

World's Worst Romantic Gifts! -Plaintiff/ex-wife Robin Riley, suing defendant  Allen Riley(her sister) Roberta Walborn,  Litigants were married , divorced, and then remarried for a year, and defendant bought a stove and fridge for plaintiff.   In 2013, litigants bought a house, but it was only in defendant’s name, and defendant bought a stove and fridge for the house, and plaintiff claims it was a gift for her.  Plaintiff wants the washer/dryer she owned before, back, and the stove and fridge that defendant ex bought.

Now defendant is living in the home, apparently with the sister of plaintiff.   Defendant Allen says he put washer/dryer outside the gate (it was 10 years old) and it disappeared. 

Plaintiff $100 for washer and dryer, and that’s all.

Defendant wants money for rent and utilities, and a replacement washer/dryer.   Everything dismissed. Defendant wants his clothes and TV back.  

Everything dismissed.

Car Crashing Cousin? -Plaintiff Carolyn Stacy suing defendant Larissa Hecke for the value of a totaled car, and the contents.  Litigants are cousins.   Defendant took plaintiff’s car to drop plaintiff off at the bus station, watched her kids at her Aunt’s house.   While plaintiff was gone, defendant had her boyfriend over for dinner, and then defendant’s boyfriend ‘borrowed’ the car, defendant claims she thought boyfriend got a ride, but it was plaintiff’s car, and he wrecked it.  Defendant claims she doesn’t know where the boyfriend is now.

JJ doesn’t believe the defendant’s story about the boyfriend just dropping in, and defendant claiming she didn’t know boyfriend took the car.  Then boyfriend was hospitalized for quite a while, and then disappeared.    Car was never reported as stolen.

Plaintiff was told by defendant that boyfriend Kavante borrowed the car to jump his father’s car, and defendant let him borrow it, and that’s when the crash happened. 

Plaintiff told to sue the defendant’s ex-boyfriend. The only police report was about the accident.  

Plaintiff case dismissed.

Sideways Dog scratcher? -Plaintiff Joseph Wilke suing defendant /former employer Alanna Partin unpaid wages, money for tools defendant forced him to buy, and car damages.  Plaintiff claims he had to buy tools from a particular supplier to get the job.  Plaintiff says his former employer’s dog scratched his car.

Defendant’s deduction for the tools from plaintiff’s wages is illegal.   

Plaintiff claims defendant’s dog jumped on his car, and scratched it.

Defendant countersuing for $250. Defendant case dismissed.

Plaintiff gets $244.

Second (2014)-

Blind Curve Catastrophe -Plaintiff /uninsured motorist Dawn Coltellino is suing defendant David Novak for her auto damages.  She was driving uninsured for over eight months, and is suing the other driver for totaling her car.  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?  

I lived in Colorado for seven years, and the mountain driving is scary for a lot of people, but plaintiff sounds as if she never adapted to mountain driving.   I wonder if she was from a flatter part of Pennsylvania?  Or just a lousy driver. 

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.  I think the only issue was plaintiff blocking the road around a blind curve, and it wasn't even in limited visibility.    I hope plaintiff moved somewhere else, but only after the state of Colorado fined her for driving without insurance, and reckless driving. 

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 driver’s 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)-

Bulldog Rescue Scam or Slander?-Plaintiff Melisa Duncan is suing Victoria Rigdon for online slandering of her English bull dog rescue business (My Dreams Bull Dog Rescue), leading to the loss of 3,000 donors, and the rescue closing.  501 (c)3 registered in 2017.   Rescue was in Florida, and they had dogs in plaintiff's home, and with foster parents.    Plaintiff has one now, and that's all she has.    Most dogs end up in foster homes, pending adoption.    JJ wants the foster homes name, and only lists two homes.   The rescue pays for supplies, but not for fostering.    In six months plaintiff paid vets $4k, but no bill copies.    The two foster homes have fostered 15 dogs in six to nine months.    The two plaintiff witnesses have fostered for the rescue also.   Rescue paid thousands for vet bills, about $10k.   Plaintiff raised about $26k through silent auctions, and from other donors, since April 2017.

Defendant claims plaintiff has a bad character, and divorced her sick husband (nope, don't see what that has to do with the case).   Defendant gives JJ the posting that she put on the rescue page, alleging that plaintiff isn't vetting dogs properly, and claims to be an expert, and doesn't keep the dogs long enough before adoption.       Defendant can't be sued for her opinion about the adoptions.     Defendant claims adoptions were done without home visits (no proof). 

Defendant says plaintiff posted she was closing the rescue because of husband's cancer, but that was when she was divorcing him at the same time, and said nothing about defendant's posts.    Not nice, but not defendant's business either.  (As you can probably tell, I don't like the defendant).

Defendant sent a message via FB to examine the books and records of the rescue, but no formal request.    Defendant didn't bring others she claims looked at the plaintiff's books.   

Plaintiff can show no damages.   

Plaintiff receives $500 for the unsubstantiated charges by defendant.

Second (2017)-

Vandalized Office, Mudslinging Business Partner-Plaintiff Sharon Dent suing former business partner Angel Canady-Larry, at Global Tax & Business Solutions, for vandalizing her office, and stealing her employee files.  They were in business for five years.   Litigants were in a tax business together, and each want $5k from each other.     

The defendant was in charge of check writing for the business, and paid herself $13,025.   The checks were to cover rent for a property she owned with her husband.  Instead of paying the office assistant (a plaintiff witness), the defendant paid the assistant's rent from the business accounts.   

Plaintiff fired defendant after defendant's husband was accused of sexual harassment in the business office, victim is plaintiff's witness, and defendant was told her husband wasn't to come into the office.   

Graffiti in office reads "Angel" in several places, and that's the first name of the defendant (Angel Canady-Larry).   I do not believe there is any way that defendant and her husband weren't behind the graffiti.      

 Office had been cleared out, because plaintiff took the furniture out before the vandalism.    Defendant is suing for her TIme-Warner Cable modem, and slander.    Defendant has a witness that says after defendant was fired, witness was called to meet with the plaintiff, and defendant, and told defendant was out of the office.    Defendant witness says she did her taxes with defendant, and then plaintiff called and said she needed to sign her taxes.   Witness said she had already filed, and didn't authorize the plaintiff to do her taxes.   The IRS should take away the authority of plaintiff's company to act as an agent for taxes.    So, defendant and husband owned the apartment that plaintiff's witness lived in, and was paid for out of company funds, and she's also the one who claims defendant's husband harassed her.  

Both cases dismissed. 

Don't Believe Everything You Read Online-Plaintiff Travis Evans suing Christin Heath, mechanic for damaging his car, and return of his deposit.  Plaintiff bought a 2007 Saturn, that needed a new engine, and was towed to the defendant's shop.    Plaintiff found defendant through an ad on Facebook, and a recommendation from his aunt.    The deposit to the mechanic was $1200 in December, and car was picked up six weeks later, and had to be towed home.  Defendant also lost his mechanic's shop during January.     Plaintiff claims nothing was done to his vehicle over the six weeks, except many parts were disconnected, and placed inside the car.  Why didn't plaintiff get a mobile detailer to clean his car seats? 

Plaintiff has unhelpful estimates.  Plaintiff receives $1200 deposit back.

Edited December 5, 2022 by CrazyInAlabama

[One Tough Cookie]

2 hours ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

7)-

Bulldog Rescue Scam or Slander?-Plaintiff Melisa Duncan is suing Victoria Rigdon for online slandering of her English bull dog rescue business (My Dreams Bull Dog Rescue), leading to the loss of 3,000 donors, and the rescue closing.  501 (c)3 registered in 2017.   Rescue was in Florida, and they had dogs in plaintiff's home, and with foster parents.    Plaintiff has one now, and that's all she has.    Most dogs end up in foster homes, pending adoption.    JJ wants the foster homes name, and only lists two homes.   The rescue pays for supplies, but not for fostering.    In six months plaintiff paid vets $4k, but no bill copies.    The two foster homes have fostered 15 dogs in six to nine months.    The two plaintiff witnesses have fostered for the rescue also.   Rescue paid thousands for vet bills, about $10k.   Plaintiff raised about $26k through silent auctions, and from other donors, since April 201

I can''t tell you why, but  I felt something hinky about her. May it was he oily  slick hair?

[CrazyInAlabama]

I didn't like either one of the litigants in the Bulldog case.   I question the accuracy of the accounting income, and payouts for the plaintiff, and think defendant is a busybody.   

The incorporation listing, founded in 2017, inactive in 2018.    I find that interesting.  If the rescue was so successful with fundraising, then why is it gone?   I also find that there are only four foster families amazing, since the charity raised over $25k, but paid out less than half of that. 

Edited December 6, 2022 by CrazyInAlabama

[CrazyInAlabama]

4 p.m. episodes-

First (2014)-

Pilot Caught Cheating Online -Plaintiff/ex-girlfriend Lourdes Gallagher. suing defendant/two timing cheater Joseph Schoofs for money she loaned him when he was broke, and for hotel rooms, and vacation costs. Defendant is an airline consultant, and sometimes a commercial pilot.   He earned about $100k a year, and then took the flying job in Ghana for about six weeks.     The loans added up to $4621.  Money came from a cash advance on plaintiff’s credit card. 

Plot twist: defendant was married when plaintiff started dating him. Litigants met three years before  this court case was filed. 

The money transfers started by plaintiff to defendant in a few months before the court case.  Defendant was suddenly unemployed, and he couldn’t get another job?   (I knew plaintiff looked familiar, she’s a film and documentary producer, very impressive list of productions she’s been involved with).

Defendant never repaid the plaintiff even though he claims to be employed again, at a huge salary.  Defendant claims the hotel rooms they met in shouldn’t be paid to plaintiff.    Plaintiff  says while her pilot boyfriend was working in Africa, she saw a Facebook post that he was engaged to another woman.   That’s where he was working on his consulting business.  Defendant claims the litigants weren’t in a committed relationship, and he’s no longer engaged to the other woman.

Plaintiff gets $4,600. And defendant is still a lying cheating jerk.

 Mobile Home Moxy! -Plaintiff/landlord Robert Schroeder suing defendant /former tenant Kelly Larson for an unpaid rent-to-own agreement on a mobile home, for $400 a month rent/payment. Total for the mobile home is $6,000.

Landlord says he had to call the sheriff to evict his mobile home tenant, and wants unpaid rent.    Defendant was evicted for nonpayment of rent, $800 for the two months, and failing to get insurance on the mobile home.   Defendant actually was in trailer for 3 months, so rent adds up to $1200.   Plaintiff wants $5,000, for two month’s rent that only adds up to $800.   

Plaintiff wants the promissory note amount, but he’s not getting that.  JJ says that the down payment defendant gave to plaintiff was only to get the keys to the trailer, “Key Money”, and she defaulted immediately, because she didn’t think plaintiff would be able to evict her. 

Defendant paid $200 to plaintiff, and nothing more.   So, she still owes $600.   Defendant moved in September, and only moved out in November (yes, she got evicted). So, she owes $1200, minus the $200 move in deposit, $1000 total.

Defendant works as a mentor.  

Plaintiff should have also received the costs to evict defendant. 

Plaintiff gets $1,000.

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)

Beer Pong Gone Wrong-Plaintiff Amanda Filbrandt suing defendants/former roommates, April Huddleston, and Diana Clement, both 18, for damaged property, unpaid bills, and return of rent (living in a rented house).    Plaintiff was on lease, when boyfriend moved out, he was removed from the lease, and both defendants were added to the lease.   

Plaintiff saw defendants' video of a party of underage people playing beer pong, brought home a Pit Bull, that was not house trained.  Dog was brought to the home without plaintiff's consent.    Lease had all three roommates on it, each paid $217 a month.    Over Christmas holidays, plaintiff was out of town for two weeks, plaintiff saw video of beer pong party, beer cans, and cigarette butts in the house, and lawn.   (JJ refused to go to her college kids' homes, or apartments because of the filth, and germs).     

There was a roommate agreement forbidding the dog, and parties without all roommates’ agreement.   Plaintiff says her dining room table finish was ruined by water damage, and table is cracked.    Defendants had a Yorkie with everyone's consent, but the incontinent Pit Bull was moved in without plaintiff's consent.   

Plaintiff had a right to move out because of defendants' breaking the roommate agreement.   Plaintiff receives her $217 security deposit back.  Table top is absolutely ruined.  Pit Bull chewed up plaintiff's coffee table. 

In mid-January plaintiff was moving out, and when she came back to get her stuff, she saw the total damage to her table.      Defendants gave dog back to the original owners in mid-January.    

Plaintiff receives $1,029.    

Woman Attacked During Beauty Treatment-Plaintiff Catrina Kaihe suing her hairdresser's roommate Kellie Hunter for medical bills, and lost wages from a dog attack.  Plaintiff went to defendant's house (her name is Aguilar) house for hair services,  and defendant's dog bit plaintiff.     (On a personal note, never go to a hairdresser that can't even do their own roots for court). 

Plaintiff says she was having foils put on, and dog ran into the room, and bit her twice on the hand.    Dog is a Rhodesian Ridgeback.   This was the first time plaintiff went to hairdresser's place for hair services, instead of defendant coming to the plaintiff's home.

Defendant witness doesn't want to mention that dog was let in by defendant, while she was helping get foils ready for plaintiff, and that's when the dog bite happened.   Defendant claims the plaintiff let the dog into the room herself, and was playing with the dog.  

Defendant witness was previously homeless, and still lives with defendant (the dog owner, and hairdresser).   Defense witness doesn't want to speak in court, because she's afraid of being kicked out by defendant.   

Plaintiff submits doctor's report, and medical bills.   Plaintiff received six stitches in her hand, and missed work for a week.   Plaintiff needs a better hairdresser too.  

$1,000 for plaintiff for medical bills, and lost wages. 

Second (2017)-

 The Smell of 14 Cats in the Morning-Plaintiff Taymoor Pilehvar (is also operating out of Florida now) bought a condo, in Stillwater, OK, and later rented it to the defendants, Kevin Mensink and Tiffany Armstrong, who had 14 cats, and 7 kittens, and the results were horrible to live with.  (I can almost smell the ammonia from just hearing 21 cats in one home).   Plaintiff was in college, when he moved to Norman, OK for law school, and now practices law in Norman, Oklahoma, and he rented the condo to defendants.    Defendants lived in condo for three years, and payments were often late, but paid, except they still owe partial rent for the last month.    (Plaintiff now intends to rehab the condo, and sell it). 

Neighbors started calling plaintiff about the cat stench from the condo.   Defendants claim the maximum number of cats was 14, including kittens, and found homes for them (now the strange singing/meowing, voice of the defendant man starts).   Defendants had 4 cats when they moved out.   Lease says 3 cats maximum.   

Bizarre note, the male defendant has a weird voice in court, a cross between meowing, and speaking.   Last time it was suggested by posters that it was Tourette's, or stuttering mitigation, or he's part cat, I'm going with the third option.   Male defendant's hairstyle is interesting too, resembling cat ears.   

Plaintiff never gave permission for more than three cats.   I love the plaintiff, he has move in condition of the condo, the damages in photos, and original photos are from defendants' Facebook page.   There are a lot of Facebook photos, of many cats and kittens (different photos show different coat colors, and patterns).     On move in, apartment was immaculate, and in great physical condition.    In hall-terview the defendant male's voice is more normal.   I wonder how the new landlord of the defendants felt, when they saw this case? 

$5,000 to plaintiff for cleaning (won't even begin to remediate that smell, you have to remove drywall at least two feet above the floor, all trim and baseboards, clean floors under carpet, or other materials, and it still might not get rid of the smells, probably the doors too and probably still have stench.  If you have popcorn ceiling, that will hold the smell also, and curtains and other fabrics.   I pity the neighbors of that condo. 

$5,000 to plaintiff.  

Store Owner or Drug Dealer-Plaintiff Tommy Wade alleges that the neighbor Miranda Arnold, in the apartment complex, accused him of running a drug business, and filed a false protective order against him.    Plaintiff claims he only operates a store for building residents for juice boxes, and milk, and doesn't actually live in the unit.     Plaintiff also has an attorney he's used since he was 18, but can't find the number.    Plaintiff also claims he only has the store open to help people, and spends most nights at his girlfriend's place.   Plaintiff didn't bring any bills for his business, and claims the building manager knows about the business.  

After defendant called police about alleged drug activity by plaintiff, he made death threats against her, and she received a protective order.  (Plaintiff was selling his products out of two separate apartments, and the day-room in the building).   When the day room closes at 4:30 pm, he starts selling out of the apartment until late at night.       The plaintiff's attorney doesn't know him, the receipt for cash isn't a number the attorney uses.   

Madonna Homes, the complex this happened in is only for elderly, and disabled people.     I want to know how plaintiff, and his fiance qualified to move into a building for elderly, and disabled?   

Defendant is getting evicted from apartment complex because of plaintiff's harassment, and that means to me that management of the apartments is fine with plaintiff running his store in the building, and allowing someone who doesn't even qualify to live there have two apartments, and use the day room.

Case is recalled, and the attorney doesn't know the plaintiff, and his receipt isn't from his office. (On another strange note, plaintiff's witness/fiance is barefoot in court). 

Plaintiff case dismissed.        Counter claim dismissed. 

[One Tough Cookie]

On 12/2/2022 at 5:32 PM, CrazyInAlabama said:

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).  This was in Santa Cruz, CA.

Ya know,, she had had video proof of the def. coping the documents so why didn't she rule in her favor? 

Oh, wait. plaintiff was a LANDLORD.

I tell you even if I had to eat DOG FOOD I wouldn't rent a room to ANYBODY. 

[CrazyInAlabama]

4 p.m. episodes-

First (2014)-

Cougar Landlord -Plaintiff/former tenant-to-be Gabriel Garcia suing defendant/landlady-to-be Joy Billotti  for refund of his security deposit and first month’s rent.   Plaintiff was going to rent a room from defendant, paid the security and first month’s rent, and then he says defendant started getting inappropriate, with kissing him, and innuendos.   Deposit was $700, rent was $700, he paid $400 by check, and $800 cash.   No written lease.

Previous tenant only stayed 9 days.    That’s a big red flag.    Then plaintiff decided not to move in, and wanted his deposit back, and the first months rent.

Because plaintiff did no damage, he gets his security deposit back, but defendant keeps the one month’s rent because she couldn’t rent room for a month. 

Security to plaintiff, rent stays with defendant.

Your Junk? My Treasure -Plaintiff Shafonta Hudson suing defendant / mechanic Sean Lofton for cheating her on the sale of her old car.   She had an older car, an Impala, and defendant said it wasn’t worth paying to fix car, and said she should junk it.   Defendant said I’ll pay you $400 in car work on her remaining two cars, and would arrange to junk her old car. 

The promised work was done on the plaintiff’s other two cars, and she thought the Impala was junked.   Then, she saw her witness driving the Impala.   So, plaintiff witness says she bought the Impala from defendant.   

   JJ says if plaintiff doesn’t like defendant’s deal, then she should have gone to another mechanic, and received $400 in work in trade for her other two cars.

(I hate the heart rose tattoo on plaintiff’s chest).   

Plaintiff husband says they went to multiple mechanics, getting same diagnosis on the car.   Plaintiff husband, Ceyide Jones, says Mr. Lofton never reregistered the car, so it was still in plaintiff’s name.   So, new owner / plaintiff witness didn’t reregister the car either?   Plaintiff and husband both have CDL licenses, and needed to get the car off of their liability in case of accident.   So, plaintiff called DMV and junked the title on the car.   So, plaintiff witness, new owner didn’t re-register the car either, because it has no title now.

Plaintiff case 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)-

New Career: Flipping Cars!-Plaintiff Ramon Canty is suing body shop owner Christopher Satkowski, for a car purchase, tow fees.   They were going in together to flip cars, buy cheap, fix up and make money selling.   2007 Charger was the first purchase, for $800, and it needed an engine ($1250 + $400= $1650).   When plaintiff finally picked up car, it croaked on the side of the road right up the street from the defendant's shop.  

Car was left by the side of the road by plaintiff, and defendant.   Then car was gone from the side of the road, and tow truck said car was gone when they came to pick up car.   Defendant assumed plaintiff had called a different tow truck to pick up car, and take it to plaintiff's mother's mechanic shop.   Plaintiff didn't call to ask about car for three days later, so why didn't he call the next day to check with the mechanic?    I wonder if anyone checked with the police, to see if it was towed by them? 

This is not defendant's fault, because plaintiff bought an $800 car, invested about $2,000 in it, and there are no guarantees on the repairs.

OK, so car was picked up by police, and after the legal time period was auctioned off, probably junked by now. 

Plaintiff case dismissed. 

Creative Judgment!-Plaintiff Janie Hill suing Glen McTier over a car purchase.  Plaintiff was buying the car on payments, but didn't pay the last payment, then the deal went south.   Plaintiff claims she was only going to pay the last payment to defendant when he signed title over, defendant repossessed the car, and that's when she stole the car back, and still has it. 

After defendant repossessed the car, the plaintiff went and stole the car back from defendant, and has had it for 14 months, and wants the title signed over to her.     Car registration was cancelled by defendant.    Price was $3500, at $300 a month.   Plaintiff paid $3000.

Defendant is countersuing for impound fees, lost wages. 

Proof by plaintiff is inadequate, and as usual, receipts are in the car, but when defendant repossessed the car, plaintiff claims defendant cleaned it out.    Defendant is going through bankruptcy, and he still owes $700 on it.  As usual it's a title loan.  I'm very confused about the bankruptcy case.  

I agree with JJ, there's some kind of scam going on here, but I'm not sure how.   Plaintiff claims she only wants the title, but also wants $3,000 in payments returned to her.   (My guess is the scam is car was going to be put in plaintiff

JJ says defendant will get $350 for the last of the loan, title will go to the plaintiff, and then she can register the car.  The $350 check for defendant will be made to TItle Max, and defendant will have to pay the loan off, and title will go to plaintiff. 

Second (2017)-

Pregnant Ex-Lover Anger-Plaintiff Ericka Bobalek suing former live-in boyfriend Trace Fisher, for return of rent, moving costs, and security deposit.     They were shacking up, and three months later it ended.    Plaintiff took out a personal loan for $4,000 for moving, security deposit, and rent.    Security was $1450, and rent was $950.    As usual, defendant has no proof he paid security, and first month's rent. 

Plaintiff moved out in March, and went back to apartment to pick up some of her things, and discovered another woman living there.   Plaintiff rented a U-Haul, and moved out in Mid-March, and discovered the evidence of new furniture, TV, belongings of Heather (his children's mother, and their two kids living there).    Man has 50/50 custody, and after plaintiff moved out he claims Heather only came over to send kids to school, but plaintiff says woman was living there.  (Sadly, plaintiff became pregnant, and claims defendant told her to get an abortion or move out.   Plaintiff moved out, and sadly will be tied to the loser defendant for years to come.  This is child number four for defendant). 

Plaintiff gets $1450 security back, but no moving costs.   Plaintiff also bought almost $1,000 of appliances, and defendant paid her $800 for those, and she'll get $156 more.  Defendant says on move out day, either plaintiff or a helper took his king sized bed, and smashed his TV (good for them). 

$1606 to plaintiff.  Plaintiff does not get money for the loan, because she had no expectation of repayment.   Defendant claims to be a victim.  

Attending a Funeral or Arrested?-Plaintiff In He Lee suing former tenant John Jhun for unpaid rent and damages.  Plaintiff rented a 2-story home to defendant, and defendant paid $1100 security deposit.   Plaintiff claims defendant didn't pay from July to September (defendant claims he paid cash, and has no receipts).     Defendant owes $3300 for three month’s rent (July to September).   Plaintiff claims damages, but no proof of damages, so that's dismissed. 

Plaintiff has no proof of damages.    Defendant was out of town in September at a family funeral, however plaintiff claims man was in jail.    Counter claim by defendant is for property landlady took when he was at the funeral (or jail).  Defendant has no proof of the funeral he went to.   

Defendant also left his girlfriend behind at the plaintiff's house, and she was told to leave also (apparently not on lease).  So, girlfriend didn't need to go to the funeral?   

 Plaintiff gets today's award for hysterical faces, during the defendant's testimony. 

 Plaintiff gets $3300 for rent.  

[parrotfeathers]

2 hours ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

Sadly, plaintiff became pregnant

Good luck collecting child support.  I kinda sorta believed her when she said he did this as a method of getting back to his ex-wife and kids.  But unfortunately he can't be that smart or he would have worn protection during their good times.

[CrazyInAlabama]

4 p.m. episodes-

First (2014)-

Deceased Dad’s Truck Trouble -Plaintiff/father of defendant’s ex girlfriend Mark Hoover suing defendant/daughter’s former boyfriend/ James Elkins for half of a title loan, $1,000, and a truck.     Plaintiff wants $1000 for title loan that daughter, Angela Hoover,  took out on her car, to pay mutual bills.   Title loan is in defendant’s name, and plaintiff receives that.   

The truck was left to plaintiff by his late father, and defendant refuses to pay.    Text messages from defendant to Angela Hoover, are unclear about payments.

Plaintiff says defendant was supposed to pay $400 a month for the truck, but no paperwork, so JJ says truck was a gift.

$1,000 to plaintiff for the title loan, half of the amount borrowed by defendant and plaintiff’s daughter.

Firefighter Fun Cruise -Plaintiff Kasey Campbell suing defendant Brian Bethea for defendant’s share of a cruise to the Bahamas.    Both litigants are volunteer firefighters.    Plaintiff wants $400, for defendant’s part of the cruise.  (This was Spotsylvania, VA).

Defendant says Kasey and his other friends on the cruise made the trip miserable.   Defendant claims plaintiff said the trip was a gift. 

Plaintiff receives $832.36 for defendant’s ticket.

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 stealing 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.   If car is hidden, then plaintiff should report it as stolen.

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.     

Plaintiff gets car back, and that’s it.

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)-

When Old Friends Become New Roommates-Plaintiff / homeowner Melody Syndor suing former friend Vernon Stuart Jr. for damages, and unpaid rent for his girlfriend when she rented him the top floor of her townhouse ($600 a month, four months).   Plaintiff claims the defendant moved his girlfriend (met on Plenty of Fish) and she moved in within a few days of meeting defendant.   He never paid rent for the girlfriend either.    Defendant claims plaintiff turned utilities off on him, and constructively evicted him.    Defendant owes $150 more for the last month's partial unpaid rent.   Plaintiff claims defendant broke the sleigh bed that belonged to her, tea stains on the mattress, and other stains on the mattress, microwave, washing machine (stackable), and carpet trashed, including wax.    Clothes racks pulled down in walk in closet in his room, furniture damages.   No security deposit either.   No invoice for cleaning fee.   Defendant promised in texts that if plaintiff helped him clean his previous place, he would give her half the returned security $90. 

Rent for defendant's girlfriend.   Scary that defendant is a realtor, and has access to many homes as a part of his business.  Plaintiff says defendant abandoned TV, and other items at her place when he moved out.   Defendant has five days to pick up his TV, or it can be trashed, with a police escort.

Plaintiff receives $240.   

Frightened Painter Walks Off Job?!-Plaintiff Christopher Bellard suing defendant Jeffery Spring-Durovy, who was paid to paint his house interior, but job wasn't finished.    Bellard says he paid 50% deposit to painter.   Painter says he left after threats by the plaintiff.    Plaintiff says job was not done well, however, he didn't allow defendant time to finish either.  

Defendant painter admits the paint job was taking longer than promised.    However, plaintiff hasn't had the job redone, or finished since this happened, which is over three months.    

Plaintiff receives $2250.  

Second (2017)-

Yorkie Struck and Killed-Plaintiffs Isaias and Ashley Sanchez, suing driver/defendant Brad Underwood, for hitting and killing their Yorkie.   Plaintiff brother Geronimo Sanchez was walking three dogs (plaintiff's Yorkie, and Boxer, and his own Jack Russell Terrier), and it is alleged that he was also on his cell phone.     Yorkie was on a retractable / flexy leash.    One other dog was on a leash, and the Jack Russell was on a flexy too.   Plaintiff claims Boxer was also hit, but not injured.   Plaintiff was walking the three dogs, and claims he waited on the sidewalk, then when he went into the street when the defendant hit the two dogs.    Plaintiff dog walker says he was barely off the left side curb, so he's claiming the defendant was on the wrong side of the street, and turning left.   

Defendant was pulling out of his driveway, and hadn't reached the stop sign yet, and was going to turn left after stopping.   Defendant's car hit the plaintiff walking across the corner, from behind the neighbor's parked car,  on the left side of the street corner, across the intersection.    Defendant's pictures show the neighbor's car parked on the corner where plaintiff crossed.    However, defendant didn't see the dogs coming out from behind the parked car.  Defendant claims plaintiff/dog walker was on his cell phone too.    The only vet bills are for the dog's cremation, and defendant paid the $159.    

Plaintiffs want the money to buy another Yorkie.   My question is how far out in the road was the Yorkie?    The defendant was on the right side of the road, and the dog walker crossed from the left side.   Plaintiff dog walker did admit he saw the defendant backing out of his driveway.  

(I bet the dog walker was walking diagnally across the street, from the SW corner, to the NE corner, and came out from behind the badly parked SUV of the neighbor.      

In my opinion, it was the plaintiff brother's fault, he was jaywalking, on his cell phone, and not paying attention.  They should have been buying their own replacement dog.   

Plaintiff receives $1200.

Playing House Nightmare-Plaintiff Noretha Martin, suing ex-fiance Eric Epps for car payments.    Litigants lived together for five years.   (What the hell is that fugly furry vest on the plaintiff?   It looks like she made her own out of road kill pelts).    Both litigants owned two cars, and both were bought on plaintiff's credit.    Defendant was supposed to make the payments, and he paid his own car off.   

Litigants had a big fight, after man was 'caught' doing something, but still lived together for one more month when defendant moved in with his next girlfriend.   Plaintiff started making payments on defendant's car, after car finance people threatened to repo defendant's car, which was on plaintiff's credit.   Defendant didn't pay for three months, and plaintiff called police, and she went to get the car, and took the plates.   Next day plaintiff had the key, and she drove it home.   

Plaintiff paid one month of payments, tried to refi the car ($14,000 owed), and couldn't.   (Defendant says plaintiff didn't want his new girlfriend in the car that was in her name).  Sorry, but plaintiff took the car back, so why should the defendant pay anything on the car?  Plaintiff also is whining because defendant didn't marry her.  

$5,000 to plaintiff, but her $14,000 car payment still is garnished from her wages, and she's still going to pay $8,000 plus interest.   Plaintiff didn't really win. 

[CrazyInAlabama]

4 p.m. episodes-

First (2014)-

Optical Store Flood!- Plaintiff Ivy Fossett and Kim Berkeley suing defendants Mary Woodruff (mother) and Elizabeth Harvey (daughter) for lost wages, and the cost of lab equipment, after an optical shop flooded.   

Defendants claim plaintiffs stole from them, and assault.    JJ wants receipts from defendants for the equipment that they claim they owned.   Defendant claims they bought the equipment, but plaintiffs have the receipts also. 

Defendants claim plaintiffs have the equipment.    Plaintiffs say they bought the equipment for the optical shop, and have receipts.

$989 for plaintiff.

Mobile Car Washing Dream -Plaintiff Tinoai Cotton is suing defendant/ex-boyfriend Jackie  Walker for a unpaid loan to fix his van, he wanted to start a mobile car washing service.   Loan was for $600.  The loan was to covert a passenger van to a mobile car wash van, beef up the struts on the van to support the water tank.

Defendant says the money to fix his van was in return for him doing a favor for her.  He says the money was for other repairs.  Defendant says the favor was to drive over 600 miles each way to her father’s house to pick her up.   

Plaintiff receives $600.

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 the 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.   Plaintiff 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, but never paid plaintiff.

$1,000 to plaintiff.   

5 p.m. episodes-

First (2017)-

Unwed Parents Feud! -Plaintiff /ex-girlfriend Telisa Jackson suing defendant/ex-boyfriend Steven Johnson for unpaid loans, car repair costs and lost wages.   They have a 2-year-old, and 10 month-old, and in the second pregnancy, defendant  was in jail for three months.  He’s counter claiming for bleached clothes.  

Defendant claims plaintiff took $800 from his bank account, but plaintiff has a bank receipt for the money, that has both litigants’ signatures on it, and she claims she repaid the money.   This is for $320, the remainder of the $800.  Defendant claims he reported the fraud to the bank, but they never paid him back.  

Then, plaintiff says defendant had an accident in her car, but they were living together, and JJ tosses plaintiff’s claim that defendant didn’t have permission to drive her car.

Defendant wants his speaker box back, dismissed.   Then defendant’s watch is missing.  

They broke up in May, but defendant took his clothes in August, and bleached them, and that’s dismissed.

Plaintiff case dismissed. 

Defendant receives $800 for the illegal withdrawal.   

Twin Sisters Huge Settlement?! -Plaintiff/sister Tyra Johnson suing defendant/sister Trina Shaw for an unpaid loan to pay her bills.  After their mother dies, the twins received a settlement for negligence, they’re now fighting over unpaid loans.   $2,272 is the loan amount plaintiff requests. 

One twin (defendant)received $100,000 settlement, but the other twin (plaintiff) received $149,000, because of loans defendant had taken out.   Defendant is going to Strayer for Criminal Justice, on financial aid, $9,000 a year, with two courses each quarter.  (Strayer and Capella joined after the pandemic).  

Defendant received $100k, after she paid the other loans off previously.    Defendant took out loans from Oasis for the $50k.   

Plaintiff loaned defendant $1500, but there were other loans, .   Then, defendant was supposed to put money into retirement and CDs, but she didn’t.   Defendant told her sister/plaintiff some garbage about the bank confiscating her money.   

Plaintiff needs to stop loaning money to sister, or she’ll be broke soon too.  (I wish defendant had the sense of a squirrel, and priced out community college, and then 2 years at a regular, not a for profit school.   This case is why you shouldn't go to one of those settlement companies, they pay you very little for your money from a trust, or settlement.   Why do I suspect that she blew the rest of the money in a year or two?) 

$2074 to plaintiff for the loans.     

Second (2017)-

Remodel Fail in Old Hickory, Tennessee-Plaintiffs Alton Billings, and wife Roshell Smith hired defendant, Kyle Gibson, to do remodeling work, and they're suing for breach of contract.   Defendant was paid $3,000.   Another $1,000 defendant was paid by check, that plaintiffs paid him, and then stopped the check/money order.  Defendant, and plaintiff witness tried to help settle this matter, but not after suit was filed.   Defendant's counter suit is for unpaid money.   

According to contract, the work had to be substantially completed, but no specific deadline was mentioned.    JJ mentions that the $4,000 that was going to be paid to contractor for a long list of remodeling work.   Total price was supposed to be $7500, but only $3,000 was paid (minus the $1000 money order defendant revoked). 

 It also cost plaintiffs $14,000 to finish the remodeling job.  Defendant had a signed initial contract with plaintiffs, but their change orders were not written down, and signed by all parties.  

Plaintiff gets nothing.    $1,000 to defendant.

Woman's Weak Defense-Plaintiff Britnee Pinkston is suing defendant/ former roommate, Sarah Ward, for return of her rent, and security deposit, and punitive damages.    Plaintiff says she gave her portion of the rent to defendant, but defendant didn't pay the landlord, and plaintiff won't get her security deposit either.    Defendant claims the lease expired in February, but had signed another 1-year lease, that didn't take effect until the month the defendant moved out.  Defendant move out with her then boyfriend, and didn't pay the landlord for February, or give notice to landlord, or plaintiff.  

Defendant says plaintiff gave her plaintiff's part of the rent money for gas.     The audience giggles, and JJ and Officer Byrd don't shush anyone.   JJ's glare at defendant is epic.  

The only cleaning on security deposit was rug cleaning.   The rest of the charges from security are for unpaid rent.   

$810 to plaintiff.

I have to thank my local Fox channel, for running JJ for the full two hours, when soccer ran over because of overtime, or something.    

Edited December 10, 2022 by CrazyInAlabama

[DoctorK]

53 minutes ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

One twin (defendant)received $100,000 settlement, but the other twin (plaintiff) received $149,000, because of loans defendant had taken out.  

Clearly the defendant (who seemed a little dim) did not understand that she had already gotten $49k (borrowed against the settlement from one of those lovely companies who advertise extensively on court shows) ahead of time, which was repaid when she received the complete settlement. She acted as if the loan never happened and so she should have still gotten the full $149k at payout. We see a lot of litigants who simply can't or won't bother to think. I am surprised that some of them don't walk out in the rain looking up with their mouths open and drown.

[One Tough Cookie]

On 12/6/2022 at 5:28 PM, CrazyInAlabama said:

he Smell of 14 Cats in the Morning-Plaintiff Taymoor Pilehvar (is also operating out of Florida now) bought a condo, in Stillwater, OK, and later rented it to the defendants, Kevin Mensink and Tiffany Armstrong, who had 14 cats, and 7 kittens, and the results were horrible to live with.  (I can almost smell the ammonia from just hearing 21 cats in one home).   Plaintiff was in college, when he moved to Norman, OK for law school, and now practices law in Norman, Oklahoma, and he rented the condo to defendants.    Defendants lived in condo for three years, and payments were often late, but paid, except they still owe partial rent for the last month.    (Plaintiff now intends to rehab the condo, and sell it). 

Neighbors started calling plaintiff about the cat stench from the condo.   Defendants claim the maximum number of cats was 14, including kittens, and found homes for them (now the strange singing/meowing, voice of the defendant man starts).   Defendants had 4 cats when they moved out.   Lease says 3 cats maximum.   

Bizarre note, the male defendant has a weird voice in court, a cross between meowing, and speaking.   Last time it was suggested by posters that it was Tourette's, or stuttering mitigation, or he's part cat, I'm going with the third option.   Male defendant's hairstyle is interesting too, resembling cat ears.   

Plaintiff never gave permission for more than three cats.   I love the plaintiff, he has move in condition of the condo, the damages in photos, and original photos are from defendants' Facebook page.   There are a lot of Facebook photos, of many cats and kittens (different photos show different coat colors, and patterns).     On move in, apartment was immaculate, and in great physical condition.    In hall-terview the defendant male's voice is more normal.   I won

As a cat lover myself I CANNOT imagine living with more than two.

***

Edited December 10, 2022 by One Tough Cookie

[One Tough Cookie]

On 11/24/2022 at 8:56 AM, Tom1mac2 said:

I am thankful for your hilarious recaps! 🍾

On 11/25/2022 at 9:27 PM, DjamillasMan said:

***Hey JJ Family!! I hope you all had a wonderful Thanksgiving holiday! Djamilla is making blue crabs tonight and texted everyone and their mother (literally and figuratively), so everyone is coming back over to the house tonight. Smh. I had to cut this one short as well. Grab your favorite drink and LET'S GOOOOOOO!* 

Back Kicking a Toddler?! (2013)

“I considered him not a tenant, your honor, but a lodger, because we were also living in the home.” –Jillian Delgado

Plaintiff: Timothy McCarty from Los Angeles, CA. Tim comes into court wearing a suit that he picked up at Belk. Tim is a 47 year old man who has no place to go and is suffering from severe arrested development issues. He has two kids, both of which are homeless because of his said issues. Tim is in the medicinal marijuana business, but also collects welfare. He is accused of assaulting not only the Defendant, but also her two year old daughter. Tim kinda looks like a sleazy guy, like a ‘70s porn director or something. He has known the defendants for quite some time.

Defendant(s): Jillian and Salvador Delgado from North Hills, CA. Jillian is a full on drama queen. She is wearing some cute glasses and a pantsuit from Penney's. Sal is wearing a burgundy dress shirt and tie straight off the rack at Ross. Jillian insists that she had the right to throw Tim out of the house, even though he’s a paying tenant and was current on his rent. Sal, meanwhile, comes across a bully and a thug. Jillian also recorded her altercation with Tim earlier in the day so that she can let Sal hear it later, probably as an attempt to get Sal all riled up so he could kick Tim’s ass. Something about Sal strikes me as a violent mechanic/mechanic’s apprentice. Jillian does not like it when you go into her fridge and toss out moldy food, as apparently, this is what kicked the whole “back kicking” incident off. Jillian looks sullen, with her crying on cue at each appropriate opportunity. She thinks Tim is a mooch

The Complaint: Tim is up in court suing for the return of a deposit, storage fees, and damages from an assault.

What Does He/She want: Tim wants $5000 from the court. If he gets it, we have to down the entire drink!

Countersuit?: Yes. The Delgados want cash (it's never specified how much) for Tim back kicking their toddler and a broken door.  

Puppy Multiplier: N/A

Driving Around Without Insurance: N/A

What Went Down: JJ kicks this one off by going over the background of the case. That Tim rented a room from the Defendants. Tim explains that he has known the Delgados for about 13 years. He moved into the residence on July 21st, but only stayed there for 3 weeks. After the altercation, he moved out. Tim was only being charged $300 a month for his room, but the Delgados also asked him for a deposit, which was also $300. Jeez, all of that just to get a room? $600 for a room? He could have rented an apartment with a $300 security deposit.

Tim said that he didn’t pay the $300 security deposit, just the monthly rent (I stand corrected). JJ then gets a bit annoyed at him, barking that his complaint stated something about a security deposit. Tim corrects himself and states that that was most likely a misunderstanding. JJ, who doesn’t like being lied to, chastises Tim. She says that English is her primary language and gathers that it’s Tim’s primary language. Tim agrees that it is. JJ gets frustrated and says that Tim lived there for three weeks, paid his $300, but didn’t give a security deposit, so he’s not entitled to that back. JJ asks what does Tim want from the Delgados.

Tim says that he was also seeking punitive damages for his children and him being homeless for a few months. JJ counters that and states that Tim shouldn’t put his children in that sort of situation. I agree with that. Tim should have, at that point, relinquished the children back to their mother since his situation was so dire. You don’t do that to your children. I would rather walk through broken glass barefoot with a double handed sword up my ass before I see any of my kids suffer like that because of a mistake I made. Fuck all that noise.

JJ then asks how old Tim is. Tim mentions that he’s 47 years old. JJ makes fun of Tim by saying if he’s 47, then he should be in control of his own life, not out here bouncing from place to place. He should at least be stable enough to have his own shit sorted out. Again, I agree. JJ dismisses Tim’s bullshit and goes to the Delgados for their countersuit.

The Delgados claim on the night of the altercation, that Mr. McCarty broke their door. Jillian states that the night of the confrontation took place on August 11th, 2013. Jillian looks like she’s trying to think of something that is going to make her cry. I can tell. She looks like she’s plotting some big dramatic breakdown, which we’ll see in a bit.

It all started by Tim disposing of rotten food in the fridge (which will stink up a house something terrible), and Jillian got pissed off about it. Instead of, you know, going through the food and seeing what can be salvaged and what can be thrown out, it seems this pushed Jill over the edge. JJ exclaims that this created a big “brouhaha” (take a shot!). JJ says that it reached a boiling point to where Tim was pushed out of the residence. Jillian denies this. Jillian states that Tim was momentarily outside on the phone. That’s when Jill locked the door. Tim’s kids were upstairs in the shower at the time. I’ll be damned if someone locks me out of their house with my children still in the house. I’d go the fuck off, too.

Jillian changes her story and claims that she locked the door after Tim assaulted her and her daughter. JJ wants to hear Jillian’s version of how Tim assaulted Jillian and her child. Jillian claims that on the morning of August 11th, both she and Sal explained to Tim that the situation was no longer sustainable and they wanted him to pack his bags and roll. I mean, Tim was already a paying tenant by then, so he couldn’t leave that day, or so you would think. JJ brings this up to Jillian, but Jillian, who is super headstrong or hardheaded as fuck, says that Tim had violated the rules of the home, thus his need to vacate the residence immediately.

LOL. Oh, Jillian. You don’t know shit about landlord/tenant law. LOL.

You cannot just kick someone who is paying rent out. You have to move to evict that person through the courts. That’s why some people take advantage of that and become squatters. Yeah, they’ll get kicked out eventually, but you cannot remove them in the month that they paid rent. You also have to give them notice that the lease is being terminated. The Delgados should have never tried to be landlords.

JJ then gives Jillian a dressing down on landlord/tenant law. Jillian, ever defiant, claims that she doesn’t need to give Tim a 30 day notice. JJ gets pissed from that comment and again lectures Jillian on how landlord/tenant relationships work. JJ states that the moment Jillian accepted Tim’s rent, she became a landlord. Jillian just starts doing the ‘bobblehead’ while JJ is explaining this to her (take a shot!).

Jillian claims that Tim says that he wasn’t leaving, which JJ interjects and states that that’s Tim’s right. Jillian then begins to say that she asked Tim how much time did he need to get his shit together. JJ queries were they talking hours, days, or months for Tim to vacate. Jillian states days. Jillian says that her two children were standing next to her. Jillian then tries to fix her story (most likely from JJ admonishing her lack of knowledge on how to be a landlord), stating that she asked Tim how much time did he need. JJ immediately spots this and tells Jillian that she didn’t say that. She then asks Tim if Jillian said that to him (take a shot!). Tim denies Jillian ever said that to him. Jillian says that during this conversation, Tim was still standing outside. JJ asks why didn’t Jillian let Tim in. Jill states that she needed to have a conversation with Tim. JJ cuts her off by saying “No, no, no, no, no! You can’t keep him outside. That’s his home!” Sal is over there crossing his arms. JJ spots this and tells Sal to uncross his arms (take two shots!). Sal does as he is told, while chuckling a bit.

Jill says that she considered Tim a ‘lodger’ since he was living in their home. Um….since when has anyone used the word “lodger” in this century? LOL. No, Jillian, you stupid woman. You had a tenant. Arguably, Tim could be considered a roommate. Jillian, you were not running an inn, lady, this was a private residence. Stupid lady.

Moving on, JJ is still battling with Jillian on what the definition of tenant means. I can’t believe she has to explain this to a grown woman. JJ ends the debate by saying “Unless you go to a school that tells you you’re right…” and Jillian shuts up about it, taking the L (take a shot! JJ implied that Jillian hasn’t been to law school). Since things aren’t going the way Jillian wants them to go, she tries a new tactic (KAREN ALERT! Take a shot!). Jillian makes mention that she didn’t feel comfortable with Tim in the home until Sal got back home. While she’s saying this, she looks up at Sal with adoring eyes. JJ rebuts this by saying that her comfort is irrelevant (take a shot! JJ doesn’t care how you feel!) . JJ again states that Tim paid rent and he has a right to access the home. Why do I feel like I’m on Groundhog Day with Bill Murray? Jillian is fuckin so hardheaded, bro. If Jillian’s brains were ink, she couldn’t even dot an i. I think Jill and Sal share a brain. Apparently, the brain is on vacation this day. Tim’s not so bright, either, but he stayed well within the law.

JJ says at some point, Jillian started to record the conversation. Clearly, this segment was taped in either the early morning, or around early afternoon, as we see JJ sipping on a cup of coffee (take two shots!). JJ wants to know why Jill recorded the conversation. At first, Jillian says it is so her husband can listen to it later on. JJ, not being satisfied with that answer, asks why again. Jillian then starts dishing the dirt on Tim, with him being a mooch, angry, and living off the system. She states that Tim is very manipulative. Personally, I think you both are very manipulative.

JJ then turns her attention back to Tim, asking him where he got the money from rent. Tim answers ‘Um’ at first. JJ says that “Um is not an answer!” (take a shot!). Tim then states that it was the returned deposit from another place that he had in the amount of $1500. JJ wants to know where he got that. Tim claims that is from work. JJ wants to know what kinda work he does. Tim says that he works for the ‘California Correctives’. JJ asks what that is. He states that it’s ‘medical collectives’. JJ, on the verge of losing her patience with him, asks him to explain that to her. Tim finally relents and tells her that he works in the medicinal marijuana business. Jesus, Tim, was that so hard? Take a shot for Tim being a dumbass, too.

I don’t know about you guys, but I have asked my doctor repeatedly for medicinal marijuana for my migraines. I don’t like the crap that they give me now (which has side effects that overpower the migraine, such as drowsiness, nausea, lightheadedness, dizziness, isolation, and can be highly, highly addictive) for my migraines, and I noticed that marijuana will just knock the migraine out completely, and I’m feeling much, much better afterwards. JJ scolds Tim for being so bashful and tells him to get the name of the company out there. She then just shakes her head (take a shot!). Meanwhile, Tim is all smiles and is acting all lighthearted. I still think he’s creepy.

JJ asks Tim if he gets any welfare from the state of California. He answers with “Um”, to which JJ states “Um? It’s either a yes or a no!” (take a shot!). Tim admits that he gets food stamps, and JJ tells him that that’s welfare. Tim just says “Yeah”. Tim also admits that he gets GR, which JJ quickly surmises is ‘General Relief’, which is also welfare. She admonishes Tim that he should just call a spade a spade. She makes it a point to say that even if he calls it ‘ballet lessons’, it’s still welfare at the end of the day.

Tim states that he gets $175 cash and $200 for food. JJ asks what else he gets for the children. He begins with “Um”, and JJ again says “Um is not an answer” (take a two shots now, because it’s starting to rack up). Tim states he receives nothing for the children because they are under the mother. He doesn’t claim them on anything. He claims that the mother and he have joint custody, but he doesn’t claim them for aid. Tim is a real fuckin prize.

After JJ is done fuckin with Tim, she turns her attention back to Jill and Sal. She wants to know about the broken door. Jill claims that she locked the door while Tim was on the phone with the police while his children were upstairs in the shower. She states that he told the police that Jillian had assaulted him. JJ asks if she or daughter go to the hospital on the evening of August 11th, 2013. Jill denies both. Jillian then says that she filed a police report, however. Then she tries to hand JJ a novel (take two shots!). JJ says she only wants to see the police report.  The police report is so smudged and had been written over so many times, I’m shocked that JJ didn’t call it a fake right then and there. Jillian claims that she can read it. Jillian says that she can’t read it, which JJ all but tells her “Yeah, I know you can’t!”

After a commercial break (that had not one, but two Life Alert commercials (take a shot!)), we cut back to the case.

JJ wants to know how Tim assaulted Jillian. She advises Jill to tell her fast, as she has other things to do today. It must be sushi day (so take a shot for that!) and we all know that JJ loves her sushi.

Jillian begins her first real testimony here, as she describes that Tim claimed that he would never be leaving. She then threatened that the police or their attorney (LOL. Like you guys have a personal attorney at your beck and call. Please) would kick him out. Jillian then says something about how many days that Tim needed to get his shit together. God, this case just keeps spinning its tires. JJ claims that she can guarantee that she won’t hear the word “days” on that tape that Jillian insists that JJ listen to. Jill states that she hasn’t ever heard the tape because it’s “hard for me to listen to”. Okay, then don’t make claims to things that you haven’t fact checked yourself. Gah! Both of these litigants are so dumb, I’m totally neutral at this point.

Jillian claimed that Tim lost his shit and grabbed her by the wrists and entered her home. She says that he was kicking her at her feet (was he trying to do a Jean-Claude Van Dam sweep or something?) while also trying to bring her down to ground. That’s when he “back kicked” her two year old. JJ wants to know what Jillian means by Tim performing a “back kick”.

I mean, it’s funny, but it’s not, as a child could have been seriously injured (apparently not, since Jillian couldn’t be assed to take her child to the hospital that evening), but I just see Tim summoning the spirit of Steven Seagal and back kicking her child like this is Marked for Death.

JJ is incredulous, stating that she doesn’t understand how he had Jillian by the wrists, flinging her around the living room, and then had the presence of mind to back kick the child. Jill says that the child was behind Tim, trying to “get to her mommy”, and that’s when Jill warned Tim about her daughter. She claims that Tim said “This is not about your fuckin daughter!” then put his foot back and kicked the child. That’s not a “back kick”. That’s more or less a mule kick.

JJ asks Tim if he did that. He adamantly denies this. JJ asks if she listens to the tape, will she hear that. Tim says that the child reached around his leg and he just shook the child off, while being assaulted, and then picked the child up after the child fell and said “Awww….sweetie!”. Either way, both parties are in the wrong.

After the commercial break, we cut back to the case.

We actually hear the tape (take two shots since a tape is played in court!). JJ says that Jill made mention that Tim was not welcome in the house. The tape sounds like fuckin anxiety and craziness, with Tim and Jill arguing in the beginning, and then Jill loses her fuckin shit and starts screaming fuckin bloody murder while a baby is crying in the background. Tim is going off, Jillian is going off (while screaming her head off), and a child just losing its mind in the background. Jillian pulls out her best daytime soap opera performance and begins crying on cue here. Sal tries to comfort her as Jill turns the tape off.

JJ advises Jill that Jill has two problems; that Tim behaved badly that day (that’s an understatement), and that Jill lied to her. She lied to JJ because Jill never asked Tim how much time he needed to get his ducks in a row to leave, although Jill stated that multiple times. So both are in the absolute wrong no matter how you slice it. Tim’s a piece of shit for kicking a kid and also for having his children suffer because of his boneheaded mistakes, while Jillian is a piece of shit for lying and acting all dramatic.

Sal then starts to interrupt JJ during her lecture, with JJ screaming “Listen to ME!” (take a shot!). Then she says “Mr. Delgado, I’m speaking!” (take a shot!).  Sal really wants to get his point across, but JJ is preventing him from doing such. She starts lecturing Sal on the fact that he only wanted to hear the tape to give him ammunition to attack Tim.

After yet another commercial break (this one featuring a commercial for ‘The Cleaning Lady’ (which I have never seen, but people tell me is okay, and a commercial for WBFF investigating some recent developments in a case from 1995), we get back to the episode.

JJ is still going in on Sal. She’s telling Sal that his wife should have went outside and called 911, even though the 5-0 would have sided with Tim, at least it would have been documented. Tim would have still had to have been let into the house. This is why I don’t invite people to come live with me. Tim starts to say something, but JJ silences him and says that Tim could have had a discussion with Sal when he came home (which, I think Tim did say on the tape; that he wanted to talk to Sal), and sorted things out from there. JJ tells Sal what his wife did was wrong. She excluded him while Tim’s children were upstairs. JJ states that their complaint says they want damages for a broken door. JJ then goes in on The Delgados and Tim for a bit before she dismisses the case.

During the Hall-Ter-View, Tim explains that all he did was throw away moldy food, which caused Jillian to flip out. Jillian, meanwhile, doubles down on her shit, claiming that Tim touched her shit, which she didn’t appreciate. Jillian didn’t want to be disrespected by someone who was a stranger in their home. I can get what Jillian was saying, however, I think I would be appreciative if someone threw out moldy food in my refrigerator. I mean, that’s just common sense. I don’t want a case of botulism or e-Coli. Simple as that. I didn’t have any dog in this fight in this case, as I think all three of them were idiots.

Verdict: Plaintiff and Defendants suits were dismissed. Neither party gets anything.

This was a hard choice:

Did Auntie Judy say anything fucked up to anyone?: {to Tim}: “ You lived there for most of the month. And I think this was handled wrong by the both of you. I suggest you not rent rooms to anyone anymore because you don’t understand what your responsibility is as a landlord. I would suggest to you, sir, at the age of 47, you can wear a suit and a tie to court, you should be in a position to get an apartment for your two children-with whom you share custody with their mother. So go out there and get yourself a good job!”

*Edit* : I must have really been in a rush when I wrote this. Those blue crabs were calling my name. I had to go back and edit this a bit. 

Sorry it took me so long to reply--but between the alcoholic stupor I was in and pissing myself it took some time.

[CrazyInAlabama]

4 p.m. episodes-

First (2014)-

Flight Attendant Basement Blues -Plaintiff/flight attendant and former tenant Krystle Davidson for the return of her security deposit, lost wages, and last month’s rent.  suing defendants/landlords Chris and Lee Anderson.   Deposit was $600, and $300 a month rent (there was another roommate who stilll ives in the home).  $1175 was the receipt, for $600 deposit, there is a handwritten receipt for first and last month’s rent, security deposit.  

When plaintiff sent a 30-day notice text to defendant Chris then defendant sent an answering text to plaintiff that is very nasty.    Plaintiff text says to use the deposit for the last month’s rent, for July.     Defendant says plaintiff moved out on July 1, but plaintiff paid through July already.    Plaintiff says defendant Chris went bonkers, and locked her out, was very insulting, and defendant refused to left plaintiff back in the apartment, and plaintiff’s boyfriend moved her property.

Plaintiff was transferring to another home city for her flight attendant job.

Plaintiff gets $587 (or $887) (one month’s rent, and security deposit) , because defendant Chris constructively evicted her.

Overly Excited Teen Jumper! -Plaintiff  Alexander Basch suing defendant Debbie Dreiman (mother) and (son) Alan Dreiman  for breaking a recliner by Alan jumping on it.   Sharon Basch is plaintiff’s daughter and was having a bunch of kids 13-18 over for a church group party.    

After Alan Dreiman arrived at the party, he saw his friend sitting in the recliner, and Alan jumped over to hug his friend, and that broke the recliner.  When JJ tells defendant to stop saying “like” in every sentence, he can’t talk any longer.    (This happened in West Hills, CA).

Sharon Basch said she heard a crack when defendant Alan jumped on the chair, and the chair no longer worked.   Alan says plaintiff witness didn’t tell him he broke the chair, so he shouldn’t have to pay for it.  Alan doesn’t like the price to replace the recliner either.

$950 to plaintiff for his recliner.

Second (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 costs were paid to him.   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 proving dog 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.   The terms JJ offers are a replacement puppy, and fortunately for the dog, plaintiff turns it down.

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 is suing defendant/ex-boyfriend Daniel Wrice, 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 protected 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.

5 p.m. episodes-

First (2017)-

Landlord Lock Out-Plaintiff/former Harold Barnes, kind of a tenant, suing former landlady Peggy Howell for illegal eviction, loss of property.  Plaintiff's witness is his estranged wife, also named Dusty (I'll call her Dusty Sr., and her daughter is Dusty Jr.) and wife was the legal tenant.  Dusty Jr. is defendant’s witness and helped moved the property out.    However, landlady knew plaintiff was living there on and off with estranged wife, Dusty Sr.      Landlady is counter suing for shed materials, back rent, and that's tossed,  

Landlady claims man was an illegal tenant, and she had every right to lock him out.  Landlady claims she didn't know plaintiff moved back, but she sometimes employed him as a handyman to build the shed for her.   Defendant's counter claim about the shed is tossed.  Plaintiff witness/estranged wife, was moving out as of a certain date, and two days later the defendant changed the locks.   

Landlady claims the plaintiff changed the house locks, not her. Plaintiff claims he changed the door knob, but not the locks.      Plaintiff witness/ex-wife complains in text that locks were changed, but then says that plaintiff changed the locks.   Plaintiff witness could still get into the house. 

Defendant is not getting back rent, and accepted rent from both plaintiffs, even though man was never on lease.  Legal tenant (plaintiff witness) gave 30 days-notice to landlady, and she says plaintiff also said he was moving out.   

 Plaintiff estranged wife's daughter (Dusty Jr is defendant’s witness) claims she helped move man's property out, with the plaintiff's wife's help, and put them in the shed at the house.  Plaintiff witness claims the landlady's husband, and maintenance man moved plaintiff's property to the shed.  

Landlady's witness that helped plaintiff witness move out plaintiff's property, is Dusty Jr. the (the plaintiff witness/estranged wife/former tenant) plaintiff witness's daughter.

Plaintiff seems shocked to find out his estranged wife Dusty Sr., is the mother of Dusty Jr., the defendant's witness, and so is JJ.   Plaintiff witness/mother keeps weeping through the whole case.    

$5,000 to plaintiff for illegal eviction.   

Wronged Man Returns for Justice-Plaintiff Augustine Evans suing defendant Reginald Burkett over a traffic accident.    The defendant's insurance company already said the plaintiff was at fault, but he thinks JJ will reverse that (apparently, he never watched this show before agreeing to appear).    Plaintiff is suing for $250 for his insurance deductible.     Plaintiff's insurance paid plaintiff for his totaled car, and he had $250 deductible from that amount.      Defendant was driving a 1991 Toyota, plaintiff was driving a 1997 Acura.   What the hell is defendant wearing? 

The front of defendant's car hit the back of the plaintiff's car (defendant's wild tie, and matching shirt is amazing), so it sounds like the accident was plaintiff's fault.   Plaintiff claims defendant ran a red light, and hit plaintiff in the rear from the side.     Defendant is standing there with his mouth wide open in amazement at the plaintiff's testimony.     Defendant claims he thought plaintiff hit him.   Defendant says he was going straight across the intersection, and plaintiff hit him (it scares me that drivers like the defendant are out there on the roads, he's a hazard).   

Photos show the defendant's car front hit the back passenger side of plaintiff's car.   Plaintiff is suing because his car only had the bare minimum insurance coverage, and he didn't get anything for his car.    Defendant actually claims the plaintiff slid sideways into his car.   The only place you see a maneuver like the defendant described is at a demo derby. 

Defendant's hall-terview is bizarre, and he still claims the plaintiff was driving like a NASCAR wannabe, and hit him. 

Plaintiff receives $250, and defendant is still deluded. 

Second (2017)-

Pomeranian Custody Battle-Plaintiff /daughter Elaine Wales is suing defendant /mother Betty Donnelly, for the return or value of a purebred Pomeranian.      Plaintiff says one dog is hers, but defendant took custody of the second Pom. when the ne'er-do'well daughter went to jail again.   Mother bought two dogs, and daughter claims mother gave her the one dog, and she kept the dog for two years, but also claims the mother gave her the second Pom.   Daughter claims second Pom didn't get along with mother's five other dogs. 

In 2013-2014 defendant moved into a trailer owned by her father, and stepfather moved into the trailer too.   In 2014 plaintiff gave the male Pom to  her stepfather to keep the dog for her, because she could only take one dog on her move to Denver.     (I have totally lost track of who lives where, who had custody of the dog, or who owns what home).   Mobile home that plaintiff lived in belongs to the father, not defendant or the stepfather (stepfather also lived there, with plaintiff and her then boyfriend).   

Then plaintiff moves back to the home city, and wanted the second Pom back from the defendant, and defendant still has the dog as of the court case.   

Plaintiff gets the second Pom back, per Judge Judy.    Mother/defendant says in court that she's not giving the dog back to daughter. 

Here's one case I wish there was an update about what happened to the dog. 

Day Care Serial Conman-Plaintiff Diane Gillett suing former day care customer Johnell Parker for non-payment.    Defendant has full physical custody, and joint custody with the child's mother.   JJ wants to know former child care provider, and he was terminated as a customer, for non-payment.  JJ decides that defendant is a deadbeat child care customer.  Plaintiff wants $25 a day for watching defendant's child for 10 days total.   Fatima was the previous child care provider, and defendant claims he wasn't behind on child care services (he's lying). 

Defendant said that he was enrolling his child in a Crystal Stairs program, and claimed to be a single father, but child's mother went with him.   (Crystal Stairs is a non-profit that gives low-income families on public assistance, attending job training, or job hunting, childcare assistance.    If the person has not been on public assistance, then they can get on a list for child care, but that list is really long, so no way defendant would qualify).    

Plaintiff receives $250 for the two weeks of child care services she provided.

[One Tough Cookie]

1 hour ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

1 hour ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

The front of defendant's car hit the back of the plaintiff's car (defendant's wild tie, and matching shirt is amazing),

L

Did you notice that tattoo on top of his bald head?😄

[CrazyInAlabama]

4 p.m. episodes-

First (2014)-

Down and Out Karaoke Singer-Plaintiffs/former landlords Joby Weldon and fiance Bonnie Carr suing defendant/former tenant Cynthia Custer (Harrisonburg, VA is where defendant now lives), for rent, living expenses and insurance deductible for a cell phone.  (This happened in Mathias, WV)  Plaintiffs were online students, but still lived in student housing.   Bonnie is the karaoke singer.    Joby claims they met defendant, and say that she was living in a tent in the woods, and so moved in with plaintiffs in student housing.   

 Joby and Bonnie got Cynthia on with the carnival for work.   Bonnie also wins money at karaoke contests to pay the rent.    Since when does an online only student get college housing? 

Defendant’s witness says plaintiff’s also paid for her cell phone bill.

Plaintiffs were paying $250 to landlord for some type of multi-bedroom situation, and defendant would have to share a room with some sketchy other roommate.   Defendant witness is her cousin, and was letting defendant stay with her, and Lashanda Custer (age 19, another litigant who claims to be a nurse) says plaintiffs recruited defendant Cynthia to live and work with them at the carnival. 

Plaintiff and defendants lived together for three months, and defendant now lives with her cousin Nurse Lashanda.   Plaintiff Joby claims they got defendant a free cell phone, just had to pay the bill, then to get phone replaced, then phone insurance paid for the $449 phone, after plaintiffs reported phone stolen.  Now plaintiffs want the deductible for the phone insurance.   Plaintiffs paid $100 for the phone deductible

(I bet Officer Byrd listened to some of this, and broke his pencil in half, and signaled for additional security).  

What kind of student housing has two bedrooms for $250 a month, and allows various other people to live there?  

$100 for phone to plaintiffs.

 Mother Goes After Son's Ex- Plaintiff Christine Schulz suing defendant Taylor Hanson (son’s ex-girlfriend) for balance of car she sold to her, and a loan for the cost of repairs, $1410.   Defendant was only 17 when car was “sold” to her, so contract to buy wasn’t legal.   Plaintiff transferred car to defendant’s name the first day she bought it from plaintiff.   Defendant paid a total of $850 to plaintiff, but cost of car was $1,000.  

Defendant says car was a lemon, so she claims plaintiff agreed that defendant could stop paying for the car.   Plaintiff says the ‘stop paying for the car’ conversation with defendant never happens.

JJ says when defendant made a payment after she turned 18, that making a payment or recertifying the contract, then it’s a legal debt.   Defendant registered and insured the car, and I hope actually has a driver’s license.

$913 to plaintiff

 Motorcycle Racer Refund -Plaintiff Kayla Gardner  suing defendant Cole McNamara for payment for a motorcycle loan.  The litigants were just friends.   

  Defendant says the agreement was he would pay back plaintiff only if he won the race.  University of Iowa Credit Union refused to loan unemployed defendant with bad credit, so he asked plaintiff for a loan.   Defendant was recently incarcerated too.  (I was naughty, search “Cole McNamara” and Iowa, it will be sadly interesting.   I really hoped he had changed for the better). 

Plaintiff is a server, age 19, and was very foolish to loan this money. 

Plaintiff receives $850.

Second (2014)-

Comatose Mother, Criminal Son  -Plaintiff /mother Sheila Lincoln suing defendant/son Andrew Webb for stealing her car, damaging her car, and claims he stole her money while she was in the hospital.   Son denies he ripped off his ailing mother, and son says he didn’t take her car, damage her car, or steal her money.  (This happened in Rosamond, CA)

Son was living with mother before she went to the hospital. Son and mother also lived with his grandmother.      He was her paid caretaker before she went in the hospital, about $200 a month.   Mother had a settlement from a drug company, $6000, for her damages from taking their medication.  

Mother is still getting arrearages from son’s father’s child support, she’s been on disability for 12 years.   Her bank statement was actually $2525, which was received after mother left hospital, and son had already moved out.     Son now lives with his uncle Mark McCarley.    When son moved to Uncle Mark’s he had to walk, because plaintiff’s witness had the car.   

Plaintiff’s withdrawals were all made after she went home from the hospital, when son had moved out. 

Brian Muro, is plaintiff’s witness, and neighbor.   He testifies that plaintiff’s car was junked, and blames it on son.  Plaintiff and witness say car damages were from defendant blowing the car engine.  However, witness picked up the car, and drove it to his house, so car was operational then. 

Plaintiff case dismissed, because it’s ridiculous.   

Fresh Mouth Take Down! – Plaintiff Jessica Reyes suing defendant/ex-boyfriend Andrew Gile for loans for car repairs, and parts.  Defendant is counter suing for return of property, including a limited-edition hookah pipe.    Defendant says she only paid for a couple of car parts, not the labor or other repairs.   Plaintiff has a lot of car repair shop costs, and says are all for the defendant’s car.

When JJ says defendant isn’t listening to her, he wises off and says she’s not listening to him either.

I have to say, defendant’s hairstyle is awful.

JJ boots defendant.

Plaintiff gets her money, and defendant gets the Officer Byrd boot.

5 p.m. episodes-

First (2017)-

 Defibrillator Pawn Shop Shocker-Plaintiff/pawn shop owner Daniel Risis suing defendant Joseph Frazier  for pawning stolen property.  Defendant took a plea on the theft charges too.   Defendant pawned 20 aviation headsets, and 9 defibrillators (theft of portable defibrillators is a big issue, endangering lives).  Defendant made restitution to the airport for the thefts.   

Police confiscated 4 defibrillators, and 20 head sets, and pawn broker wants his money back, but has no proof of the numbers confiscated.   (Interesting note, Daniel Risis owns 11 pawnshops, called Perfect Pawn in NJ, so I can imagine it is hard to keep up with the number of items taken by the police.   I bet the police don't keep up with their paperwork back to the pawn shop owner). 

Defendant claims the pawn shop called the police.  Plaintiff claims the police came by the stores, and confiscated the items.    Items weren't pawned, but bought out right by the pawn shops.    JJ is ticked the pawn shop didn't call police.  However, calling the police only works when a theft report was filed, and no one said that happened.   

However, I bet the police caught the thieving defendant, and he told them where he sold the property, then the police visited, and confiscated.   Defendant's witness just interrupted, and got the glare of death.  Plaintiff claims defendant said his late grandfather had airplanes, and that's where everything came from.   

(I don't like the pawn shop owner, but I doubt he bought anything from defendant himself, he owns way too many pawn shops for that to happen, but the defendant is a thief, and a jerk.    Why did I suspect the plea bargain was a real deal for the defendant, and he learned nothing about stealing). 

Plaintiff case dismissed. 

Mercedes-Benz Deal of the Century-Plaintiff Gerald Washington Jr is suing defendant Anthony Widner over the purchase of a 2008 Mercedes C300, plaintiff wants his money back.    Byrd's Blue Book 2011 says $11.200, but plaintiff paid $18,000 for the car.   Plaintiff paid the asking price of $18000 in 2011, and it was repossessed in 2018.    Defendant brought his own old Blue Book, saying the car value was $28000 in 2011.   

Plaintiff says the car title is fake.  Defendant claims it was $18k down, and plaintiff would make the payments remaining on the car ($6,000 plus interest up to now).    In 2011 plaintiff still owed $6,000, plus interest.  This would have given the plaintiff a $28k car, for $24k.  

Plaintiff claims the $18,000 car payment was complete, and that he didn't know about $6,000 remaining on the car loan.    The car title has the lien company misspelled on the title, and it has the defendant's home address as the car lien company.

JJ sends them back to local court, which since they live in separate states, mean plaintiff is SOL unless they want to file and pursue this in the other state.  

Second (2017)-

Couch-Surfing Son Sued by Mother-Plaintiff/mother Tela Morton suing defendant/son Michael Whitmore, for damage to her car, impound fees, and lost wages, for wrecking her car.   Defendant plead guilty to 'failing to maintain a lane'. Defendant was living with mother for about a year before the wreck, accident happened in the middle of the night.   

Plaintiff claims car was insured on the date of the accident, but son says car wasn't insured.    Defendant didn't have a license on him at the time of the accident, and didn't have one, and went to jail on an alias.    Defendant was charged with removing tags from car, and had expired registration.   

Car was registered in Missouri, but accident happened in Georgia, and plaintiff and son, didn't register car in Georgia (she lived there 10 months).   You have to get insurance to the address you live at, and it has to be a company that operates in that state.  Insurance didn't fix plaintiff's car, because defendant wasn't on her insurance (her insurance was American Family, and they don't operate in Georgia.  I used to have the same insurance).   Plaintiff claims she only lived in Georgia for a month before the accident, and son lived with her, but they actually lived there for ten months before the accident.    

Plaintiff did not have valid insurance when the accident happened.  Plaintiff is raising son's child (child is 10 now, and grandmother has raised him since he was 2), and only gets food stamps (from Missouri. at least until this case aired).    I guess she doesn't change her address with states for the child's benefits either.  JJ advises the mother to have authorities in Georgia garnish the son's wages for his child support.   

$1500 to plaintiff.   (JJ only did that for the grandchild, not the grandmother). 

Retaliatory Freeway Brake Tapping-Plaintiff Matthew Kemmerle suing defendant (couldn't catch the defendant's name) for an accident on the freeway, defendant is countersuing for his deductible.    Accident was deemed 60% plaintiff's fault.   

Plaintiff say defendant was tail-gating him at high speed, and plaintiff tapped his brakes, and defendant went all of the way right.  However, plaintiff pulled in front of defendant in the high speed lane.   Instead of getting out of defendant's way, plaintiff tapped his brakes, and defendant pulled back in front of plaintiff's car.    Then defendant tapped on his brakes, causing plaintiff to swerve, and the accident to happen.  

Another case where people let someone irritate them, and then react.  Great way to end up dead.   You never know who is in the other car, and if they're armed, and will go after you.  Defendant didn't have to say anything in court. 

Case dismissed.  

Edited December 13, 2022 by CrazyInAlabama

[One Tough Cookie]

2 hours ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

Plaintiff did not have valid insurance when the accident happened.

I don't get why the defendants get compensated when they don't have insurance.  Isn't it against the law?  It is in our state. eta:  I think if you are caught driving without insurance OR a license your car should be confiscated.

Edited December 14, 2022 by One Tough Cookie

[CrazyInAlabama]

4 p.m. episodes-

First (2014)-

Family Drama Lock Out! -Plaintiff/sister Dawn Fusaro suing defendant/brother Richard Fusaro for locking her out of her father’s home, she wants return of her property, and hotel costs. Litigants are half-sister and half-brother.    Plaintiff claims she was living with the father for six years, until she became ill, and then moved in with her mother, and is still there.     Father supported plaintiff, so she hasn’t worked since 2008 when she moved in with father. Father    Defendant has POA on the house, plaintiff counters that she has the deed to the house.

To move in with mother, plaintiff picked up her desktop computer, and her son’s stuff to move in with her mother, when police pulled up.   Police were called about a burglary at the father’s house.   Brother says defendant had a TV, cable modem, electronics, and her desktop and father’s items.   The caretaker lived in the house while father was hospitalized for hip surgery, and caretaker, Sheila, who was hired and moved into the house while father was in hospital, and then caretaker’s stuff was thrown out of the house by plaintiff, when she picked her stuff up at the father’s house.   On deed, father, plaintiff and defendant are all on the deed, but it hasn’t been filed yet.

Plaintiff hotel fees thrown out.   Father doesn’t take plaintiff’s calls either.    Son has POA currently.   Plaintiff gets her stuff, and son’s toys and clothes with help of a marshal within five days.   Anything left in father’s house after the five days can be tossed.      Plaintiff claims she left the house because she was getting hospitalized, but father won’t let her back in his house without return of electronic items father and son/defendant say she stole from the house.

Plaintiff claims father won’t allow her back, because she put the caretaker out.    Defendant says father won’t let plaintiff come back until she returns father’s items. 

This case is absurd, plaintiff doesn’t own the house, the father does.   Father needs to cancel the transfer to father, son, and daughter for house deed.

Case dismissed.    If daughter wants the house deed, she needs to take it to another court because of the value of the house.

Divorcee Tax Fraud? -Plaintiff/ex-wife Melissa Wallace suing defendant/ex-husband Michael Wallace for taking money from her Roth IRA.   The litigants filed jointly, so they will have to pay the taxes eventually, and penalties for early withdrawal of IRA.   They were married for 21 years, and divorced in 2014.  (This was in Idaho).    They had a settlement on property during the divorce.   Then defendant got an IRS letter saying he owed taxes on money taken from plaintiff’s IRA, on three occasions.    

JJ tells plaintiff to call her divorce attorney and tell them that ex-husband committed fraud by withdrawing from plaintiff’s IRA, and reopen the divorce.  (This was in Meridian, ID).

JJ tells plaintiff that she had an attorney during the divorce, and divorce was finalized.  Plaintiff says she didn’t know about the money withdrawals during the divorce, except she had all of the financial records during the divorce.

It was a Roth IRA, so taxes were taken out before the money was deposited in the IRA, so no taxes are owed. 

I’m getting sick of plaintiff’s “I was cheated” and saying she didn’t look at documents that were in her possession.

Plaintiff case dismissed.   Plaintiff can either reopen the divorce settlement or give up.

Second (2014)-

Mysterious Motorists -Plaintiff Terry Bross suing defendants (driver) Christianna Castillo and (car owner) Megan Mulroy over damages from a car accident.  Plaintiff was rear ended while stopped at a red light.  Defendant Castillo was driving, and she rear ended plaintiff’s car.  Car owner Mulroy let plaintiff drive her car, but Castillo couldn’t find the insurance card at the accident, so the defendants had to go to court to prove car was insured.   Car damages were never claimed on defendant’s car policy. 

Defendant Mulroy says she didn’t claim the damages to her insurance because she wasn’t driving when it happened.  I agree with JJ, why did defendant Mulroy agree to pay the damages to plaintiff instead of claiming on her insurance, and after agreeing to pay, didn’t?  

Plaintiff says before the police showed up at the accident, that two other cars came to the accident and removed a lot of stuff, and then fled the scene.   Defendant driver Castillo says she called Mulroy right after the accident, and her sister-in-law, and that’s when the other people showed up at the accident, grabbing a lot of objects out of the car.    The mystery drivers were defendant driver’s sister-in-law, and her boyfriend came to the accident.     

Plaintiff submits the estimate for his car damages.

Plaintiff gets money for car damages $4210.

Bitter Break Up -Plaintiff Jacob Thomas suing defendant / ex-girlfriend Aliicia Fox for the balance of a title loan and return of the Honda’s title, on a 20-year-old Honda Civic.   Defendant claims the day they broke up, that he gave her the title to the Honda.    Plaintiff bought a used 2003 Subaru, before they broke up, and he was driving the Subaru and the Honda.    Plaintiff says they went 50/50 on the Honda, and defendant was supposed to pay him $100 a month until his half payment on the Honda was paid up. 

Defendant says when she got a new boyfriend, that the plaintiff was upset, and then plaintiff wanted money for the Honda. 

When plaintiff gave car to defendant to drive, he thinks the title was in the car.    Plaintiff says defendant forged his name on the title, and then got a title loan on the car.

Defendant says plaintiff only took car back when she was dating someone else.

Defendant and plaintiff each paid $600 when they bought the Honda.  Defendant only took the title loan after they split up, and he took the car.

Plaintiff case dismissed, and defendant will get the car back after contacting police.

5 p.m. episodes-

First (2017)-

Stay Out of Big Limos Lady!-Plaintiff/limo company owner John Mosby suing former limo drivers Lalo and Kay Lynn Landres for damages to his limo.  Plaintiff has a limo company, and owns 14 limousines.    Plaintiff claims defendant had three separate accidents that were her fault.   JJ doesn't like the employment contract where limo drivers are responsible for the insurance deductible, if the accident is the driver's fault. 

Defendant wife damaged three limos, so she owed $3,000 in deductibles (two were on the same day).    Plaintiff tried to deduct the $3,000 from husband plaintiff's salary, after he fired the wife, and that's not legal.      I absolutely believe the wife had all three accidents, and they were all her fault.     

Defendant husband is counter suing for wrongful termination.  If this is California, it's an At Will state, so you can fire at any time, for any reason.  Many states are at will employment also.   Defendant was also counter claiming for future wages, didn't get that either. 

Plaintiff receives $612

Second (2017)-

Damages from Police Invasion-Plaintiff Demetra Dunbar rented the front of her house (for the first and last time) to defendants, Marquie and Kenisha Jackson.  Plaintiff suing defendants for damages from the police raid, utilities, unpaid rent. Police had a warrant on defendant, and broke down the front door.   Defendant couple and their child, plus a few other people were living in the home.   

They had a month-to-month verbal agreement, for $1200 a month rent, and half of the utilities.    In January, after the police raid she gave them a 30 day notice to quit, and defendants moved out in February.   

The warrant on Marquise Jackson was served by the police, on October 2016, for assault with a deadly weapon, and the case is still going on (this was filmed in 2017).   Defendant husband was held in jail for two months.   January rent was never paid. and on 2 January the 30 day notice was issued.    Plaintiff will get $1200 rent (no security deposit existed).    

Photos and bill for door are produced.   The front door damage was from the police raid, there is another door destroyed by defendant's dog, and the garage door has damage.   Defendant claims they paid $1200, for the first month's rent, and $300 the next month for the security, but there is no receipt for the security.    

Plaintiff receives $1695 for one month’s rent, and door damages.   Defendant's counter claim is for loss of dog (he had to give the dog away when they moved), defamation of character, and motel costs, everything is dismissed.   I love a defendant with a case for assault with a deadly weapon still going on in court is claiming plaintiff defamed him. 

Dog was not allowed to be there, and guests not on lease, then the police raid happened.  Defendant claims the visiting relatives were babysitting the 14-year-old daughter, but plaintiff claims the daughter was left alone a lot.  Defendant's ridiculous claim dismissed. 

$1695 to plaintiff. 

Teens' Camaro Clash-Plaintiff Romarin Bell suing ex-girlfriend Briana Woodson for the value of a 2002 Camaro, purchased for $900.   Plaintiff said he loaned the girlfriend the Camaro.   He also had a 2003 Camaro, and a 1999 Hyundai.    Camaro is in impound, and it will cost almost $2000 to get car out of car jail.         (What is wrong with plaintiff's speech?   New braces, or what?).     

Car ran out of gas, and Camaro was pushed to curb by defendant's house, Camaro was taken to mechanic, and it needed a blown head gasket replaced.    Defendant claims she gave plaintiff $500 to plaintiff for 2002 Camaro.     

There is nothing in defendant's written statement that says anything about her buying the car, and getting it repaired.   

JJ dismisses everything, because she believes nothing the litigants say.

[CrazyInAlabama]

4 p.m. episodes-

First (2014)-

Neighbors Restrained From Each Other! -Plaintiffs Steven and Krystal Voight and  suing defendant/neighbor) and truck owner  Douglas Smith and Ashley Ruff (wife) and wants money for fixing defendant’s truck.   However, when plaintiff tried to collect, he had three restraining orders filed against him by defendants.    Plaintiff Steve fixes cars in his front yard.   Defendant needed his truck fixed, and asked neighbor to do the hubs, and exhaust manifold gasket.   Defendant Douglas used to be a mechanic.   Estimate was $850 for the repairs from another mechanic.   Douglas is on SSDI for a back injury, he used to be a mechanic and is totally disabled, at age 26.    (This was in Franklin NH)

Plaintiff Steven did the work, but defendant didn’t pay for the $1200 for the parts (Steven says Douglas’s truck needed a lot more work than the first estimate stated). 

Steven says defendant Douglas traded the previous truck in, and bought the total lemon that needed a lot of work.  Douglas claims he paid $400 to plaintiff, and says that’s in full.   JJ doesn’t believe defendants about the payments.   There are repeated police reports about this entire case.   The police report is defendant Douglas’ statement claiming he’s been paying plaintiff Steven weekly, but plaintiff says no payments were ever made.  Defendant Douglas says the entire repair was a gift, and claims plaintiff refused payments, which is total bull pucky.

Plaintiff Steven claims defendants file three different applications against him, and only one was granted.   The one that was granted was a no contact order between plaintiff Steven, and defendants.   JJ says the granted order was a consent order against plaintiff by defendants.  

$2009 was total work and parts, and none was repaired.   At the time of repairs, defendant Douglas claims he wasn’t actually the owner of the truck yet.   Truck was wrecked after this, and defendant says insurance company will be hauling away the truck remains tomorrow. 

Plaintiff receives $2009.   Defendant told to stuff his request for moving costs.  

High-Priced Water?! -Plaintiff / sister Wynnette Thomas suing defendant/sister Laurie Mitchell for a water bill and a cleaning bill. (Water bill was  over $3500).   Defendant says the water was attached to a shelter also owned by plaintiff sister.    Plaintiff owns a veterans home, and a transitional home for women coming out of prison, and plaintiff says defendant would be working at both shelters, and pay some utilities (water, cable, electricity) , but defendant says water bill was not included.   Also, defendant would be volunteering at the shelters.   

Defendant says her son was too sick for her to go to work.    Plaintiff never asked sister for rent while she was living in the rental home.    Plaintiff says defendant could work if she helped with the defendant’s son.    Defendant’s source of income was ?

Defendant’s son was so sick he could only play football (yes, sarcasm), and other sports.  Plaintiff says house defendant and son lived in would have cost her $750 a month, but working at the shelters and paying the utilities replaced rent payments.  

Plaintiff says utilities couldn’t be in her name, but were in defendant’s name.   With no income, how did defendant get the bills in her name?   And why couldn’t plaintiff get utilities for her two shelters in her name?

The $2500 that was due before defendant moved in.   Plaintiff didn’t bring the water bill to court.

$800 to plaintiff, $2500 back bill is dismissed.    

Second (2014)-

Racial Profiling? -Plaintiff Don Coner suing defendants/cousin Frederick Coner and girlfriend  Rutjai “Sparkle” Sinerurat  for unpaid bail.   Plaintiff says he was pulled over, and it was racial profiling because his car has big rims.  However, his car radio was very loud according to cousin Frederick, and was driving erratically.   (I’m sorry, but “Sparkle” is the least sparkly person I’ve seen in a long time)

Defendant got arrested for a warrant he didn’t know anything about, claiming it was a bad check written by his ex-wife, and that was dismissed.   All of this happened in California.  Defendant Sparkle keeps interrupting, and gets told to sit down, she’s told one more interruption and she’s out.   (This happened in Las Vegas).

Plaintiff claims when Frederick got arrested that plaintiff should call Sparkle, and his aunt, Sparkle Western Unioned  $200 for bail, and so plaintiff bailed defendant out.

Defendant didn’t pay any of the bail, blames his arrest on the plaintiff drawing attention to them.  Defendant has been arrested, and bailed out before.  

$800 is left to pay the bondsman, so Frederick paid $200, and Sparkle paid $200.  

JJ is so funny in this case, she says plaintiff didn’t get any fun from defendant’s ex, so why should he pay her bills?    Plaintiff confirms he wasn't having any ‘pleasure’ from defendant cousin’s ex-wife. 

Plaintiff gets $1115.

Roommate Rebel  -Plaintiff/former tenant Alek "A.J." Robbins suing defendant/former roommate Jessica  Haney for his rent back.   Plaintiff gave February rent to defendant to pay, they had a dust up over parking, and plaintiff wanted his rent back.  Plaintiff case dismissed.  Contract was $450 a month rent each, and 30 day-notice to move.     Plaintiff did not give 30 days notice, so he loses his case. 

Defendant is counter claiming for plaintiff holding her against her will.   Defendant says plaintiff forcibly took her to the bank, and tried to get his money back that way.  Defendant says when plaintiff was moving out, she wanted him to move the truck so she could get out of their way, and he wanted to follow defendant to the bank to get his $450 back. 

 Then, defendant was on her cell phone, while driving to the bank, and the police showed up.   Defendant said that plaintiff held her against her will, and intimidated her, and tried to force her to give him his money back.   Defendant’s story is she was blocked in by plaintiff and his brother, and she called the Sheriff from her car, and she was on the phone with Sheriff's officers all the way to the bank.   

Plaintiff case dismissed.   Defendant case dismissed (no police report, or charges filed). 

5 p.m. episodes-

First (2017)-

Neighbor Nastiness Caught on Video-Plaintiff John Helfer suing defendant Michael Shorey over a dog bite.    Plaintiff saw, and videoed his neighbor walking his dog in the common area, and taking a German Shepherd size dump right next to the "clean up after your dog" sign.   When plaintiff was handing him a bag to clean up the poop, dog bit the plaintiff.     Plaintiff has seen the defendant leaving dog piles behind repeatedly, on the complex common area.   Defendant also grooms his GSD, and leaves the hair to mess up the common area.  

Plaintiff and his daughter video, or take pictures of pet owners that abuse the common area of the condo complex.    The plaintiff's daughter took a video of the incident with the dog, and plaintiff.    Defendant didn't have a poop bag, and didn't care about the mess his dog leaves.  As JJ says, defendant is disrespecting his condo complex common area, and being a bad neighbor. 

Plaintiff is in law enforcement, and JJ tells him not to embroider his story.  (It says engineer under his name on the screen, so I wonder where the law enforcement part came from?  Or did he retire from one job, and then works as an engineer? Or do they let people change professions on the show, for privacy?).    

Plaintiff receives $1000 for the medical bills.  

Second (2017)-

Harley Handshake Deal-Plaintiff Scott Coates suing motorcycle sellers, Preston Clay and his wife Denise Robinson Clay, for return of his deposit on a Harley, and the cost to get bike running again.   $14,500 was the purchase price, and the price was $2000 down, and a kitchen remodel for the defendants.   JJ says verbal contract was completed, with an offer, an acceptance, and exchange of property, however contract wasn't finished.   Plaintiff did do some work on planning the kitchen, with elevations, and prints of cabinets that were prepared for the defendant's kitchen.   

Plaintiff wanted to borrow bike for a weekend trip, had the bike for three days after changing the starter.       Plaintiff returned bike, and defendant backed out of kitchen deal, and plaintiff claims defendant said he would give the deposit back.   Plaintiff says defendants didn't want to redo their kitchen, because they were going to move.    Defendant says he lives in the same house, and was never going to redo the kitchen.   Defendant says plaintiff wanted too much to redo the kitchen.

Plaintiff receives $2,000 deposit back.         Plaintiff gets nothing for the parts he put on the bike, because he used the bike for the 3-day trip. 

Rottweiler Puppy Death Drama-Plaintiff Yasnaya Lorick suing Elia Gomez for return of money paid for a Rottweiler puppy.   Plaintiff selected a puppy from photos.    Plaintiff put down money on the puppy (she put down 1/2, $600), but puppy died.     Defendant had 9 puppies, and 3 died, and she sold the other six puppies.    The defendant took the puppies to the vet in August, but three more died in October, and no vet care for the three that died.   Defendant claims she offered another puppy, but plaintiff didn't want that puppy.    Defendant claims the five puppies she sold were all fine, but there is no proof of that.   

The only "contract" was the text message exchanges between the litigants.   Defendant claims deposit wasn't refundable.     Defendant claims the deposit was only $200, not $600, then plaintiff husband gave her $392.    A week after tail docking, the puppy died.   I'm wondering who did the tail docking?  My guess it wasn't the vet, in spite of the fact defendant claims she has paperwork.     I wonder what killed the three puppies?   Defendant says infection, plaintiff says she suspects parvo. 

Plaintiff receives her $592 deposit back.  

Edited December 15, 2022 by CrazyInAlabama

[One Tough Cookie]

1 hour ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

Rottweiler Puppy Death Drama-Plaintiff Yasnaya Lorick suing Elia Gomez for return of money paid for a Rottweiler puppy.   Plaintiff selected a puppy from photos.    Plaintiff put down money on the puppy (she put down 1/2, $600), but puppy died.     Defendant had 9 puppies, and 3 died, and she sold the other six puppies.    The defendant took the puppies to the vet in August, but three more died in October, and no vet care for the three that died.   Defendant claims she offered another puppy, but plaintiff didn't want that puppy.    Defendant claims the five puppies she sold were all fine, but there is no proof of that.   

As much as I  really wanted  don't like dogs like that I wanted to smack out of that fat slob.

[CrazyInAlabama]

4 p.m. episodes-

First (2014)-

Don’t Lie to the Judge -Plaintiff Jonathan Merida suing defendant Herbert Osorio for impound fees and car damages from a car he was loaning to defendant.   Since defendant had no license, car had to be in impound for 30 days, and plaintiff wants car damages, and impound and storage fees, $4847.  Defendant claims he was buying the plaintiff’s car.

Defendant claims he told plaintiff he had a suspended license.    Defendant says he offered $4,000 to plaintiff to buy the car, plus money for the insurance, $700 for six months insurance.     Plaintiff claims car was always insured.   Plus since defendant works at a body/mechanic shop, he would fix the issues with the car.  

License was suspended for traffic violations.  Defendant says car was repaired, and he was going to the shop to store the car until he regained his driver’s license.   Plaintiff claims defendant left car at his house, and drove it on weekends, after he repaired it for $1200.   Defendant has an invoice for car repairs, and JJ will use her Phone of Justice to talk to the mechanics shop about the car.

Defendant says he tried to pay plaintiff for $1504 for impound fees, and JJ gives that

Hysterically Bad Driver? -Plaintiff Tamisha Johnson (26-years-old) suing defendant James Parker Jr. (23-years-old) for damaging her car while practicing for his driver’s test,  when defendant backed into something and damaged it.   

Defendant says accident was plaintiff’s fault.  JJ reminds plaintiff her insurance doesn’t cover unlicensed drivers, and defendant didn’t have a learner’s permit.    Defendant hit a fence.

Defendant says he hit the fence because of plaintiff touching the wheel.  

Plaintiff’s insurance company did pay for the fence, and defendant still doesn’t have his license.

Defendant says he practices in his parent’s Chevy Cruze, but plaintiff says his parents live in GA, and both litigants go to school in Alabama.  So, plaintiff says defendant is a liar.   They go to school in Huntsville, and parents live three hours away in Atlanta.

$2363 to plaintiff.

Escorted Out by Police -Plaintiff Kayla Jensen suing defendant/ex-boyfriend Austin Fisher unpaid rent, a lease-breaking fee, and property damages.  Litigants were roommates, and romantic, had an argument, the next day defendant left the apartment.  Plaintiff called the police, and they told defendant to stay away for the night, to let the situation cool down.  Next day when plaintiff came back to the apartment, defendant was packing to leave.  Plaintiff wants defendant to leave, but still pay for the apartment rent, and lease breaking fees.  (This happened in Lynwood, WA).

Defendant says police escorted him out, and he left.

Plaintiff paid $2656 for lease breaking fee, so plaintiff gets half $600 of the lease-breaking fee.   But plaintiff doesn’t get $2,056 for damages.

Second (2014)-

Teenager Steals from Her Mother? -Plaintiff/ mother Dawn Carmichael suing defendant/ daughter Megan Carmichael for stealing $5000, from her house.  Mother shows the receipts for a $1600 dog, and other fripperies that daughter spent the $5,000 on.   Plaintiff is a nurse in the  Army Reserves,  and is a civilian nurse too.  She claims she received an overpayment by the military, about $20,000.   As JJ says, plaintiff knew she would have to return the overpayment to the government.   Plaintiff says they sent her a $20k check by mail, and plaintiff cashed the two checks, and claims DFAS (military pay group) told her they would debit her pay until the money was repaid.    

Plaintiff now needs the money to repay the government / DFAS, so she came to see JJ.   

Daughter’s counterclaim is for the dog mother sold, lottery winnings, and the rest of the $5,000 she blew on stuff, even though daughter and boyfriend were unemployed (he sometimes packs fruit).

Plaintiff took the check, cashed it, and kept it at the house.   However, the overpayment was a mistake by the military, and there were two checks, and she would have to repay it.  JJ doesn’t believe the mother’s story about the overpayment, and why she had the money at her house.   Mother says the daughter is unemployed, and boyfriend makes very little, but yet the two had a big savings account.   There is an email from daughter to mother saying she will repay the $5,000.   JJ believes nothing about the mother’s story.   Sorry JJ, you repay overpayments, or other debts to the government from a certain percentage of your pay.   

There is an email from defendant to plaintiff, but no way to prove when it was emailed.   So, how is plaintiff going to repay the government now?    

Plaintiff   case dismissed.   I hope the daughter stays far away from plaintiff.  

Daycare Drama -Plaintiff/daycare provider Encarnacion “Nani” Martinez suing defendant/former client Karen Betsill for unpaid daycare charges after defendant didn’t tell plaintiff her state aid for care ran out.  Supposedly the defendant mother’s one kid won some kind of child care lottery for state aid, and the other child was supposed to be paid for by the defendant.

JJ disregards the application, says it isn’t a contract, and dismisses the plaintiff’s case.

Reckless Driving Mishap -Plaintiff/car owner Joseph Williams Jr suing defendant/car owner Tiffany Reed   after defendant backed into plaintiff’s car.  Plaintiff was driving on the street, when defendant backed into him out of a driveway.   Plaintiff also slipped on the ice after the accident.  Plaintiff was driving past the defendant’s driveway, slowing to turn into his daughter’s driveway, when defendant backed into the road and clipped his car just in front of the driver’s side rear wheel well.

Defendant claims it was all a set-up by plaintiff, says plaintiff was driving on the wrong side of the road, and claims his daughter ran out of her nearby home with a gun and threatened her.   Plaintiff had right of way.   This was in Detroit, in the winter.  

I love the plaintiff’s tie and shirt.

Plaintiff receives $1663

Officer Byrd Takes Charge! -Plaintiffs Kristy Reighard for unpaid suing defendant Binnie Thompson for unpaid rent, and cable, and for punching huge holes in the walls.   Mr. Thompson doesn’t know his rent, when he moved in and out, or anything else.  Plaintiff’s witness is her boyfriend, and saw the defendant punching the walls.   Plaintiff witness says defendant was trying to punch him, and missed, and damaged the wall.  

 Then Mr. Thompson interrupts again.  Officer Byrd has to step in after defendant mouths off in court, and tell him to shut up, stop interrupting, and shouting out.

Defendant in the hall-terview says everyone can kiss his a$$ (ass is bleeped).  

$2485 for rent to plaintiff, and $0 for damages, a total of $2485.

5 p.m. episodes-

First (2017)-

Ambulance Ride Revisited    -Plaintiff Gesian Deal (mother of five children with defendant), including son Mark Wright Jr, is suing defendant Mark Wright Sr for medical bills (ambulance ride cost $878), and accident settlement.     Son's accident while living with defendant was a car accident, and son was taken to hospital, treated, and released.   This was in October 2013, but in 2017 the ambulance company is garnishing the plaintiff's salary for the $878 ambulance ride.     

However, defendant claims plaintiff only takes the son back to her home, because of child support, but defendant hasn't gone to court to change custody, and child support to plaintiff for all five children.    Child support is $107 a week for all of the children, and when son was living with the defendant, he still paid the $107 to the ex/plaintiff.

Plaintiff doesn't give two flips that child support should have been reduced for the children when they age out (four are out of both houses now), and it's only for the son, Mark Jr.   And defendant still paid when son lived with him, and plaintiff had no children living with her. 

Defendant received a settlement, $1,500, and kept it.  A letter from the insurance company says the settlement was $3200, is submitted by plaintiff / mother,  but defendant claims it was another accident, not the first accident.  Letter of $3200 settlement says for accident in November of 2014, not the same accident the son was in October 2013.   

 Check for son's settlement should have been deposited, and held for the son when he hits 18.    Mark Jr used the money for shopping, movies, etc.    Plaintiff found out about the settlement when she was sent to court for collections, and garnishment for the ambulance ride.   However, defendant's child support should have been reduced by 80% when son lived with mother, and zero when he lived with the father, and when he ages out.   

Defendant is still paying current and back child support, but plaintiff son is on his own.    (this happened in Michigan City, Indiana)

Plaintiff case dismissed, for lack of proof, and because this is stupid. 

New Get Out of Jail Clothes!-    Plaintiff Lavisco Barr suing ex Aloysius Graham for a phone ($1400), phone cancellation fees, and clothing she purchased for him when he left his most recent incarceration.   JJ throws out the clothes purchases, because they were a couple then.      

Plaintiff bought herself a new cell phone, and added another line for defendant, and he was supposed to pay his part of the bill.    The defendant says plaintiff's phone was messed up, and then fixed, and when she bought her new phone, she gave her old phone to him.   Defendant had the phone for two months, and paid $50 a month for the phone, and plaintiff cut the phone off for defendant.   This was  after defendant found spy ware plaintiff put on the phone, and he wanted it off.  Plaintiff cut his phone off, and defendant couldn't get the phone in his own name, or the spyware removed.   

Lavisco (plaintiff) says she lost her phone, got the new phone, found the old one, and gave it to defendant.   

Plaintiff's ridiculous case dismissed.  

Second (2017)-

Co-Worker Embarrasses Man Online-Plaintiffs Danielle Brown and fiance Terence Powell, are suing defendant/ co-worker/roommate Ernesto Connerfor unpaid rent and car damage.   Plaintiffs, and defendant worked together, and when defendant became homeless they offered him the couch for $150 a week.     Defendant was in home for five weeks.  ($600 a month to sleep on the couch!).  Defendant borrowed plaintiff's car, and plaintiff said she didn't notice the vehicle damage until a month after defendant moved out.   

Plaintiffs will not get vehicle damages.    

However, plaintiff woman should ashamed at posting her nasty rants on social media.   Plaintiff woman posted a nasty video online of defendant's girlfriend,  Plaintiff woman needs her filthy mouth washed out with soap.   Revolting plaintiffs are suing for harassment, and car damages, and that will be tossed. 

Back rent is $100, to plaintiffs.

Ex Gets Short End of the Lizard Stick-Plaintiff Darlene Lobato suing her ex-boyfriend Michael Velezfor lizard support, a false restraining order, and expenses, and says he has her car.    They lived together at his mother's house, he moved out two years ago, and left his two dogs, and the six lizards behind, but visited the animals occasionally.    Plaintiff took care of the defendant's mother, and all of the animals.   Plaintiff pays the rent since defendant moved out.   

JJ has plaintiff sign over title to defendant's old vehicle (to get her liability for the vehicle canceled).     Plaintiff will keep the dogs, and if defendant doesn't pick up his lizards in the number of days JJ specified, they will be going to lizard jail.   There is no contract for pet care, so no money for plaintiff for that.   

Defendant says he visited his late mother, she has died), often, but plaintiff says he came to visit less than once a month.     Defendant says plaintiff tried for a false restraining order, and his property is messed up or missing.    Plaintiff keeps the dogs.   

Plaintiff filed for a restraining order, and says defendant threatened her.  It was only posted on his social media, but didn't mention plaintiff's name, and is song lyrics, and stalked her after the mother died.  (As they say where I live, the defendant just ain't right in the head.  If the plaintiff is smart she moved far away from where he lives.)

Cases dismissed. Defendant will pick up his lizards or they go to lizard jail, and plaintiff keeps the dogs. 

I've noticed the coordinated outfits on litigants, so much for the 'we broke up, and hate each other' story that so many tell to JJ.   I suspect that the ones with matching wardrobes are just on the show for award money, national TV time, and the free trip to L.A.   I also hate the people who are suing each other, say horrible things in court, and then in the hall-terview they're hugging and saying they're still family.     

There have been a few totally phony cases, but not many.   I suspect a lot of the dismissed without prejudice, to go back and refile locally, are suspected to be phony.

Edited December 17, 2022 by CrazyInAlabama

[One Tough Cookie]

Does anyone other than myself notice that most of the time the def/plt usually come in the same, i both plaintif and defendant coordinating colors??

I have to go and feed my lizadrs now

Edited December 17, 2022 by One Tough Cookie

[benice]

On 12/6/2018 at 10:06 PM, Cynna said:

This was hard to watch. Gorman struck me as a racist who has moved into a 'gated community' with the expectation that it will be gated to keep all of 'them' out.  He stated at the end that he's trying to move but that the plaintiff is bringing down his property values, that's a dogwhistle right there. 

I actually know the guy. Definitely not racist and actually a really kind and generous guy. 

[One Tough Cookie]

On 12/2/2022 at 5:32 PM, CrazyInAlabama said:

Only Child vs. Only Dad -Plaintiff/father Gregory Johnson suing defendants (son) Joshua Johnson and (future daughter-in-law) Jessica Quick for repayment of a loan

I think i thinka shitty when parents sue their children, ESPECIALLY when the parent comes into a nice chunk of change.

Edited December 20, 2022 by One Tough Cookie

[CrazyInAlabama]

4 p.m. episodes-

First (2014)-

Crowbar-Wielding Mother! -Plaintiff Anna McNamara suing defendant/father of her child, Roby Ulrich for damaging her car when he kicked and jumped on it.   Plaintiff took a crowbar with her to go to defendant’s house, because she was afraid of him, and his druggie friends (that’s her story).   Son left bookbag in defendant/father’s house, and when plaintiff went to pick up book bag, she pulled up and honked (defendant blocked her number), and when defendant didn’t answer, she took the crowbar with her.  Then plaintiff saw the book bag in defendant’s car, so she grabbed the bookbag, and started honking his car horn.  (This was in St. Louis, MO).

Plaintiff took the bookbag, and was still carrying the crowbar.  Then plaintiff claims she started to walk back to her car, and she claims defendant came running after her.   Plaintiff has a mother who lives near her, and plaintiff’s witness Kayla Roles (was with her at the book bag incident) says she saw the defendant run out of his house, jumped on plaintiff’s car hood and dented it, and kicked the car.

Defendant says when he went outside the plaintiff threatened him with the crowbar.   He also says plaintiff was outside his house, honking her horn, three times in one week.   Defendant says he jumped out of the way when plaintiff drove after him.

Unfortunately, defendant says he kicked plaintiff’s car six months ago.   $3400 is the estimate for the car.   JJ says plaintiff is hostile, and out-of-control.

$1700 to plaintiff, so she better find someone who can fix her car for that.  

Failed Friendship -Plaintiff Krystal Williams suing defendant Staci Schiller for the return of a security deposit and damages to her car by defendant.    Both women drove the car.   The two women lived in MN when the case began.    Then, the two litigants decided to move to GA, with defendant moving first to get ready for plaintiff and kids to arrive, and defendant had left her kids behind in MN too. Damages to car happened in MN, but no way to know who was driving, or when.

When defendant moved to GA it was just her, then when plaintiff showed up defendant and boyfriend were staying at the boyfriend’s house, not in the apartment.   Defendant boyfriend says he never lived at the apartment.  Litigants were was living in the apartment, but three months later they broke the lease in GA, so plaintiff moved back to MN.   This is the security deposit that plaintiff claims was returned to defendant by landlord, there is no later from landlord in GA about security deposit.  

Plaintiff car damages, and security deposit case dismissed.

Defendant has a counter claim for the $1300 security, but actually wants $950 for unpaid rent.

Defendant ridiculous case also dismissed.

Second (2014)-

Clash of the Cousins -Plaintiff/ cousin Randall Gerringer, and his wife, Cindy Nason, are suing defendant /cousin Madalyn Walleshauser for the unpaid balance on a car they sold her.   Car is being hidden at a mechanic’s shop by defendant, so plaintiffs can’t find it.   Defendant says car was taken to some unknown mechanic by her witness, who is sent out of court to get the mechanic’s address.  Defendant was supposed to pay $125 a month, and only paid $100 (or so she says) one time.   Car payments weren’t paid for 2 full months, and part of another month, so plaintiff will get the car back according to the contract.  (this happened in Haw River, NC).

Part of the car issue is defendant was letting her boyfriend Rico drive the car, which was not allowed by the contract.  Defendant claims she wants to keep the car, and catch up on payments.

Plaintiffs now have an order to repo the car, and are to contact the police at Haw River, NC, and get their car back, and since defendants have the title, defendant will sign the title over to plaintiffs, and they can re-register it, and sell it or whatever they want to do with it (I always suggest that even though it’s expensive, change the ignition, and door locks, or the car will go bye-bye with Cindy, and boyfriend Rico.

JJ makes defendant sign the title back to plaintiffs, and they will report it stolen.   Boyfriend Rico never comes back to court.    Plaintiff says defendant hasn’t had the car for months, some random guy has it.

Plaintiffs get car back, so title is signed back, and they will contact the police to get it back, or report it stolen.  Plaintiff says he's going to get the car, and crush it, and send the photo to defendant. 

Dog Breeding Brawl -Plaintiff Jessica Navarro and Alice Fiala (mother) suing defendant Dee Godin over the value of two Yorkshire terrier puppies.   Plaintiffs have a breeding female, one has been bred for five litters (one litter per year), and the other female has had three litters (one per year), they get an outside stud, in return for pick of litter for stud owner, or a stud fee.

Defendant has four females, and five males, two are breeding.   She has one male champion, and two with points.      

Plaintiff says they bred their two females to defendant’s stud.    Defendant is counter claiming because she claims the plaintiffs withheld medical information from defendant.    There is a contract for a breeding, in 2011.    Contract is the usual arrangement for breeding.  If the litter produces more than one puppy, defendant would get to select and keep a puppy.  If there was only one puppy, then defendant would get $500 instead of the puppy.  Contract says the name of another stud, not defendant’s stud dog, but this was for a 2011 breeding. 

The 2013 breedings were without a contract.    The females were bred a few days apart, and there were a total of eight puppies, first litter defendant took one puppy.  With the second litter, defendant kept three puppies.   

Plaintiff says deal was for one puppy, not three puppies that defendant wanted, and defendant said had control of them (plaintiff took the litters separately to defendant’s house), and she was keeping them, and not going to pay for the extra two puppies. 

Defendant sold one puppy, kept another one, and gave one away.   I guess she kept or sold the first puppy from the first litter.    Puppies in the second litter sold for $1300 and $1500 each.

Police said it was a civil matter, and they weren’t getting involved.  

Plaintiffs should get $2800, but are awarded $4,000.   Defendant yells that JJ didn’t listen to her side, why should she? 

5 p.m. episodes-

First (2017)-

Child Deprived of Food on Dad Day-Plaintiff Ronald Aragon suing his child's mother, defendant Alexandra Rosado, over her limits on visitation, for a false restraining order, and defamation.      Plaintiff claims a false restraining order petition filed by defendant was just to harass him.    Daughter was 18 months old when defendant moved in with her father.   Defendant lived with her father for one year, and no visitation with child's father happened. 

 Defendant claims to fear plaintiff, but never called police, or filed for a restraining order.   The only time plaintiff saw his daughter after almost a year, defendant says she 'let him' see his child, and that was the only time in a year plaintiff saw his child.     Plaintiff hasn't seen his daughter since the one meeting, and it was over a year before the child custody hearing, which resulted in joint custody. Judge's order was agreed on during mediation, and there was visitation on weekends for the father. 

Plaintiff went back to mediation to get more time for visitation with his child.  About a year later, defendant claims the baby came back from visitation and claimed no one fed her.   Daughter is now eight years old.    Defendant claims she tried to go to family court, but instead defendant filed for an emergency restraining order, and plaintiff hasn't seen child since.      Defendant never went for modified visitation.    Defendant claims plaintiff reported her to CPS.   At hearing judge took testimony, and defendant's case was dismissed. 

Application for protective order says plaintiff assaulted defendant, but there are no police reports, medical proof, or anything else to back that up.     Plaintiff gets child from school on Thursday, but he says defendant doesn't send the child to school on Thursdays.   Judge dismissed order of protection because the only testimony was defendant's claims, and that judge went back to the same visitation schedule (plaintiff is supposed to get daughter from Thursday afternoon, to Sunday afternoon).   

 Police would not take the child from mother for visitation.   Unfortunately, plaintiff made a mistake on when child wasn't in school, it was a different month.  (To make this shorter, the litigants lived together for 1 1/2 years, then defendant disappeared with child for a year, and has been fighting legal visitation ever since.   Then she tried to get a false protective order, instead of dealing with custody.   My guess, the 50/50 visitation means the defendant doesn't get child support, and that’s what she wants).  (My guess is this child has heard their whole life what a deadbeat her father is, and probably will never have a relationship with him). 

Plaintiff receives $2500 for the false protective order. 

Second (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.   

[CrazyInAlabama]

First (20 14)-

Police Officer Assault by Landlady -Plaintiff/former tenant Christopher Overheul suing defendant /landlady Rosanna Echeverria   for slander, return of security deposit and property damage.  Plaintiff was a tenant for a short time, renting from defendant.   Plaintiff rented a room in defendant’s house, rent was $690 a month.   Plaintiff says there were fleas in the room, complained to landlady, and she did nothing.   Plaintiff says the fleas came from defendant’s indoor/outdoor cats.    Plaintiff is suing for $5,000 from damages and assault.   Landlady claims she ‘bombed’ the house for fleas, not a sure way to kill the fleas, without repeated treatments.     Several months later, plaintiff came home, and saw water pouring out the front door.   Plaintiff says landlady used an outdoor hose to water the indoor atrium, and flooded the front of the house.   Then, plaintiff went out to his car, and then landlady locked him out, claimed plaintiff didn’t live there, and was an intruder.  

Police were called by plaintiff, and defendant was arrested.   Defendant /landlady was drinking, when she banned the plaintiff from entering his legally rented room.  JJ suspects defendant’s drinking was responsible for the house flooding, and the lockout.  

Landlady pled guilty.   She ripped a police officer’s badge off.

$200 security to plaintiff, defendant case dismissed.

College Football Scholarship Hiccup -Plaintiff Erving Lipscomb suing defendant Robin Johnson for her share of their son’s restitution, and return of child support that was overpaid.   Son had chance to play football in another state, but parole officials in Illinois would only allow son to move to the other state if parents paid off the son’s restitution (son’s a minor, so it’s the parents’ job to pay).

Plaintiff wants half of $1590, for the restitution.   Crime was when son was 14.   This was for bicycle theft, and other crimes, multiple crimes to the state of Illinois, no payments were made by defendant.

 Plaintiff overpaid $834 child support, and defendant didn’t repay that, but took money to pay for son’s graduation fees.

$1629 to plaintiff for the restitution and overpayment.    

Second (2014)-

Marijuana Growing Property Fight! -Plaintiff Jay Fox (he’s an animation director or something) suing defendant/former tenant and Weed grower Harlan Pankau for damaging his rental property after defendant was told his lease wasn’t being renewed.    Plaintiff and father bought the 7 acres, and a mobile home at a foreclosure auction, fixed the trailer up, and rented it to defendant.    There are move-in pictures of a clean property.    Defendant claims to be a single father, and student, and supports his children from government benefits.  Defendant has two kids in the U.S. in the trailer, and two in Mexico with the ex-wife.

Move out pictures of the trailer are disgusting. Including a sort of Christmas tree painted on the wall, obviously by his two kids, possibly the defendant too.

 Defendant calls the filth and vandalism in the rental house done by his children “Art Work”, believe me it’s not art work.  Defendant’s mother is his witness, and denies the dirt, garbage, vandalism, and the rest of the damages to the trailer aren’t how her son and his children live.

Defendant says every time he went to Mexico to see his ex-wife and two kids, who can’t come to the U.S. because of immigration reasons, he claims ex-wife called plaintiff, and plaintiff vandalized the trailer.   Defendant has two kids in the U.S. at the trailer, and two with the ex in Mexico, and the ones in Mexico can’t come to the U.S.    The trailer is right next to the Mexico border, so defendant claims he could visit with his kids over the border fence.    Nice place to have kids hanging out, next to the border fence, which an area full of crime, smuggling, and dangerous criminals. Defendant hasn’t filed taxes for year. 

Defendant used to have blackout seizures, and grows his own Weed for medicinal reasons, and claims to have a legal license to do so.   He was growing on plaintiff and father’s property. Convenient he’s next to the border, easy to get product over I’m guessing.

City/county had an issue with the water quality at the trailer, and the allegation is they hooked up to the neighbor’s waterline, and were stealing water.   Actually, the property the trailer is on, shared a well with the neighbor who used to own both properties.  My guess is the grow op needed a lot of water, so I think I know who needed a lot of water free.  

  Defendant’s ex-wife was living with plaintiff’s father, after defendant booted her out, with her two kids.   Actually, plaintiff's father says the woman and children live in another rental property, and they're legal tenants.   I think this is the U.S. ex, or not the wife or ex the plaintiff has two more children with, who live in Mexico.    Plaintiff said defendant locked a chicken in the bedroom, and let it starve to death.   (My question is, why would two women marry, and have kids with the defendant?).

Plaintiff says the neighboring property was owned by the man who owned both pieces of property, with one well shared by both properties.  When the plaintiff bought the property, the other owner refused to sign a water agreement, so plaintiffs had to get another well.  

Plaintiff’s father is a contractor, but that doesn’t make up for $20k in damages, just for labor.

Plaintiff gets $2,500. ($850 was security deposit, total damages add up $20,000)

5 p.m. episodes-

First (2017)-

Go Find Yourself Another Harlequin Great Dane-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-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). 

Second (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. 

Edited December 20, 2022 by CrazyInAlabama

[CrazyInAlabama]

4 p.m. episodes-

First (2014)-

Father and Daughter Gang up on Ex! -Plaintiff Charlie Simkins (father) and Shelbie Simkins (daughter) are suing defendant/daughter’s ex-boyfriend Shane Wright for car repair and towing fees, $6500.   Boyfriend was in jail for one year of the three-year relationship.    Two months after the car repairs paid by plaintiff father, the couple broke up.    Defendant paid plaintiff father for two months $800 a month, for $1600 to plaintiff father.  Original agreement was each of the couple (Shelbie and Shane) would pay half of the loan. 

Plaintiff daughter took car back from defendant’s friend’s house, title is still in lien holder’s name.  Defendant wants out of the car, and car is no longer running.    Defendant will sign off on the title. Car is probably only worth $8,000, but the loan remainder is $11,000.   There is no written contract with defendant for the repairs with plaintiff father.   Defendant didn’t have a direct conversation with plaintiff father.

$5741 is what plaintiff father says repairs totaled, and defendant owes half, $2870, and still owes $1270 to plaintiff father.

Plaintiff father gets $1270, and defendant signs the title over to plaintiff.

Boy Traumatized After Dog Attack -Plaintiff Amanda Clayton (mother) suing defendant Gerald Mixon Jr for an attack by defendant’s dog on plaintiff’s 12-year-old son, Dalton Lary.  Plaintiff wants medical bills paid.     The pictures of the child’s injuries are heart breaking.      Child has PTSD from the attack.

As usual, dog owner blames the attack by his dog on the 12-year-old child.   Defendant was walking his dog, and kids were playing basketball on private property, in the driveway.   Ball rolled towards defendant, and defendant claims he told the child he would throw the basketball back.     (Bull Pucky!) Defendant claims Dalton charging towards the dog triggered the dog’s protective instincts.

Plaintiff son says defendant was walking his two leashed dogs, while the kids were playing basketball, and defendant asked to take a shop, so Dalton passed the ball to defendant.   (Both leashes were in one hand, ball in the other).    Then, defendant lost his balance and dog attacked the 12-year-old child, repeatedly biting the child’s legs.   

I just hate to think what the dog would have done to a smaller child.   Defendant claimed against his homeowner’s insurance, but dogs weren’t covered by the insurance anyway.

Dalton has on-going PTSD treatment.   Animal control said shots were up to date for both dogs, and dog was not deemed dangerous.   The plaintiff family had a greyhound in the home, and a month after the attack they rehomed the Greyhound (they did it through the source they got the dog from, and dog was adopted out).  (I don’t know why JJ says defendant should have followed through with the homeowner’s claim, but defendant said the dogs weren’t covered under his homeowner’s insurance anyway).

Plaintiff receives $5,000

Second (2014)-

Tijuana Crowbar Payback! -Plaintiff Abdiel Flores Torres Jr suing defendant Salomon Gomez for damaging his car with a crowbar, $1101.    Litigants just happened to show up at the same place, about a month before the crowbar incident.   The two men, and their various friends were in Tijuana at a club, and defendant got jumped by plaintiff’s friends.    Then, after the fight defendant and friends were going to leave the club, but defendant claims plaintiff and 15 friends jumped them.   Defendant claims plaintiff and his posse followed them to the car, and threw a rock that broke his car window.   They went to Mexico because legal drinking age there is 18.  Is JJ kidding?   She asked defendant why he didn’t file police charges against the others in Mexico?  

Then a month later, the litigants met up, and defendant says he doesn’t know how they ended up at the same place.   Plaintiff was selling a car on Facebook, someone set up an appointment about the car, and the fight that’s subject of the case happened.   Then, a girl called plaintiff to ask to see the car, and when plaintiff showed up for the meeting, defendant and his buddies were there instead, at the 7-Eleven.   Then, the confrontation starts, and someone took a crowbar to plaintiff’s car.

Defendant claims the plaintiff’s car damages were payback for the defendant’s assault before.

$350 to plaintiff for car damages.

Dog Eat Dog -Plaintiff Erin Wilson suing defendant/former soccer teammate  Kate Cashman over a dog attack, and wants vet bills paid.   Defendant claims it was mutual combat, and not her fault.  Defendant claims both dogs were leashed, but plaintiff says defendant was cited by animal control for an off-leash animal. 

The soccer game just ended, plaintiff’s dog was clipped to her soccer bag, when defendant’s Shiba Inu bit the plaintiff’s  Silky Terrier mix.   Plaintiff took her dog to the doggy ER, and she wants her vet bills paid.   Defendant claims her dog was leashed, but her boyfriend paid the off-leash citation.

Plaintiff says defendant paid part of the bill.

$230 remaining to plaintiff.

5 p.m. episodes-

First (2017)-

The Joy of Music...Murdered-Plaintiff/violin buyer Badra Saljooghi suing defendant/ violin teacher and seller Armen Movsessian over the cost of a violin, and violin classes.   Plaintiff bought a violin for $700 from defendant, and she says that it was over-priced, and she also wants teacher to refund money for lessons.  The teacher credited her for one lesson, and actually taught the second lesson until plaintiff got mad at defendant.   

Defendant bought the violin for $500 from a violin maker who sells on Ebay, and replaced the strings, and sold it to plaintiff for $700.   Plaintiff wants $700 back.  The plaintiff's case is ridiculous. 

 I don't know, but I'm guessing replacing a full set of strings, and the labor involved is probably close to $200.    (Why do I suspect that plaintiff found another violin, and it was cheaper, and she either wanted to get the full refund, and save money buying the cheaper one, or just give up the violin because she wasn't an instant expert). 

(The violin teacher appeared as a performer at several years of Yanni concerts and tours, and has been teaching for years.    He's very accomplished in his field apparently).

JJ gives the plaintiff the violin, and dismisses her case.

It Was Not an Engagement Ring-Plaintiff Terri Furgison suing ex-boyfriend Jerry Egger (yes, they were Terri and Jerry) for unpaid rent ($1600), money owed for other loans, and money for car repairs.  Plaintiff also wants engagement ring back from defendant, but she says it wasn't a proposal or engagement, because she's never getting married again. 

Ring cost $9,000, but woman claims it wasn't an engagement ring.  Plaintiff paid for defendant's truck repairs, in return for her driving the truck, but he moved out first, and truck went with him.      If it wasn't an engagement ring, then why is plaintiff suing her "ex-fiance". 

Defendant put $2700 down on the ring, and is still paying for it, even though he sold it (apparently still short on the payments remaining).  Defendant wants property back from plaintiff's home.    

Other loans, and the ring dismissed.   Defendant is still out of work, lost his job due to 'his stupidity', and is living in his truck, or sometimes with his mother's boyfriend.

Plaintiff will get the $1600 for rent, and defendant will get his property back if he picks it up in five days, with an escort. 

Second (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.   

[CrazyInAlabama]

4 p.m. episodes-

First (2014)- 

Bare Bones Apartment Dispute -Plaintiffs Brandon Pesterfield and girlfriend Brittney Meeker suing defendant/landlady Christina Ivanow for the return of rent and security deposit. Pesterfield looked at apartment with no kitchen and bathroom, but defendant said the couple could use the main house kitchen and bathroom until the apartment remodel was finished.    Plaintiff has a text saying he didn’t have to pay rent until the remodel was finished.   

Plaintiff and girlfriend were homeless, and desperate, and rented the one bedroom apartment for $700 a month.   Apparently, before defendant (she’s a renter, and is allowed to sublet the studio ADU) moved in the former garage was attached to the house as a one-bedroom apartment.   (This happened in Portland, OR).

Plaintiff says they were threatened every time they used the kitchen and bathroom in the main house.   Plaintiff and fiance moved out before lease expired.   There is another bedroom attached to the ADU, and he wanted the other bedroom, and access to the yard.   Plaintiff Pesterfield is apparently not regularly employed, and Meeker gets SSDI, or SSI or something for her disabilities.     Plaintiffs claim living at the house/ADU was impossible to live in safely, so they lived in the ADU for months without ever paying rent.  

Defendant submits photos to justify keeping their security deposit of $500, because of extensive damages in the ADU.  

Tom, the other tenant testifies for defendant, saying damages shown weren’t in apartment before plaintiffs moved in.  

Plaintiffs claim no damages were done by them.  

When defendant sent a plumber to work on the bathroom in the ADU, the plaintiffs wouldn’t let the plumbers or other workers into the unit to work.

The plaintiffs never paid rent, so that’s dismissed.

$500 to plaintiffs for security deposit.

Vintage Clock Breakdown -Plaintiff Laura Gender suing defendant Russell Buckley for breaking her vintage clock.  Defendant offered to fix her clock, and plaintiff delivered it to him.  After they broke up, defendant shipped the clock back, in the original box, to plaintiff.    Plaintiff says defendant failed to fix her clock, and because she claims he signed a waiver for UPS saying clock wasn’t packed correctly, that the waiver meant that UPS didn’t have to pay for the damages.   Defendant said that clock wasn’t working when he received it, and it was returned intact in the same box, and he didn’t damage it.

Plaintiff shows photos of the clock came back to her, and pictures of the box.   Plaintiff says the clock didn’t need repair, but claims the defendant said he needed to repair the clock.   There was no external damage to the clock, according to JJ, and plaintiff claims the damages were all internal. 

Plaintiff case dismissed.  

Second (2014)-

Ditched Car -Plaintiffs car owner Stephanie Ferrari and driver Tyler Ferrai are suing defendants /former friends, (boyfriend) Timothy Reid and his girlfriend, Nacasia Gullingsrud for taking plaintiff’s car without permission, and claim defendant girlfriend wrecked the car.    Plaintiffs sold car after accident for $1500, and car was a gift from plaintiff’s grandmother, a 12-year-old Toyota Corolla.    Plaintiff Tyler and the two defendants took plaintiff’s friend Matthew to his Army base.  

Defendant Tim says Tyler gave him the keys, weather was bad, and he claims Tyler crawled into the front seat, hit his elbow, and car went out of control and went off the road.   (This happened near Hibbing, MN). 

Defendant Nacasia claims Tyler was in the car, but Tyler says she wasn’t in the car.   She says she knew nothing about the accident until Tim gave her the tow ticket after the accident.   Tyler claims the defendants were going to drive Nacasia’s car.

Nacasia claims Tyler initially told her mother she was driving, and only claimed Tim was driving when mother wanted to fix the Corolla. 

The plaintiffs bought a Nissan Altima a week later.   Plaintiffs want more money, even though the didn’t fix the Corolla, but sold it for $1500.  A text from defendant Nacasia says she knows about the damages, but can’t afford to pay, so she assumed responsibility.   Nacasia now claims Tyler wasn’t in the car.

Plaintiff case dismissed, defendant case dismissed.   The TV and tires cancel each other out.

Mother/Son Feud -Plaintiff/mother Leslie Valente suing defendant/son Jeremy Ferguson for the cost of tires, and unpaid rent when he lived with her for six months.    Rent claim is dismissed, they had no contract, and she never tried to evict him.  Defendant says tires weren’t a loan, but from his grandmother’s trust, and he never agreed to pay her back.  (This happened in Utah)

Defendant says plaintiff stole his TV, and sold it for $600.   Defendant claims plaintiff told him to move out, and if he took the TV she would call the police, and claim he stole the TV from her. 

Plaintiff case dismissed, she had no expectation of rent or repayment.   

Race Car RIP Tribute -Plaintiff Mary Harward suing defendant   Justin Goodman for payment for the shell of a car she gave to her late boyfriend Anthony.   Anthony wanted to turn car into a race car, but he died first.   After Anthony was killed, plaintiff sold the car shell to defendant.

When Anthony died, his next of kin were his parents, not plaintiff, and she had no right of inheritance.   So, getting rid of the shell was up to the parents.    

After Anthony died, plaintiff sold shell to defendant for $350, but it wasn’t her property.  Since Anthony’s relatives aren’t in court to testify, car wasn’t plaintiff’s to sell.   Defendant says he paid plaintiff $100.  Plaintiff brought her new boyfriend to court with her, how tacky.

Plaintiff case dismissed.  

5 p.m. episodes-

First (2017)-

HOA President Accused of Leaks, and Lies-Plaintiff Sam Salemnia suing HOA President Stuart Schlig for lying about damage to plaintiff's condo (first floor apartment) from upstairs neighbor's (third floor apartment) plumbing issues.  Mr. Schlig owns the third floor condo.    Plaintiff has two videos showing proof of the leaks from the third floor, passing through the second floor unit, and the plaintiff's first floor unit.   

Defendant is not only the condo owner, but is the HOA president, and also owns the management company, so it's a total conflict of interest.    Plaintiff's apartment was repaired by insurance, there were added items that defendant would pay out of pocket for.   Then, an additional leak happened from the defendant's apartment (washing machine drain line leaked, again).   

This apartment/condo building is about 45 years old, there was asbestos, and the pipes with leaks look like galvanized.    Part of the additional work was asbestos removal in the common area (hallway).     Defendant still says plaintiff is a liar and a crook. 

In the hall-terview, defendant still claims plaintiff is a liar, and a crook, and claims his condo pipes don't leak.   Defendant keeps saying the leak isn't in his condo.   

Plaintiff receives $2800.

(The plaintiff from the HOA case on here was on The People's Court suing a neighbor over a water leak from the second floor this time.  Plaintiff lost, and this isn’t his only lawsuit either).

Harley Motorcycle Work-to-Own Fail-Plaintiff Norman Walls suing former employer Steve Carpenter for wages, and a Harley Davidson.   Plaintiff was supposed to do excavation work for defendant, in return for a motorcycle.  and some wages.    Plaintiff claims defendant never paid him everything, and kept the bike.   However, defendant claims plaintiff was a bad worker.

$3850 to plaintiff for wages, and the motorcycle that defendant still has. 

Second (2017)-

Sneaky Boyfriend Discovery-Plaintiff John Hall III suing his former live in boyfriend, Saverio Franciosa over laptop damage, and an unpaid loan ($200).   However, the video of defendant destroying the laptop, right after he got up, is a total scam.     I agree with JJ, they're a couple of scammers that just wanted a free trip to L.A., and TV money.        Months after they moved in together, plaintiff looked at defendant's phone, and found defendant was cheating, and sexting other men.    Plaintiff has a video of defendant smashing the laptop, but the defendant doesn't look like he's just out of bed, he's fully dressed including sneakers and a ball cap.      

Laptop wasn't replaced by plaintiff.   Defendant claims his phone insurance replaced the phone.   

Cases dismissed, because the litigants are liars.   

Mommy Dearest Debt-Plaintiff Jane Kelly suing former friend Elizabeth Henke, for damage to a rental home, caused by defendant's daughter.  Residents of the house were the defendant's daughter, and a 16-year-old granddaughter.   Plaintiff rented home to defendant for her daughter, and was the guarantor on the lease, and for damages.   There is actually a signed lease, and defendant signed as guarantor of her daughter's rental.   

Plaintiff says the damages were almost $1000 more than the $1550 security deposit.   Defendant claims landlord said she could have a dog, as long as it wasn't a certain breed.   Plaintiff/ landlord denies that a dog was allowed, without tenant going through the property manager/real estate office, and paying a pet deposit.   Plaintiff said the defendant had to go through the realty company, and do a pet deposit for the dog, but she never did.  Plaintiff says there were no pets allowed in the lease, and carpets were five years old. Defendant admits she had at least one cat that wasn't allowed also.     Defendant's daughter had a Shepherd/Husky mix, and a cat.  Defendant daughter claims all the damage was there when she moved in.     Plaintiff also says the bedroom had damages from smoke too. 

Plaintiff's realtor did a walk through with defendant daughter on move in, and plaintiff did a walk through with defendant daughter on move out.    The damages include destroyed window screen, a spa cover the dog destroyed, back yard is full of big holes, smoke damage in the bedroom, scratched doors from dog.     

(After five years, replacing the carpet is a good idea, to get top dollar from another renter, or if you're going to sell the property.  Especially since the defendant's daughter had a big dog, and the cat, and who knows how many other animals).  $1550 was the security deposit, plus additional damages, and plaintiff wants $852 more for damages

Defendant daughter apparently had a bad history, according to the remark that plaintiff slipped in to her testimony.     

$500 to plaintiff, and she keeps the security deposit.  (I think the damages paid to plaintiff should have been $1,000). 

[CrazyInAlabama]

4 p.m. episodes-

First (2014)-

Grand Theft Drama -Plaintiff/ex-girlfriend Sacha Granger suing defendant/ex-boyfriend Deandre Edwards for her stolen property, and an assault.   Plaintiff’s two witnesses say defendant stole from them also, including a cell phone, and the other witness’s son’s games (about 50 games).    Defendant was previously convicted of grand theft.   Proof is a text sent by defendant to plaintiff witness.

Akilah Kidd, plaintiff witness, admits stealing from plaintiff and brother Glenn, but not from the witness.  Glenn is plaintiff’s other witness (former employer of defendant), a projector screen, .357 Magnum, a laptop, a safe, and a TV.   Defendant received a short jail sentence, and 18 months probation.    Ms. Kidd met defendant on the street, before defendant met plaintiff.    Akilah Kidd says defendant stole over 50 of her son’s games.  

Plaintiff says they met at the gas station, and then started ‘talking’, and moved into plaintiff’s apartment.  Plaintiff says defendant stole her deceased grandmother’s jewelry, a cell phone, and some of her brother’s property.    

 Defendant returned a cell phone, and a pink Swatch watch.  

Defendant witness just smirks when plaintiff witness says defendant robbed him using the witness’s Range Rover.  

Defendant’s counter claim is hilarious.   Defendant says when plaintiff filed her taxes, she put him as a dependent, and disabled, and he wants the $1700 refund extra that plaintiff received. 

JJ tells Glenn (witness for plaintiff) that the IRS has agents that watch every show, and go after people who evade taxes, never file, or commit tax fraud, and state that on JJ’s show.  Defendant says he’s never filed taxes.   Glenn paid defendant off the books, welcome to federal prison.  (Eliot Ness couldn’t get Al Capone, but the IRS certainly did).    Plaintiff says in hall-terview that she was never exclusive with the defendant, they just ‘talked’.

Plaintiff receives $2,000.

Premature Lock-Out -Plaintiff /former tenant Amparo “Maria” Martineau suing defendant/former landlord Darren Wilson for security deposit, and her belongings.   Landlord says plaintiff paid on time, but the other tenant with plaintiff didn’t pay on time.

Plaintiff was moving out slowly, during January, and claims another family lived there during January.  Landlord says another tenant moved in on February 1, not in January.

Landlord doesn’t have move-in pictures of apartment.    He also doesn’t have move-out pictures, so defendant claim dismissed.  .    JJ tells if plaintiff hated the living accommodations so much, she should have moved out.   Plaintiff lived in the apartment with boyfriend (not on the lease), her daughter, a roommate, and another kid, plus plaintiff had a dog with puppies too.

Plaintiff receives security deposit back, $1500

Second (2014)-

Man Held Hostage? -Plaintiff Jimmie Murphy suing defendants Todd and Darla Ducoing (neighbors) for damaging his fence, and falsely claiming he falsely imprisoned the defendant husband, and defamation and attorney costs.    The litigants live about a mile apart, plaintiff claims defendant husband damaged his fence, and falsely accused plaintiff of falsely imprisoning defendant husband.      Police report submitted.    Plaintiff lives near the greenbelt area the HOA mows, and claims the HOA mower broke his fence.   

Plaintiff says someone damaged his fence by mowing the HOA greenbelt section.    Plaintiff claims he saw defendant hit and take down some of his fence, but it’s not reported in the police report, or in the sworn statement to the court.   (Plaintiff and defendant's live in neighboring communities, a mile apart) 

Plaintiff got the president of the HOA’s address, defendant wife is the HOA president.  Plaintiff went to the defendants’ house, told husband about the fence and mowing accident.    Defendant husband went into the back, latched gate to plaintiff’s back yard, and showed him the damages to his fence.  Plaintiff says defendant husband said he wouldn’t tell the wife about the damages, wouldn’t pay for the damages, and wanted to leave.  Plaintiff walked through the gate, latched the gate, and wouldn’t let defendant out, so police were called again.  This happened in Lockbuie, Colorado (it’s in Weld County).

Defendant’s statement says that gate latched, locking him in the back fence, and plaintiff refused to open the gate.   Plaintiff blames everything on ‘bumbling police actions’.     Police report says Todd the defendant had a red mark on his nose, and plaintiff was blocking the gate so defendant couldn’t open the gate and leave.

Plaintiff case dismissed because he’s a jerk.    Why do I suspect that the plaintiff will never leave the defendants alone? 

Defendants spent $1200 to defend themselves against plaintiff’s court case against the defendants.   Plaintiff sued the defendants personally, instead of the HOA, and that hasn’t gone to court yet. 

JJ tells the defendants to come back after the court case is settled, and get total attorney’s fees then.

Teenagers Gang-Up -Plaintiff Jackie Hanson (woman) suing defendant Cate Sheets for her portion of an apartment lease.    There were four roommates, the litigants, and two others.    However, plaintiff told defendant to leave, and then wants unpaid rent.   Plaintiff witnesses include her boyfriend, and the other two roommates.  Both litigants were on the lease.   Plaintiff still lived in the apartment with the two other roommates, and never replaced defendant.    

Plaintiff and her despicable roommates didn’t like the people defendant associated with.

JJ dismisses the plaintiff’s ridiculous case.

5 p.m. episodes-

First  (2017)-

Busting at the Seams in Hot Springs-Plaintiffs Thana and Marshall Sanson suing vacation rental landlord John Cooksey, and plaintiffs want a refund for the week of rental.  As the title says, this happened near Hot Springs, Arkansas.   The rental rules are 12 people maximum, and renters were bringing 24 people.  Defendant discovered the extra people right before the family arrived.   (If this is on a septic system, it could be disastrous.  A well might not be able to keep up with the water usage either.  My guess is anywhere that would hold 24 people, would cost a lot more than the defendant's vacation rental.   I find it laughable that the plaintiffs are suing the defendant, when they broke all of the rules).  Twelve live in Hot Springs Village, five live nearby, so already up to 17 guests.    Rented for 7 days and 7 nights for 12 people.   The plaintiffs claims they had another seven at the other rental property, but everyone was going to be at the Cooksey rental house.   $3,424 was the rental price.   

Defendant's house was the only one with a swimming pool, and plaintiff says only 12 would be at the Cooksey rental, and 12 staying at other locations, but everyone would gather at the defendant's house for meals, and swimming.    The guests were plaintiff's uncles, cousins, kids, and various relatives.  

When Mr. Cooksey found out about the 24 people, he told the plaintiff woman that was a violation of the rules, and he has security cameras, and would be looking at them.   Plaintiff woman lies out her ass, and says defendant said he would refund her money, and find someone else to rent the home.   However, he didn't find out until the plaintiffs arrived on the morning of the rental.   The plaintiffs rented a large place at a state park that could accommodate the entire group.

The day before the visit, defendant called plaintiff woman to confirm the number of guests to 12, and she said maybe 3 more, and there's a no party policy, and that would include only 15 people, not 9 more. 

(This is why the vacation and short term rentals limit the number of people, and say no parties.  They ban people who break those rules, I hope the big rental companies watched this show, and put plaintiff on the banned list.)

Plaintiffs lose every penny, and deserve that.    What horrible people the plaintiffs are.       

Lawn or Love Business?!-Plaintiff Lena Wendtlandt suing Melissa Buck over loans for lawn business.   However, defendant says plaintiff wanted a different relationship that defendant refused to have with her.   Plaintiff's first loan was for a truck, $5,000.   Title loan on truck was $3400, and plaintiff claims she paid that off. 

Defendant claims plaintiff and plaintiff's former partner encouraged defendant to start the lawn business, and bought items that defendant said were too much, too soon for the business.  Plaintiff claims she spent $1100 on the lawn care items.  Defendant says she has records of what she paid the plaintiff back.   Defendant also said at the time plaintiff was buying and setting up the lawn care business, that plaintiff was on worker's comp, and wasn't supposed to have outside employment (she was employed by the fire department), because of their no moonlighting policy, and worker's comp rules.   

JJ not satisfied the money was a loan, so case dismissed.    (I suspect the money was only a loan after the break up)

Second (2017)-

Pocket Pit's Owner Attacked by Chow?!-Plaintiff Carl Young Jr suing neighbors Merri and Peter Francis, and adult son Charles Francis for their dog attacking him, and his dog, and is suing for medical bills, and vet bills.   Defendants' dog was being walked by a six-year-old, dog is a Chow, and weighs over 60 lbs.   Plaintiff has a 21 lbs. pit looking dog, and defendants have 3 dogs (2 small ones, and the Chow).     Plaintiff was going to walk his dog on a leash in front of his house, when defendant's dog, also on leash, but kid walking Chow had lost the end of the leash, and Chow attacked plaintiff's dog on plaintiff's property.    Plaintiff says the dog jumped his dog without warning.    Defendants didn't see this, until after it started.  

Plaintiff says defendant's dog ripped the leash away from the little kid (he weighs the same, or less than the dog), and defendant's dog attacked his dog, and plaintiff was bitten while saving his dog from the defendant's Chow.    Defendants say the plaintiff was only bitten because he got in between the dogs.   Chow has a history of aggression to other animals.    Defendants claim this is their dog's only bite, but dog wasn't up to date on rabies shots at the time of the attack.  (My guess is the dog is so uncontrollable at the vet's office, that they told the defendants to muzzle the chow before entering the office).   Defendant's dogs not registered, or had shots.   

$2500 to plaintiff for vet bills, and deductible for medical costs for plaintiff.  

Homeless Teen Meets Good Samaritan-Plaintiff Jeffrey McBride suing defendant George Zavala for medical expenses, clothes, and other money he spent on the defendant.  Defendant was homeless, kicked out by parents, and living in a cheap motel with a friend a few times a week.  Other times the defendant was sleeping on the beach.    

Plaintiff rented a room in the motel, and the 48-year-old plaintiff started living with the 19 year old defendant.   

Plaintiff is trying to sue for room costs, food, medical expenses, and clothing he bought the defendant.   

I am not happy with plaintiff's case, or anything to do with him.  

Plaintiff case dismissed because it's garbage.  

Back to Mommy?-Plaintiff Stephanie Derrick suing ex-boyfriend Patrick Howard for an unpaid loan.    They lived together for about three years, then defendant moved back in with his mother.     

When the couple broke up, he moved back with Mommy, but they were still seeing each other.  That’s when the car flipping business came up.    The two were going into a business together to flip cars bought at auction, and split the proceeds.   Plaintiff says she made the defendant a loan to start the business, $7500 and only has a copy of the front of the check.  

Case dismissed without prejudice so plaintiff can collect more evidence, and file again in local small claims court. 

Edited December 23, 2022 by CrazyInAlabama

[One Tough Cookie]

On 12/22/2022 at 5:24 PM, CrazyInAlabama said:

HOA President Accused of Leaks, and Lies-Plaintiff Sam Salemnia suing HOA President Stuart Schlig for lying about damage to plaintiff's condo (first floor apartment) from upstairs neighbor's (third floor apartment) plumbing issues.  Mr. Schlig owns the third floor condo.    Plaintiff has two videos showing proof of the leaks from the third floor, passing through the second floor unit, and the plaintiff's first floor unit.   

This guy SERIOUSLY got on my last nerve, he was a slimy,creepy guy and if I were looking for an apartment and met him I would peace out so fast his bald head would have spun around.

[CrazyInAlabama]

With the HOA case, it wasn't right that he was HOA president, and owns the  property management company too.    That's absolutely a no-no.     I live in a HOA community, nothing like that HOA though.   

When we had the meeting someone asked if being an officer means you don't pay dues ($300 once a year), no that's not legal.    HOA officers have to be volunteers, and can't be paid for any reason.   The property management people work for the HOA, so he was paying himself since he was on both sides of the deal.  

4 p.m. episodes-

First (2013)-

Grooming Gone Wrong -Plaintiffs Stephen and Emily Fantasia are suing defendant/dog groomer Kathleen Cassidy for heat stroke of their dog, a Chow, Sammy, and want their vet bills paid.     This case strikes near to me, I had dogs that needed grooming, and was always worried about what was happening while dog was there.   Also, cage heaters can be a problem, and most places don’t use cage heat dryers any longer, just air dryers. 

Owners told groomer to keep the dog cool, and told her again on drop off, at 8 a.m.     This was in Holbrook, MA, and the air conditioner was not on, defendant claims it was only 73 degrees that day, and a/c wasn’t needed.     Defendant didn’t do the work, her employees did.  The two employees that worked on the dog aren’t in court.    

Defendant claims dog was bathed with cool water, and never overheated.   Then, in the tub Sammy was unhappy, and on the table for the blow-dry, Sammy was in distress.     Then, plaintiff called to see how the dog grooming was progressing, and groomer told him dog was fine, and would be ready soon. 

Defendant blames the collapse on a preexisting condition.   

When plaintiff husband arrived, dog was on the floor, bleeding from under his tongue, panting heavily, and groomer claimed dog bit his tongue.   Plaintiff husband took dog right to emergency vet.    Diagnosis was heat stroke, and respiratory distress.   I'm surprised poor Sammy recovered, many dogs don't survive heat stroke the way he did, and especially with their brain intact.  

Plaintiffs get paid for vet bills, $1681 

(This is so sad, Mr. Fantasia has died, but his JJ appearance is mentioned in the obituary

https://www.legacy.com/us/obituaries/southofboston-ledger/name/stephen-fantasia-obituary?id=9188307   )

Father Daughter Car Dispute -Plaintiff /daughter Amber Cronin suing defendant/father Trevor Cronin for a car that was supposed to be joint, but father has possession of, and car is entirely in his name.   Father is counter suing for transmission repair on the car.   

Litigants went to an auction, each bought a car, and plaintiffs blew the transmission.  Defendant took daughter’s car to the mechanic, had it fixed, and put the car in his name.     Plaintiff paid for car, and father has it.  

Daughter is a nursing student, and I hope she did great after this show.

$980 to daughter.   Father keeps the car, but will have to negotiate with daughter to get her to sign the title transfer.  

Second (2014)-

Rock-Throwing Child Testifies -Plaintiff/driver Richard Delgado Jr suing defendant Tammieka Jacobs for damages from defendant’s 8-year-old son Zakkai Jones (one of twins) for damaging his car throwing rocks.  Zakkai gets to sit in the witness chair of Justice, and talk to JJ.   Zakkai’s twin sister told him not to throw rocks.    (This happened Ocala, FL)

The twins were in the road, and Zakkai and cousin, also 8 years-old, were throwing rocks, sister told them to stop.   

Plaintiff was driving down the street, sees the twins by the road, but not the cousin.   Plaintiff says defendant mother denies it happened, denies her son did it.     Defendant mother says plaintiff was screaming and yelling at the twins, because the kids told her.  Defendant mother claims she was working and came to the door after a couple of minutes.   Defendant claims a piece of gravel must have been tossed up, and done the damages. 

JJ explains due to lack of adequate supervision of the children, the damage happened.   Since this happened in 2013, I guess the twins are 16 or 17 now.

$467to plaintiff.    

Porched Possessions -Plaintiff Sonya Lovejoy suing defendant /ex-boyfriend Randy Ward for loss of possessions, due to plaintiff putting items out on the covered porch.    The two lived together, in the trailer, but when they broke up, they both moved, and items were stored in the trailer owned by defendant.   Plaintiff had already moved to Idaho, and defendant was selling the trailer, and he texted her to pick up her possessions by the following Monday.    Defendant put plaintiff’s stuff out on the back porch, and plaintiff says it was all ruined or gone.   This happened six months after they broke up.

JJ is so inconsistent about property that is left behind and someone is stuck with it being there for months at a time.   Stuff was there for six months, about 7 or 8 boxes, according to defendant.

Plaintiff says table and chairs were already outside.   She also claims a compound bow, bicycle, TV, jewelry collection, and boxes.     Plaintiff hired movers, and all of the stuff was gone.   JJ thinks the stuff was long gone before defendant claims he put it outside. 

I wouldn’t have given her a penny.  Who would leave all of that stuff behind for six months?  

Plaintiff gets $2000 for her stuff that she left behind for over six months. 

5 p.m. episodes-

First (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). 

Second (2017)-

Mega Landlord Fail-Plaintiff / former tenant Brandy Gist suing defendant/landlord Erik Bauer because he wasn't present when the inspector from Section 8 came to inspect his property.    Plaintiff wants her security deposit returned by defendant.    Defendant has 44 rental properties, and is owner/ manager, and is experienced with Section 8 housing, and plaintiff paid her own $500 security deposit.    Defendant said it would be $1500 security with plaintiff's bad credit, and after Section 8 inspected landlord was given 5 days to make a few corrections.   

On the appointed return date and time, the plaintiff, and the inspector showed, but defendant didn't show up for the inspection.    The Section 8 voucher ran out on the 26th, but the re-inspection was the 28th, and she was given a 30-day extension by Section 8.    Defendant's property failed the second inspection, on the 28th, because defendant didn't show up.    

Defendant says his wife died during the month in question, so he was a little distracted.  

Plaintiff had to find another property that accepted Section 8, and passed a Section 8 inspection.  Defendant didn't return her deposit.   I think defendant dodged a bullet by not having plaintiff move in.

Plaintiff gets her $500 deposit back. 

On Again, Off Again Home-Plaintiffs John and Cynthia Stenz were renting out a rental property to defendant Donna Garrison while they were trying to sell it.   They bought the house for an investment, fixed it up, and rented to the defendant.    When defendant moved out she took an older TV, some other furniture, and other items from the house, and didn't pay her last two month’s rent (defendant claims she didn't owe the last two month’s rent), two months utilities.    Defendant claims she only paid rent while house was off sale market, and it was put back on in January, so she didn't pay December and January.    Lease is only month-to-month, and 30 days-notice of non-renewal was given.    It's hard to tell what security deposit was received. 

Defendant owes $2,000 for rent.  Plaintiffs want to be paid for a futon, dresser, bed, etc. that came with the rental house, and defendant took them.   

Defendant says as long as house was off the market, she had to pay rent, and when it went back on the market she didn’t have to pay rent. (This was Palmyra, VA).

Plaintiffs get $2,000 unpaid rent back, and $448 for unpaid utilities, totaling $2,448, and get their furniture and appliances back if they pick the furniture up within five days.  

Mother Daughter Feud-Plaintiff/mother Maria Vaughan suing her daughter/defendant Aleshia Williams for unpaid loans, property damages, and lease fees, and slander.   Defendant wanted small loans (that's gone).   Plaintiff made the huge mistake of co-signing on daughter's apartment, then daughter stopped paying rent, and moved out early.      Rent was $389, lease went to August, but defendant moved out in June.    So, plaintiff had to pay for June, and July.     Apartment was 4 bedrooms, and three other young women lived there, and landlord rented the rooms individually.    

Plaintiff says defendant moved out to be with her boyfriend (not the father of defendant's seven-month-old baby), in Richmond, and plaintiff didn't know until landlord sent her bills for rent.    JJ tells to offer landlord a settlement. 

$778 to plaintiff. 

Edited December 26, 2022 by CrazyInAlabama

[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 then became neighbors from hell.  Melanie and Steve, the neighbors, greeted defendants, and claim plaintiff came over and threatened them over being friendly with other neighbors and defendants. 

Plaintiff says another 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, were 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)-

Assault in the Workplace -Plaintiff Renaee Pattin suing defendant Crystal Gause for assault at work.    Plaintiff says defendant started touching her, stroking her, pulled her chair out from under her when she was sitting down.  Plaintiff says the defendant and eight other co-workers would touch, pat, and grope her.  Two years ago, defendant pulled plaintiff’s chair out from under her, and plaintiff was injured.  Plaintiff is suing the company, and trying to get disability.     This happened in Toledo, Ohio.

Plaintiff wants defendant to be responsible for the injuries on the job.  Plaintiff was working on her computer, and someone came up behind her, yanked the reclining back of the office chair back, let it go, and it slammed into plaintiff’s back, and it was the defendant.  

(Can you believe the defendant’s name, “Crystal Gause”?).

Plaintiff says she had no back issues before defendant’s ‘prank’, and her chiropractor says her back is out of alignment.  A year later plaintiff consulted an attorney about suing the company.   JJ wants to see doctor’s records for before and after the incident.    Plaintiff took a lie detector test, and claims she passed it, about the incident.   The first attorney is no longer her attorney.   

After the chair incident, plaintiff claims other employees were groping, patting, touching, and she’s also suing about the hostile work environment, from a total of eight employees including defendant.

Defendant says incident is very different from what plaintiff described.   Defendant says aisle behind plaintiff’s chair is narrow, and she only tapped plaintiff on the shoulder. Three weeks later, HR sent an email to defendant outlining the incident.  

I bet plaintiff’s case was right about the time of some huge hostile work environment settlements, and she’s hoping for a bonanza.   Defendant says plaintiff complained about three employees, after the first incident.     Plaintiff claims the second incident was eight months later, and defendant backhanding her on her shoulder, not patting her.   This is when plaintiff says a total of eight other employees touched her inappropriately (rubbing her back and arms, etc.). Plaintiff claims she was constructively discharged from company, because she couldn't tolerate working there again. 

Plaintiff case dismissed, no witnesses, no medical records submitted, or police reports.  JJ sends case back to try in another court locally. 

A Family’s Feud-   Plaintiffs Dale and Isabelle Worrell suing son/defendant Pascal Worrell for non-payment of a car loan.  Plaintiffs co-signed for the loan, and father was primary.   Loan was for a $8,000 with Pascal paying $4,000 down, and car was titled in father and son's name.    Parents didn't like the son's schedule, and sent him to live with their pastor.   

Pascal says the father had full control of his bank account, and father was making all of the payments.   Father says he didn't let son take the car to the pastor's house, but had to call home to request the use of the car.    Father gave son $3500, that was part of what son put down, and then father sold the car.   Father is suing for the remainder of the loan from selling the car. 

Father deprived son of his car, his property.   and sold the car after having car for a year.  

Plaintiff case dismissed, and I hope Pascal has moved on, far away from these people. 

(This case reminded me of the equally religious parents who wanted their daughter arrested for getting her cat back that the mother kept, after they threw the daughter out.  That set of parents had a bunch of kids, and everyone was estranged from them)

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 during 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 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)-

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 

[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)-

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

5 p.m. episodes-

First (2017)-

Dangerous Football League?-Plaintiff Dale Illingworth coaches a team in youth football, entered a tournament, and found his kids weren't as experienced as the other teams were.  Plaintiff is suing for return of entry fees, gate, and attorney's fees, and defendant Mike Garrett, tournament organizer refused the refund.    Plaintiff claims the other teams that beat his kids were a huge mismatch, same ages, but plaintiff claims the other teams were more seasoned.   Plaintiff's team lost twice, including one kid getting a concussion.  Two kids on plaintiff's team needed head injury clearance, and they couldn't play.    Plaintiff claims his team was guaranteed a three game tournament.  (If the plaintiff was that worried about his kids, then he would have pulled out of the tournament, and not had his team participate).    

Are the plaintiff's red shirts, the team colors or something?    

(Obviously JJ doesn't know that some kids play football the second they can stand up.   Disgusting, but true).

Case dismissed. 

Property Brothers They are Not!-Plaintiffs Scott and Robertson Kunz, suing former tenant/defendant Anthony Sorey, for stealing appliances from their rental home. Plaintiffs wanted to get into real estate investments, and this was their first house, and they now have two houses. The house was three bedrooms, and three baths.        Plaintiffs bought the house with the defendant, Anthony Sorey,  and three other tenants already in place.   They four tenants were renting the house together, the defendant, his nephew, and two more.     Then plaintiffs found out that they could get $1800 a month rent, instead of the current $1200 a month.   

They sent a notice that new lease would be $1800, then after not paying that for even one month, the plaintiffs moved to evict tenants for non-payment.   Housing court mediation gave the tenants 20 more days to move out, and 10 months later the squatters were still there.  

Everyone moved out except defendant (last of four tenants).   Defendant put appliances out on the front lawn for the trash pick up, and the next morning they were gone.   Defendant claims a plaintiff told his nephew to get rid of appliances.   Tenants were all finally evicted.  Defendant claims he cleaned the house out, but plaintiffs claim the basement, and the rest of the house was packed with garbage.  

Plaintiffs say it cost $40,000 to get house repaired, and replace everything the tenants sold or stole.   House is still being rehabbed. 

    Defendant and nephew stayed 10 days after the last month move out date, but still paid nothing, and plaintiffs had to go back to housing court again to get rid of them.   (Defendant seems a bit stoned in court, and needs a good dentist immediately).  On his way out of court, the defendant is swilling the Water That Must Not be Drunk like he's dying of thirst.

Case dismissed. (plaintiffs wanted 10 year old fridge, and other old appliances replaced). 

Second (2017)-

Financial Elderly Abuse?!-Plaintiff Dawn West owned a consignment / resale shop, and is suing former friend Alisa Smith Cumbra for defamation, slander, and a false restraining order filing (it was dismissed).     Defendant also applied for a restraining order against plaintiff, but it was also dismissed.   

Plaintiff was charged with financial elder abuse.    Defendant refinishes furniture, and plaintiff has the resale shop.     Slander on internet against plaintiff was alleging she committed elder abuse by cheating an 80-year-old woman who had consigned furniture through the plaintiff.   

Defendant alleged plaintiff stole furniture from the 80-year-old, and was selling stolen property.   Texts with plaintiff, and defendant say plaintiff took property, and gave furniture owner no money.    Plaintiff sells online so the furniture was taken to plaintiff's home.   Plaintiff claims she deposited $110 to the consigner's bank account, but brought no proof.    Plaintiff took truckloads of furniture and items from the older woman.

All restraining order applications were dismissed.    There are phone messages from plaintiff threatening the defendant over the restraining order filing.   Defendant says protective order filing was before the threats, so that's dismissed too.

Cases dismissed. 

Speeding, Crashing, Suing?-Plaintiff Alecia Siehl suing former neighbor Chazzlin Davidson (That's really her first name) for totaling a car the plaintiff sold defendant.   Defendant purchased a car from plaintiff in June, registration was never transferred to defendant, and there was no valid insurance on the car when the accident happened in October.   Litigants didn't really know each other before defendant saw "For Sale" sign on car (they lived in the same apartment complex).    Police report from defendant says driver was going to fast for conditions, and fine was $686.    

The other car owners in the accident are coming after plaintiff for car damages, because plaintiff was still the legal owner of the car.  Plaintiff had cancelled her insurance on the car, before the accident. Plaintiff's letter from insurance company is bizarre, and thrown out.   Plaintiff didn't submit the cancellation of financial responsibility for the car, that are supposed to be submitted to DMV to change the registration, until after the accident.   

 Defendant had no insurance on the car at the time of the accident. 

JJ advises the plaintiff to settle with the victims of the accident, and then sue defendant for the short fall. (Since plaintiff didn't come to court with clean hands, then I bet she's going to lose that case too). 

Case dismissed.