Hot Bench - General Discussion

[AngelaHunter]

19 hours ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

Plaintiff/rapper CozyC (also an attorney, her rap name is also Cat Spit)

🤔 I skipped this because I saw the word "kitty" in the blurb—good decision even if for the wrong reason.

[CrazyInAlabama]

15 November

“Not in Kansas Anymore”

New, Season 11, Episode  47

(Hanaah  Johnson vs.  and Michael and Gena Kugler)   

From the show site: A woman in need of a fresh start moved into her sponsor's house, but when her son misbehaved, the sponsor's husband reprimanded him, and the arrangement quickly fell apart; the defendants are accused of withholding access to her remaining belongings.

Plaintiff Haanah Johnson suing defendants/former sponsors Michael and Gena Kugler for property they withheld when she moved out.   Plaintiff and son moved in with defendant, son misbehaved, and husband reprimanded him.  So, plaintiff moved out, and claims the defendants stole her property.  Plaintiff says defendants were holding her belongings hostage until she did what they wanted, including giving custody of her child to her ex.   

Plaintiff says when she came out of rehab, Mrs. Kugler, her first sponsor, wanted her to move to Kansas City from Wichita.   However, Kuglers didn't want the boyfriend moving in too.  Rules were no drugs, they had to get jobs.  Within 24 hours of move in there was a blow up.   

Mr Kugler says plaintiff's child was trying to feed cotton candy to the grandson's lizard, which might have killed the lizard.   Gena asked Mike to leave for a while after the lizard incident.  Gena claims she saw plaintiff and boyfriend Gary taking pills, and claims plaintiff admitted to selling pills.  Within a week plaintiff moved out.   

Basement was where plaintiff, boyfriend, and kid were living, it wasn't a finished basement.  Defendant claims the plaintiff and boyfriend were regularly using drugs.   Defendant Gena says plaintiff was amped up on what seemed to be meth, and plaintiff said she was amped up on her Keto diet. However, defendant's husband has lost 100 lbs. on the same diet, and he's not wired. 

Then at the end of the first week, Gary, the boyfriend called and said he was told to move out immediately, so the couple and kids left.  Then the next morning Haanah was supposed to pick up her stuff with a U-Haul, but showed up with some stranger, and took nothing.   Then, plaintiff's adult daughter went through the plaintiff's stuff, took some, but won't tell plaintiff what she took.   Then, defendant Gena put a bunch of conditions on getting the plaintiff's property back, including giving up custody of her son.   Corriero says the custody demand was none of defendants' business.  Tewolde agrees with Corriero. 

Corriero grills the defendants, and questions their claim that plaintiff abandoned her property.   Defendant only has two beds, and says the adult daughter picked up everything else. 

Plaintiff moved back to Wichita.   

Plaintiff receives $5,000.

(My opinion is defendant Gena took over a much bigger role than sponsor).

 

“That’s Gonna Leave a Park”

Rerun, Season 10, Episode  169

p. 49, 29 July 2024

[CrazyInAlabama]

18 November

“The Nipsey Hussle”

New, Season 11, Episode  48

(Cashimier Amanda  vs. Ceritha Daily)     

From the show site: The litigants fight so much in court that a court officer escorts defendant out while litigants scream at each other.Today's case gets heated! Two sisters are ready to fight each other after one accused the other of stealing memorial programs for their favorite rapper. The accused claims she got her own booklets at the memorial service. But the accuser is convinced she took them to sell. Can she prove it?

Plaintiff Cashimier Amanda suing defendant/sister Ceritha Daily over memorial programs from their favorite rapper (Nipsey Hussle, R.I.P.).   Plaintiff says defendant stole them for resale.  Defendant claims she got her own memorial booklets at the service.   Suing for $5,000.  Plaintiff had tickets for the funeral, had multiple programs she wanted to keep forever.  Plaintiff claims sister stole the memorial programs to sell them. PLaintiff had five books.   After the service plaintiff had to go to work, and let defendant borrow her car, then the booklets were gone. 

There is a text message of defendant talking to some guy, a month after the funeral.   Defendant was accusing a man of stealing the booklets from her house.  Litigants were both living at defendant's house. 

Tasha Joseph is plaintiff's witness, who says she never had a book, and defendant had them.  Defendant claims she had four books, and gave two away, and the mysterious man stole the rest from her house. 

This all happened five years ago.  (The books have sold online from $250 to $1500)

Plaintiff claims the defendant's texts with the man are faked.  

Both parties are excused, and Sonia has to tell plaintiff to leave while the litigants are screaming at each other. 

Judges Tewolde and Corriero say plaintiff didn't prove her case, plaintiff case dismissed.  Judge Juarez says statute of limitations is long past.

Plaintiff case dismissed, no proof, and statute of limitations was passed a long time ago. 

 

“Internal Revenue Disservice”

Rerun, Season 10, Episode  176

p. 50, 19 August 2024

 

 

[AngelaHunter]

1 hour ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

: The litigants fight so much in court that a court officer escorts defendant out while litigants scream at each other.

So, I remember Nipsey Russell, but I'm ashamed to say I have no idea who Nipsy Hussle was. It seems he got gunned down because... I don't know, but he was a role model and so special his booklet had some kind of ethereal, glowing aura around it.

"Were the booklets in the car?" asks Judge T.

"Yes, they was."

I was going to watch this but when I saw the preview of the out-of-control screeching I thought there might be a knock-down, drag-out with these huge "ladies" and feared they may have hurt Sonya, so I had to click off.

1 hour ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

Plaintiff case dismissed, no proof, and statute of limitations was passed a long time ago. 

Thanks. So why were we subjected to this disgraceful display?

On 11/15/2024 at 3:28 PM, CrazyInAlabama said:

(Hanaah  Johnson vs.  and Michael and Gena Kugler) 

"The Hills Have Eyes" meets Hot Bench. 😨

[CrazyInAlabama]

It's rating sweeps month, every show on every channel gets their ratings measured, they use it for age of viewer, numbers, and it is how they charge for advertising prices.     That's why certain shows have plexiderm commercials, and others have other products not focused at people who need plexiderm.     This month, if it will get viewers it runs.   That's why the news shows feature more controversial topics.   It's all about the money.  

I believe the ever patient court officer could handle anything, but there is always off camera security officers too, mostly ex bouncers I guess, after seeing some of them. 

Edited November 18 by CrazyInAlabama

[AngelaHunter]

5 hours ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

I believe the ever patient court officer could handle anything, but there is always off camera security officers too, mostly ex bouncers I guess, after seeing some of them. 

A SWAT team would be needed to subdue some of the surly burly beasts on this show.

5 hours ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

That's why certain shows have plexiderm commercials,

Those Plexaderm infomercials? I got a new super HD TV and recently had cataract surgery. What I see now in those commercials is downright scary!😱It's worse than some horror movies I've seen. Make it stop!

This other mini-informercial is verging on making me lose it so badly that I might have a "furiation" and throw a rock through my neighbour's windshield or something. We get this over and over and over.

😠

Hate her! Like, basically - a lot.

 

 

 

[CrazyInAlabama]

19 November

“Full Moon Rising”

New, Season 11, Episode  49

(Ralph Frugone vs. Bradford Smith)   

From the show site: A man let his couch-surfing best friend move into his house with him; but here they are years later in a lawsuit over non-payment of rent. The defendant claims he never received a written agreement, and that the relationship became intimate. The plaintiff denies this and accuses him of sexual assault. That alleged incident may seem irrelevant, but the judges explore it to assess credibility

Plaintiff Ralph Frugone suing defendant Bradford Smith for non-payment of rent.   Defendant claims there wasn't a written agreement, and that they weren't just friends but intimate.   Plaintiff denies they were romantic, and says defendant sexually assaulted him.  Defendant claims he did housework, and that substitutes for rent.  Plaintiff claims the agreement was $500 a month rent, plus utilities.   Plaintiff suing for $5,000 court maximum, but owes at leat $6500 in rent, plus unpaid utilities.   

Defendant says he ws a guest, not a renter.  Defendant says they were romantic.   Plaintiff calls it sexual assault.  

Plaintiff's witness, Nancy says she was present when defendant said he had sexually assaulted plaintiff.   

Plaintiff receives $5,000.

“Roaches, Cats &  Rats, Oh My!”

Rerun, Season 10, Episode  179

p. 50, 26 August 2024

[patty1h]

1 hour ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

From the show site: A man let his couch-surfing best friend move into his house with him; but here they are years later in a lawsuit over non-payment of rent. The defendant claims he never received a written agreement, and that the relationship became intimate.

This one set off my BS Meter, as soon as the plaintiff mentioned they met in film school.  The details of this case are so soap opera-y, crude and dumb for me to buy them.  How do you get sexually assaulted in your sleep more than once?  Why would that person still be in your home?  Yeesh.

Edited November 19 by patty1h

[CrazyInAlabama]

19 November

“Evicted by a Snake”

New, Season 11, Episode  50

(Richard "Greg"  Hobson vs.  Holly Jo Wright)     

From the show site: A dog hotel owner sues his employee/tenant -- a woman with a pet python -- for lost rental income, damage to his residence, giving no notice and leaving her belongings behind.  The dog hotel owner sues his employee/tenant for lost rental income and damage to his residence. He claims the relationship became sour after she brought home a pet python; she claims it wasn't her snake he had a problem with, but her new boyfriend. She may have left because she was uncomfortable, but does that excuse her giving no notice and leaving her belongings behind?

Plaintiff/dog hotel owner Richard "Greg" Hobson suing defendant/former employee and tenant Holly Jo Wright for lost rental income and damage to a residence, she also left belongings behind.   Defendant also left without notice. 

The smirk on defendant's face when plaintiff and Corriero say how big the boas can get is infuriating.  Defendant denies damages, unpaid rent, and claims plaintiff only had an issue with her when she got a boyfriend.   There was no written lease, but agreement was $600 a month rent, and half of utilities.  

Defendant's boyfriend bought her a ball python.  Corriero asks plaintiff why snake was an issue, and it was partly that defendant didn't ask permission to get the snake.     

Plaintiff says after defendant quit work and moved out, she had two scheduled appointments to remove her property, and never showed.   Corriero asks if the plaintiff had other reasons for inviting the defendant to his house.   Plaintiff is suing for $4793, for four months rent when her property was left behind.    Corriero says plaintiff could put her items in storage and charge her for it, but the judges never give storage fees to landlords.  

Defendant claims plaintiff cut her hours at work, but she regularly didn't show for work.  Defendant's text says she was leaving, but that's without 30 days notice.   The photos of her remaining piles of garbage in the four rooms is huge. 

Attorney told plaintiff he had to keep her stuff for 90 days. There is a chock full utility trailer that's all her stuff.  As Judge Tewolde says, defendant was treating the plaintiff's house as a storage unit.  Plaintiff says he told defendant to be courteous to the neighbors, all in their 80's and not to run around the yard screaming and yelling in the middle of the night, disturbing the neighbors. 

Plaintiff says he never met her boyfriend, that defendant claims plaintiff didn't like.    Judges are wrong, you can't rent a storage unit for someone else. Landlords can't win on this show, if plaintiff had dumped her stuff in storage, they wouldn't have given him storage fees because there wasn't a contract. )

Two months' rent, junk and dump and hauling fees, rekey fees.  $1885 to plaintiff.

“Wages for Ages”

Rerun, Season 10, Episode  178

p. 50, 21 August 2024

 

Edited November 20 by CrazyInAlabama

[AngelaHunter]

On 11/19/2024 at 4:28 PM, patty1h said:

The details of this case are so soap opera-y, crude and dumb for me to buy them.  How do you get sexually assaulted in your sleep more than once?  Why would that person still be in your home?  Yeesh.

"He's a black man in America, so I just overlooked it when I finally woke up while he was sexually attacking me and merely asked, "What are you doing?" I'm just a very nice person and I've been stepped on, lied to, cheated on, and treated like dirrrt."

Yes, so crude and dumb that I bailed. What kind of costume was the little P wearing?

[patty1h]

56 minutes ago, AngelaHunter said:

"He's a black man in America, so I just overlooked it when I finally woke up while he was sexually attacking me and merely asked, "What are you doing?" I'm just a very nice person and I've been stepped on, lied to, cheated on, and treated like dirrrt."

Yes, so crude and dumb that I bailed. What kind of costume was the little P wearing?

Don't forget that the plaintiff was also suicidal!  Cases like this make me nervous... I pray that HB is not going down the same tacky road as Judge Milian's new show.   That show is a waste of time and so low class.  Hot Bench, PLEASE don't go there. 

Edited November 21 by patty1h

[AngelaHunter]

10 hours ago, patty1h said:

I pray that HB is not going down the same tacky road as Judge Milian's new show. 

I really hope not too. I think it may just be another example (I can think of a few) where the fake litigants managed to present made-up cases or appeared on two different court shows with the same cases. 

[CrazyInAlabama]

21 November

“Terrible Tenant Troubles”

New, Season 11, Episode  51

(David Spotts vs. Andrea O'Brien)     

From the show site:. An eleven-year tenant is on the hook for unpaid rent, late fees, utilities, and repairs. She claims she did everything perfectly up until the last few months when she fell on hard times. The landlord claims he had plenty of compassion, but she became completely unresponsive. Did he have the right to contact her family about her alleged debts?

Plaintiff/landlord David Spotts suing defendant/former tenant Andrea O'Brien for damages, unpaid rent, late fees, and utilities.    Suing for $5,000.

 Plaintiff says on move out day, that place wasn't empty, and defendant never showed for the final inspection.   Defendant says plaintiff was a bad landlord, never fixed anything,  and she was a good tenant, and deserves her security back.  Defendant claims the plaintiff didn't give her the itemized list of damages, and her security back.  

One damage photo shows a garage window missing, huge hole in an interior door, doors were switched, Judge Tewolde says house doesn't look dirty, and the 'holes' in the wall are smaller than her earrings.  The wall holes Tewolde can't see were over 1/2" in diameter, so not just a spackle job.  Lots of garbage left in the house and garage.   I guess defendant and her helpers couldn't find the garbage dump, or walk it to the curb for trash day. 

Water bill wasn't paid by defendant, and plaintiff had to pay almost $500 to pay the water bill, so the next tenant could get water turned on again.   Defendant claims plaintiff moved the stuff into the garage and didn't give her a chance to get rid of the trash.  

No surprise, Corriero takes the defendant's side.   Defendant was sent a list of damages, with photos, and she claims she never got it.  

Plaintiff is suing for two months rent, disposal fees, cleaning and damages.  Plaintiff says anything defendant said was broken, was fixed immediately.  When plaintiff saw defendant left and still had junk in the house, he called one of her relatives to get the trash removed.   He couldn't get ahold of defendant. Defendant also claims she had effects on income from Covid until 2023.   

Plaintiff receives two months rent plus 6 days, water bill, a few days in February, and that is all,  $4835.

 

“Ex-istential Crisis”

Rerun, Season 10, Episode 181

p. 50, 28 August 2024

[AngelaHunter]

1 hour ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

“Ex-istential Crisis”

First time viewing this. Def doesn't believe in divorce, but she does believe in legally separating from her husband (Maybe she had good reason. I dunno) and still having him give her hefty spousal (?) support payments AND make all the payments on her car. The battery died, so why should she replace it and make the payments? Let him pay for it.

[CrazyInAlabama]

If you don't believe in divorce, then the legal separation is about the same to me.  The ex-wife was despicable.   Playing poor little me only goes well with Corriero.  

Husband should just file for divorce, and not look back.   He doesn't need her permission to divorce.   Why people let someone play them for a fool like this is ridiculous. 

Edited November 21 by CrazyInAlabama

[CrazyInAlabama]

22 November

“The Auntie-Hero”

New, Season 11, Episode  52

(Marcella Williams vs. Stefon Ellison)     

From the show site:  A man asked his aunt to add a phone to her plan for his son, which she did, and he paid her for. But when the son ran away to his great-aunt's house, the payments stopped. The father feels she has his son, so it's her prerogative to cut the phone line if she wants. Does he still owe her money?

Plaintiff/aunt Marcella Williams suing defendant/nephew Stefon Ellison over phone charges he didn’t pay her to cover his son’s phone bill.   Suing for $335.  Plaintiff says son moved from his father's house when he witnessed fights, and son moved in with aunt for a while.  That's when father stopped paying his aunt for the son's bills. 

Defendant says he never had anything in his own name, and didn't know how to get a contract.  Defenant says the arguments at his house was son was having problems with school grades.   When nephew talked to his aunt, she told him to see his school counselor, and he did.  Then nephew showed up, and DCFS was at her door that evening.   

Defendant claims his aunt ratted him out to DCFS.  Nephew claimed father was rousting him out of bed at 3 a.m., and nephew was too tired to do school work.  Defendant claims he woke his son up at 3 a.m., because of father's work start time.   That makes zero sense to me.  

A month later, nephew / son left school with his mother, and no one had contact with him.  So, at that time aunt cut the phone off. 

Plaintiff receives $335. 

 

“Chopper Stopper”

Rerun, Season 10, Episode  170

p. 50, 30 July 2024

[AngelaHunter]

Thanks for the warning @CrazyInAlabama I was going to watch this tonight. Now I am not going to watch this tonight.

[CrazyInAlabama]

25 November

“Hold Your Horses”

New, Season 11, Episode  53

(JoAnn Hill vs. Liliana Salyer )  

From the show site: A horse lover who provided a young woman with a free stall and discounted rent in her home says the tenant ruined her riding arena by spreading the wrong kind of footing material.

Plaintiff/home and barn owner JoAnn Hill suing defendant/tenant and horse owner Liliana Salyer for $2281 for putting the wrong footing for horse arena.  Defendant claims the decomposed granite was approved by plaintiff, and only was an issue when defendant was evicted.  Defendant counter suing for $5,000 for unlawful eviction. Plaintiff was selling a horse, and sold horse to defendant for $2,500, then gave the stall and rental lease to defendant.   

Plaintiff had a riding accident, and no longer rides, so is getting miniature horses.  Plaintiff says defendant asked if she could put more sand in the arena, but put D.G. instead, and said she would put sand over it later, at her expense.  

Plaintiff denies knowing about the DG, but it says in text messages that it was coming.     

Defendant still has the horse, and it's now at a friend's stable now.  Plaintiff gave defendant 60 days notice to move out.  Defendant claims in spite of the notice it was an illegal eviction.  Defendant claims plaintiff constantly called her nasty names, but plaintiff says she used the B-word one time, and that's all. 

Plaintiff claims there are no texts showing she was angry with defendant, but there are. 

I'm sick of hearing phony excuses from defendant, and plaintiff denying what she said.  

I wouldn't use D.G. in an entire horse stall, you have to put a lot of sand or other material over the D.G., because it gets too hard. 

Judges agree the counter claim by defendant is total horse pucky, and dismissed. 

Judges award $600 to plaintiff, and toss defendant's case. 

 

“BBs, RVs & Caddys”

Rerun, Season 11, Episode 11  

p. 51, 23 September 2024 (This is the one in the TV ad, talking about the only witness is a cat).

 

[CrazyInAlabama]

26 November

“The Flames of Discord”

New, Season 11, Episode  54

(Kala Ferrer  vs. Kimiko Dockett)  

From the show site: A woman who discovered that her new roommate wanted a live-in caregiver says the position was immediately too demanding and she was barred from getting her belongings after move-out; the resident countersues, saying the woman set fire to her garage.

Plaintiff Kala Ferrer suing defendant /former landlord and employer Kimiko Dockett for return of her belongings.  Suing for $5,000 . Rent was $800, deposit $400.  Defendant says plaintiff didn't pay full deposit, because of the caregiver aspect.  Defendant says plaintiff and 4-year-old daughter would live rent free, which is usually $3,000 a month for the caretaker position.   Defendant says it wasn't a roommate situation, but a live in caretaker doing some housework, all room and board included. 

Three days after move in defendant says plaintiff didn't want the job and living situation after all.      Landlord only allowed tenants that were caregivers, not just room renters which is what plaintiff wanted to be. 

Defendant is counter suing because she says plaintiff set her garage on fire. 

There was another landlord, and plaintiff said she didn't want them criticising her housekeeping and boxes.   Defendant says plaintiff moved a lot of stuff into the home that shouldn't be there.    Defendant says plaintiff wanted to bring dates over, and wanted to have a yard sale.

Then, the garage caught on fire, blamed on the plaintiff.  Defendant claims she let plaintiff put a small couch, doll house, and a few items.   Defendant witness Joshua (her son), saw two boxes on fire right after plaintiff was in the garage. There are photos of the damages.  Neighbor's security camera showed plaintiff and boyfriend going into the garage, and fire started in two place right under electric and gas lines.   Garage fire claim dismissed. 

Plaintiff shows a video of defendant saying she wanted her property.  Plaintiff says she tried four times to pick up her property, including two visits with police standby, but only took some of her stuff. 

Judge T. says both sides are suing for excessive amounts.  

Plaintiff gets $1,480.

 

“One Flight Stand”

Rerun, Season 11, Episode  6

p. 50, 16 September 2024

 

[CrazyInAlabama]

27 November (Unfortunately, my channel that runs this is out of service, bet it comes back about 2:30 when the episode's over.  Just as I expected, channel came back right at 2:30).

“The Opioid Odyssey”

New, Season 11, Episode  55

( vs. )

From the show site:

A woman says she lent her van to a friend for some errands, but it was never returned; the "friend" says she made a down payment of $1,300 worth of pain pills to purchase the van, and therefore she couldn't "steal" something that belonged to her.

Plaintiff wants to be paid by defendant for the van she loaned her.  Suing for $ .  

However, defendant said she paid a down payment of $1,300 in pain pills to purchase the van, and owes nothing.  Please tell me the local drug task force saw this episode.  

Plaintiff says defendant had the van for three months, there was damage, two new tires that were trashed, and the new battery was switched out for a bad battery.   Plaintiff has the title, and the van. 

Defendant is counter claiming for $5,000 for property in the van, including prescriptions, and all kinds of stuff.  Plaintiff claims she bagged everything up, and left it on defendant's porch and told her where it was.  

Plaintiff has photos showing what was in the van at the time of the repo.

Judges dismiss both cases, because they were stupid, and no proof of anything.   Judge T also said using illegally obtained drugs isn't legal tender. 

I managed to find some parts of the case on FB, so saw it without the commercials.   

(Thanks for the information AngelaHunter). 

 

“Wristbanned”

Rerun, Season 11, Episode  12

p. 51, 24 September 2024

 

28 November

“After a While, Crocotile”

Rerun, Season 10, Episode  95

p. 46, 22 February 2024

 

“Suspicious Sale”

Rerun, Season 10, Episode  116

p.47,  2 April 2024

 

(Football is on Friday 29 November, so no hot bench)

 

Edited November 27 by CrazyInAlabama

[AngelaHunter]

1 hour ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

“The Opioid Odyssey”

OMG. Sometimes I have to split a case up when viewing it all once is too much for my little brain to take in. This was one of those times. I got only about 6 minutes in, and watching JT interacting with these two was beyond surreal.  Def, who has no money but has the wherewithal to maintain herself at around 400lbs, declared about the car she got from the frowsy P, who appeared to be wearing her granddaughter's top with the little flouncy cap sleeves:

"I paid her with 130 hydrocodone pills."

 

 

1 hour ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

(Guess I'll catch this next time it runs)

Here's a little preview, @CrazyInAlabama

[AngelaHunter]

On 11/26/2024 at 3:23 PM, CrazyInAlabama said:

A woman who discovered that her new roommate wanted a live-in caregiver says the position was immediately too demanding and she was barred from getting her belongings after move-out; the resident countersues, saying the woman set fire to her garage.

Both litigants looked like they were going to a celebrity wedding or a black-tie event after the show. I have a big ball of yarn in my closet that looks very much like what the P had on top of her head. Anyway.

So many petty scammers out there, always sniffing around for ways to beat the system, cheat someone, or perpetrate scams.

J.Juarez caught on pretty quickly that Def is not allowed to rent out rooms in her rented home (even though at first she lied and said she was) BUT is allowed to have a "live-in caregiver" even if the candidate has zero experience or qualifications to be one. Def put "Room for rent" in her ad then springs it on P that she's also going to be her caregiver. *wink wink* Yeah, right. 3K a month! Woo hoo! Maybe they could have split the windfall? 

It's like the scammers who hire housekeepers and then call them "health aides" so they can get the taxpayers to foot the bill to get their homes cleaned.

Of course, P (who says she left 5K of stuff in the house but has zero proof) set the fire in the garage. This is one of the standard ways litigants express displeasure - smashing windshields, bleaching clothes, breaking play stations and other toys, slashing tires, cutting cables, and other vandalism, and all that uncivilized shit, sure that a dispute can be satisfactorily settled this way. 🙄

Def has a video to prove P and some guy did it. Oh, right. She doesn't have it, but she tells the judges what they would see if she DID have it and expects them to believe her when they already know she's a liar and a scammer. She had a whole year to get it - if it even exists - but never bothered.

She also has photos to prove the damage P did to the room. Well, she didn't have a "Before" but she does have a pic of the rug after she cleaned it, so use your imagination about how dirty it was. JT's mouth actually drops open at that utter stupidity.

What an annoying waste of time. Luckily I had my phone game to distract me from the most annoying BS. Sorry. I'm still irritated from the ghastly narcotics-as-currency case. Ugh.

[DoctorK]

On 11/27/2024 at 4:04 PM, AngelaHunter said:

 

"I paid her with 130 hydrocodone pills."

I really disliked both litigants but I think I disliked the defendant more than the plaintiff. If the defendant has a legitimate prescription for pain medicine but is willing to sell/swap 130 pills, does she actually need the medication or is it just a way of making money (illegally). I wonder if her doctor knows how cavalierly she sells the medication the doctor is prescribing. Then again, perhaps the doctor gets a cut from the sales? I hope not or we have just encountered three scummy people, not just two.

[AngelaHunter]

4 hours ago, DoctorK said:

I really disliked both litigants but I think I disliked the defendant more than the plaintiff. If the defendant has a legitimate prescription for pain medicine but is willing to sell/swap 130 pills, does she actually need the medication or is it just a way of making money (illegally). I wonder if her doctor knows how cavalierly she sells the medication the doctor is prescribing. Then again, perhaps the doctor gets a cut from the sales? I hope not or we have just encountered three scummy people, not just two.

From what I've heard and read, prescription drugs are now accounting for more overdoses than the usual illegal drugs, since the former are much more readily available. Getting them doesn't seem to be a problem, with people often getting prescriptions from two or three doctors and going to different emergency rooms complaining of severe pain to get drugs. This heffalump seems in such dire shape she can't stand for 15 minutes. There are sites online to buy nearly any drug you want with no prescription as well.

I have trouble imagining any reputable doctor who would give a patient such a huge store of habit-forming painkillers. Where she got them all, who knows? I never know how litigants manage to wrangle all the stuff they get.🤷‍♀️

[CrazyInAlabama]

There are a lot of ways to get huge amounts of pain pills.   (I've live near too many pharmacies and pain pill clinics that were busted by the DEA). 

2 December

“Trust Me”

New, Season 11, Episode  56

(Abraham Garcia vs. Susan Garcia)   Garcia 

From the show site: A brother claims his sister is denying their mother's last wishes by withholding rent she collected on the house they inherited. But the sister claims she incurred costs for twenty months while a squatter paid zero rent - and besides, the brother signed a quit claim deed, which means he no longer has an interest in the property. Does she owe him anything?

Plaintiff/brother Abraham Garcia suing defendant/sister Susan Garcia  for rent on a house they inherited.  Suing for $5,000.   Defendant countersuing for $5,000 for money owed by brother on the house, and that brother signed a quit claim to her. 

However, defendant says she got stuck with costs for twenty months when a squatter was in the house, and her brother signed a quit claim deed so he no longer has any claim to the property.   Sister was given an additional 10% because she helped mother fix up the house.   So, house was 60/40.   Younger brother was a squatter for 20 months, and defendant paid everything to keep house up, $27,000 paid by defendant.   Then plaintiff brother wrote the quit claim on the house.  Corriero has to explain quit claim in excruciating detail, then plaintiff has a statement that is ridiculous. 

Defendant wants to sell house after this is settled, because another brother sued her and lost over the house already.   Plaintiff claims he spent $40k fixing the house up, but says it was a gift, along with remodeling the house.  

Plaintiff claims defendant lied to him about creditors suing over the mother's house, so he signed the quit claim.   Defendant says the quit claim was to get the squatter brother's threats over the house to stop.  

Plaintiff and defendant argue over who prepared the quit claim.   Corriero explains quit claim to plaintiff again, and he's pretty ticked about it. 

Plaintiff case dismissed, he has no case.   Defendant case dismissed, too late. 

“Wedding Faux-tographer”

Rerun, Season 10, Episode  111

p. 47, 25 March 2024

 

[AngelaHunter]

1 hour ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

the brother signed a quit claim deed, which means he no longer has an interest in the property.

Those Garcias - not exactly the Waltons. Mr. Garcia looked about 80, so I was taken aback to hear his mom just passed away in 2016.  He had his opening statement written down and insisted on reading every word of it, including stating his name, which the judges already knew. Someone behind him was struggling not to laugh.

 

1 hour ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

Corriero has to explain quit claim in excruciating detail,

And his whole case was based on that, but he seemed to have no understanding of it. "It means you have no claim to the property. You QUIT having a CLAIM," says Papa Mike.

"Oh," he says when it's explained to him. "I'm learning." This was his case!

(reminds me of a case here where homebuyers were suing the seller for breaking a contract to buy her home with provisions for how it would be done if the contingency wasn't met. She sold it to someone else. Papa Mike told her she broke the contract because she couldn't understand the documents the Ps sent her. "Okay," she says with a shrug. "It's not okay!" said Papa, getting pretty hot under the collar. That was the whole basis of the case!)

 

So nice when families go at it like this after a death - like hyenas fighting over a carcass. Still, hyenas perform a valuable service and are an important part of the ecosystem, unlike family members ready to rip each other to pieces over nothing much at all.

[CrazyInAlabama]

3 December

“Don’t Goof on my Roof”

New, Season 11, Episode  57

(Susan O'Ryan and Shahaley Rose  vs. Joshua "Josh" Foster)   

From the show site: A single mother sues a contractor who she claims was negligent and unprofessional while working on her roof. Heavy rain leaked into her home for three days in a row. But he claims that wasn't his fault; she's the one who made the jobsite uncomfortable for his workers and fired him before he could finish.

Plaintiffs Susan O'Ryan (mother) and Shahaley Rose (daughter) suing roofing contractor/defendant Joshua "Josh"  Foster for water leaks after he replaced her roof.  Defendant says she made a hostile work environment for his workers, and fired him before he finished.   She's suing for $5,000. 

Defendant says plaintiff was a nightmare to work with. Original job was to fix a skylight leak, chimney roof leak, stovepipe flue pipe where they went through the roof, plus some of the roof.    Defendant says he had to repair wood on roof, underlayment plywood, replace and reseal the vent and chimney flashing and boots.  

Defendant apparently made inappropriate offers to 'get to know' plaintiff better with a walk in the woods.   Plaintiff claims defendant was drinking on the job too. 

There is a video from plaintiff O'Ryan showing water damages and estimates totaling over $12,000.   The $12,000 is to redo the half of the roof defendant already did, and remediate the water damages.   

Defendant tells the racist and homophobic statements plaintiff Shahaley said, and he gets bleeped.  Plaintiff denies making the disgusting statements. 

Judges deliberate.

Judges agree roof job wasn't done correctly.  Judge Juarez brings up that plaintiff fired defendant and wouldn't let him fix the roof.   $5,000 to plaintiff.  

 

”Dog Gone Doggone It!”

Rerun, Season 10, Episode  109

p.  47, 20 March 2024

[AngelaHunter]

7 hours ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

Plaintiffs Susan O'Ryan (mother) and Shahaley Rose (daughter) suing roofing contractor/defendant Joshua "Josh"  Foster for water leaks after he replaced her roof. 

Josh was slick a, a very good talker, and a very slimy creep who was drinking on the roof. Concerning his inviting the P to take a walk in the woods at night with him so he could get to know her better, maybe he's a serial killer as well. Or maybe he just found her missing teeth intriguing or enticing or... something.

And call me old-fashioned but I don't think asking a man about his nail polish is so horrifically offensive.

[CrazyInAlabama]

4 December

”I’ll Be Your Shelter”

Rerun, Season 11, Episode  14

p. 51, 26 September 2024

 

“Motor Homeless”

Rerun, Season 10, Episode  112

 p. 47, 26 March 2024

[CrazyInAlabama]

5 December

“Sans Francisco”

Rerun, Season 11, Episode  8

p. 51, 18 September 2024

 

”Don’t Pay Me, I’m Pulling Up!”

Rerun, Season 10, Episode  110

p. 47, 21 March 2024

 

6 December

“Path of Lease Resistance”

Rerun, Season 10, Episode  182

p. 50, 3 September 2024

 

“Broken Bro Code”

Rerun, Season 10, Episode 114

p. 47 28 March 2024

[AngelaHunter]

On 12/5/2024 at 6:16 AM, CrazyInAlabama said:

”Don’t Pay Me, I’m Pulling Up!”

This filled me with admiration and awe at the superior suspension systems in Audis.

[AngelaHunter]

On 11/13/2024 at 3:27 PM, CrazyInAlabama said:

13 November

"Don’t Have a Fit Bud“”

New, Season 11, Episode  45

Mylene (Beaudoin vs. Ross Harris)

I see Ross, a goofy, not-bright,  IG "model", reality "star",  and "influencer" (kids, don't let Ross influence you to get it on in public parks) who here appeared to be filled with righteous indignation over Mylene's lust for him got a wrist-slap for doing the naughty in a park with a 20-year-old (he's 33).

I'm assuming he did this after his teary appearance here.

[CrazyInAlabama]

9 December

“I’m Too Sexy”

New, Season 11, Episode  58

(India Martin vs. Sexxy Lewis)    (That's actually the listed name of defendant).  

From the show site: A man knowingly allows an unlicensed hairstylist to braid his hair then says that disqualifies her from being paid; in a single hour, she sends him a dozen texts demanding payment.

(As far as I've heard, braiders aren't licensed unless they do other cosmetology services besides braiding). 

Plaintiff /braider India Martin suing defendant / former client Sexxy Lewis for payment.  Suing for $200 for braiding services and late fees. 

Defendant says it should have been free because he's was in a relationship with plaintiff before this.   

Plaintiff receives $485.   

 

“Gold Wedding”

Rerun, Season 10, Episode 67

p. 45, 8 January 2024

[patty1h]

1 hour ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

(India Martin vs. Sexxy Lewis)    (That's actually the listed name of defendant).  

From the show site: A man knowingly allows an unlicensed hairstylist to braid his hair then says that disqualifies her from being paid; in a single hour, she sends him a dozen texts demanding payment.

Lord, give me strength.  This sounds like something that would be shown on the new Judge Milian trainwreck of a show.

[CrazyInAlabama]

10 December

“Scratch ‘N’ Dash”

New, Season 11, Episode  59

(Toebey Ty vs. Michael Williams and Shelley Daniels)       Ty Williams and Daniels 

From the show site: A man admits he pulled a knife on someone who scratched his car, but says his son believes he's an action hero, and he was trying to keep up that persona.

Plaintiff Toebey Ty  suing defendants Michael Williams (her daughter's boyfriend), and Shelley Daniels (apartment resident) for $5,000. Suing for $ .  Plaintiff claims defendant was threatening him, after threatening him the night before over a parking space.   This is an apartment complex with assigned parking.   Plaintiff has a video of defendant Williams parking over the line on the assigned parking space.  

When plaintiff confronted defendant, defendant brought a knife to confront Williams.   Plaintiff says his son thinks he's the Rock, and plaintiff is trying to keep that delusion intact.    Plaintiff says Williams parked over the line, and possibly scratched his car.    

Someone calls the police, apparently a neighbor.  Defendant said he already moved his truck when plaintiff threatened him with the knife.    Plaintiff submitted a photo of a smashed car door, that he claims will cost over $6,000 to repair.    Defendant doesn't have the truck any longer, it was a repo situation, so he can't show photos of his truck damages.   Defendant says he didn't touch the plaintiff's car. 

So, plaintiff the pleading the cuckoo for Cocoa Puffs defense? 

Plaintiff ran to photograph is car damages, but didn't take a photo of the truck damages from the incident?   There is no evidence of a collision on the truck, because plaintiff didn't bother to take photos of the truck.   Plaintiff claims he was in the car during the collision.   

Defendant claims that plaintiff's car wasn't in the parking space when he parked his truck.   This was after the knife incident.   Williams says he never parked in the parking lot after the first incident, and wasn't in the space when plaintiff claims defendant hit his car. 

Tewolde doesn't believe defendant and believes plaintiff.  Corriero says no proof.  Juarez says she doesn't believe the plaintiff.     Juarez points out damage estimate isn't for the back door, and fender, but it's a lot of other damages too. 

Plaintiff gets $5,000.    (I wouldn't have given him a penny, no proof of who hit his car, no photo of the truck with damages. Another bizarre decision by the three judges.). 

“Trouble Brewing”

Rerun, Season 10, Episode 94

p. 46, 21 February 2024

 

[CrazyInAlabama]

11 December

“Little Pink House”

Rerun, Season 11, Episode  1 (This is part one, part two is on tomorrow)

p. 50, 9 September 2024

 

“Tenant Runaway”

Rerun, Season 10, Episode  108

p. 47, 19 March 2024

 

[AngelaHunter]

On 12/9/2024 at 3:27 PM, CrazyInAlabama said:

India Martin vs. Sexxy Lewis

I see I was right to skip this.

23 hours ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

A man admits he pulled a knife on someone who scratched his car, but says his son believes he's an action hero, and he was trying to keep up that persona.

Pulling a knife for a scratch on a car? I wouldn't think action heroes would have the time or inclination for something trivial like that, but I'm sure he's a fine example for the boy.

[CrazyInAlabama]

12 December

“Crumblin’ Down” (Part 2 of yesterday’s episode)

Rerun, Season 11, Episode  2

p. 10 September 2024

“Under Fire”

Rerun, Season 10, Episode  105

p. p. 46, 12 March 2024

 

13 December

“Metal Mayhem”

Rerun, Season 11, Episode  15

p. 51, 27 September 2024

 

“Airing Dirty Laundry”

Rerun, Season 10, Episode  4

p. 42, 14 September 2023

[CrazyInAlabama]

16 December

“Fowl Play”

New, Season 11, Episode  60

(Joan Lattimore vs. Grace Terrell)  

From the show site: The plaintiff claims her reputation was damaged when the defendant publicly accused her of stealing chicken from a food drive.

Plaintiff Joan Latimore suing defendant Grace Terrell for accusing her of stealing chicken from a food drive. plaintiff is suing for $3500 for reputation damages.  Frederick Terrell is husband of defendant and a witness for her.    

Plaintiff also has a witness, Marie Terry, who says Grace Terrell told her plaintiff was a thief, and said it in front of a bunch of volunteers. 

Defendant claims she saw plaintiff steal frozen chicken from the church and give it to her someone, and plaintiff's witness saw this.  Defendant also claims she only told plaintiff about the theft, and later told her own husband.

 Then defendant doubles down and claims others mentioned the chicken was missing, and then claims a helper was taking the box of chicken to plaintiff's car.   

Plaintiff claims not only her witness but others heard defendant make the accusations.   Plaintiff quit the service organization with the food, and said in her resignation letter she's quitting because defendant was telling everyone she stole the chicken.  

Judge Juarez says plaintiff told the allegations publicly, so how is defendant defaming her.  

Everything dismissed.  No proof of anything.   

(I disagree.  No proof plaintiff took chicken, she doesn't even eat chicken.  I think defendant is just mean, and gossips). 

“Storage Wars”

Rerun, Season 10, Episode  106

p. 46, 13 March 2024

Edited December 16 by CrazyInAlabama

[AngelaHunter]

The Great Chicken Caper. But the question remains: Who stole the chicken? Call the CSI team.

7 hours ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

“Storage Wars”

Saw this for the first time. Mama Bear (who I first thought was Papa Bear) had a POA but didn't bother taking it when she went to get the junk of her felonious Sonny Boy.

I'm sure the criminal's girlfriend was above reproach(even though she left 3 cats to starve in that place) and honest as the day is long, but she had access to the junk that was worth 5K. MB said the girlfriend didn't need any of that pricey stuff, so why would she take it? Yeah, right. Have you never heard of pawnshops, Momma?

Gee, Mom - you know how all this kerfuffle could have been avoided? If your darling boy didn't commit crimes and get his worthless ass tossed in the slammer.

The other two judges were adamant that the POA gave Momma absolute access to the crap. Yes, it would have if she'd brought it with her.  I had to agree with Papa when he said the POA didn't count since the plaintiff never showed it to Def. Oh, but she HAD it... at home. No different than the other zillion litigants who swear they have proof that will win their case, but they don't have it with them.

I can't remember what proof Mama had of the value of all this stuff for which she was awarded $2800. Mama, tell you boy to behave if and when he gets sprung. He obviously couldn't trust his g/f.

 

 

[CrazyInAlabama]

17 December

“A Cabin in the Woods”

New, Season 11, Episode  61

(Rebecca Neve and Christopher Gorman vs. Lisa Veredieck )         Neve and Gorman Verdieck

From the show site: A husband and wife claim they were unfairly evicted from a home that froze because it had no heat.

Plaintiffs/former tenants Rebecca Neve and Christopher Gorman suing defendant/former landlord Lisa Verdieck for illegal eviction.   Plaintiffs claim they were evicted from the home for water damages from frozen pipes.   Defendant say they evicted plaintiffs because they turned the heat off, and the pipes froze.  

Defendant says they owe for 12 days the last month they lived there.  Defendant says that as long as plaintiffs did lawn maintenance for the Airbnb unit in front of the rental unit, they would get a $500 a month reduction.    Plaintiffs claim there was not heat from the wall units, but defendant say Socal propane said they just needed to light the pilot lights.   

Defendant says plaintiffs never mentioned the heat issue, and plaintiffs have no proof of messages to the property manager.    Plaintiffs say they could use the gas stove, so the propane tank wasn't empty.   

There was an issue for defendant with fire insurance for the mountain property, so she sold the property.  

Plaintiffs claim they couldn't leave because of a snowstorm.     They also blame the front unit Airbnb unit for the skyrocketing electric bills.  

As usual, Corriero takes the plaintiffs' side.  

Plaintiffs want three times the amount withheld from the security deposit, so $5,000. 

At least whatever the judges give plaintiffs will come from the show money, and not defendant. 

Plaintiffs receive $500.   (Corriero would have gifted $1100 to plaintiffs). 

 

 

“Phoney Marriage”

Rerun, Season 10, Episode  107

p. 47, 18 March 2024

 

 

[AngelaHunter]

3 hours ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

(Rebecca Neve and Christopher Gorman vs. Lisa Veredieck )         Neve and Gorman Verdieck

A lot of cluelessness here. Plaintiffs seemed a little challenged or just not too bright. They were freezing to death for 4 months! But still, they didn't want to leave and couldn't figure out how to turn on the propane heaters, complain to anyone, or at least get some space heaters. They just sat on their bums and froze.

They had time to get out before the big snows came, but they didn't. Yet, they want $3200 for all their trials and tribulations, this couple, past middle age and helpless. 

Def was a lawyer, typical of the type seen on court shows who doesn't know that hearsay isn't accepted as evidence. Cute. The only way I would commit a crime is if I could be guaranteed to have Papa hear my case and thus be assured to get away with with whatever I'd done.

 

3 hours ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

Corriero would have gifted $1100 to plaintiffs

Yes. Just because. $500 was plenty for people at an age when they need to stop blaming others for everything that goes wrong in their lives.

[CrazyInAlabama]

18 December

“Not So Great Ex-Pectations”

Rerun, Season 10, Episode 183 

p. 50, 4 September 2024

“Don’t Lien on Me“

Rerun, Season 10, Episode  166

p. 49, 16 July 2024

19 December

“Wheel of Misfortune”

Rerun, Season 10, Episode  184

p. 50, 5 September 2024

“Friendship Fallout”

Rerun, Season 10, Episode  7

p. 42, 19 September 2023

 

20 December

“I Don’t Give a Deposit”

Rerun, Season 11, Episode  185

p. 50, 6 September 2024

“Breast Side Story”

Rerun, Season 9, Episode  131

p. 38, 1 May 2023

Edited Friday at 11:06 AM by CrazyInAlabama

[CrazyInAlabama]

23 December

“Walkin’ the Dog”

Rerun, Season 11, Episode  16

p. 51, 30 September 2024

 

“Pile High Club”

Rerun, Season 10, Episode  99

p. 46, 28 February 2024

 

24 December

“El Cami-No”

Rerun, Season 11, Episode  13

p. 51, 25 September 2024

“Daycare Swindler”

Rerun, Season 10, Episode  104

p. 46, 11 March 2024

 

(No Hot Bench tomorrow, basketball instead)

 

Edited Yest. at 12:08 PM by CrazyInAlabama