Hot Bench - General Discussion

[CrazyInAlabama]

18 February

“I Don’t Rolls-Royce That Way”

New, Season 11, Episode  89

(Mary Jackson vs.  Hubert Chin)     

From the show site: A woman says her luxury vehicle was towed when her mechanic left it parked on the street; he says he lost his garage years ago, and she knew it.

Plaintiff/car owner Mary Jackson suing defendant/mechanic Hubert Chin because her Rolls was towed.  Suing for $5,000, for car repairs, unpaid tickets, faded paint, impound fees. Rolls Royce Silver Shadow. She paid him $2600 in 2021 to fix an oil leak, air conditioner, and a mechanical issue, plus sun fading on the paint.    Car was parked on the street, and incurred parking tickets, and impound fees.  In 2022 she claims she saw the car on the street, and told defendant she needed the car fixed, and he brought it to her home in 2023.  

Defendant says plaintiff was aware that he no longer had a garage, and street parking was his only option.    Business closed in 2015, and plaintiff brought car to him after that.   Even after plaintiff got tickets, she claims she didn't know about the issues. 

Plaintiff says when defendant finally brought her car home it was a mess.  She says defendant also worked on her Jaguar.   Registration had also lapsed, and mechanic told her about that.   

Plaintiff has no proof of payment for the impound fees. 

There is no evidence how much the impound fees are, but Corriero wants to give plaintiff what she claims it cost.    Juarez says the offset is because defendant did a lot of work on the car.

Three judges disagree on the money, of course Corriero wants to pay plaintiff over $3k.   Juarez says $0, because of the work offset.  Tewolde wants to give $1700. 

Plaintiff receives $850, half of impound and tickets.   Corriero dissents as usual. 

“Loan of Contention”

Rerun, Season 11, Episode 33  

p. 52, 24 October 2024

[AngelaHunter]

6 hours ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

Three judges disagree on the money, of course Corriero wants to pay plaintiff over $3k.

Even after seeing what kind of nonsense Papa gets up to all these years, I was just as stunned as Judge T when Papa wanted to give the P everything she was asking for when she had not one shred of proof of anything and didn't even know which year or years all this happened. 2015? 2022 or '23? Hmm. "Well, I don't have it," was her answer to requests for proof of any kind.

Papa: "She said she paid $1700 so I believe her." Like, what??? JT screamed at him and I thought she was going to punch him,😆 so stunned was she by this loony verdict he pulled out of thin air, based on nothing. Maybe he was dazzled by the Rolls Royce.

Is this the first old beater Rolls case we've had? Does a Rolls Royce really turn white in the sun? Gee. I'd expect better quality. Of course, I'd also expect someone who can afford a Rolls, Jags, and Mercedes(es) to take those cars to an actual qualified garage and not to some octogenarian who works on them on the street. 

RR does not recommend that anyone take their cars to mechanics who are definitely not qualified to work on them. That def was never going to fix it.

[AngelaHunter]

18 hours ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

her Rolls was towed

I was just thinking - I bet that's not something you see every day!

[CrazyInAlabama]

19 February

“Not Letting Subletting”

New, Season 11, Episode  90

(Tippin Mae Harkins vs. Tula Fae Mooney)     

From the show site: A woman says she subleased a co-worker's apartment, but when she moved in, the co-worker was still living there and showed no signs of leaving, so she moved out; each party says the other broke the contract.

Plaintiff /subleasor Tippin Mae Harkins suing defendant/apartment landlord Tula Fae Mooney for failing to leave the apartment plaintiff was subleasing from her.  Suing for $1,330. Plaintiff was paying $900 a month rent, and $700 security, and is suing for not having exclusive possession of the apartment. (This happened in Portland). 

Plaintiff says defendant never left the apartment, and wasn't leaving, so plaintiff left. Plaintiff said when she was gone, defendant slept in the bed. 

Defendant is counter suing for $3,500 for loss of property.  Defendant says she stayed with friends part of the day.   Plaintiff claims the defendant not only didn't leave, but invited some friends over to stay.   

Defendant claims she was packing and moving, even after plaintiff left.   Plaintiff was in apartment for two weeks before she left.  Defendant says plaintiff harassed her for not leaving, and left blood in plaintiff's bed, and says plaintiff was mean to her.    When plaintiff saw blood outside her door, she tried to get a restraining order, and called the police.    

Plaintiff submitted a text saying she would still be staying there through the next two weeks, and so plaintiff left. 

The sublet wasn't legal, and plaintiff agreed she would lie to visitors or landlord that defendant was actually at work, and hadn't moved out.  There was a requirement in the apartment lease that visitors would only stay 10 days maximum.  

Corriero says plaintiff isn't coming to court with clean hands. 

Defendant's counter suit is ridiculous and dismissed. 

Plaintiff receives $1330. 

“Man’s Best Friend”

Rerun, Season 11, Episode  31

p. 52, 22 October 2024

Edited February 19 by CrazyInAlabama

[DoctorK]

6 hours ago, AngelaHunter said:

I bet that's not something you see every day!

Actually I would like to have seen this specific tow-away event. I have a feeling that this classic Rolls Royce Silver Shadow might not look very good in real life, maybe more like the abandoned cars the guys on "Road Kill" find in barns or under trees where they have sat for 20 or 30 years. As dumb as the plaintiff was (box of rocks level), even she would take a decent Rolls to a real specialist for repairs, not a guy who didn't even have a garage to work in. Maybe she is rich and dumb and loves having Rolls, Jags, Mercedes etc.  even if they don't run, or dumb enough to keep a non working Rolls for status rather than a shiny new Honda for probably the same cost as maintaining an ancient Rolls.

[AngelaHunter]

2 hours ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

Tippin Mae Harkins vs. Tula Fae Mooney

 

2 hours ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

Defendant says plaintiff harassed her for not leaving, and left blood in plaintiff's bed, and says plaintiff was mean to her.

Really? I think not.

1 hour ago, DoctorK said:

Maybe she is rich and dumb and loves having Rolls, Jags, Mercedes etc.  even if they don't run, or dumb enough to keep a non working Rolls for status rather than a shiny new Honda for probably the same cost as maintaining an ancient Rolls.

I recall another litigant, either here or on TPC who had a bunch of broken-down luxury cars cluttering up his property. A maintained RR breaking down would be unusual. People who own them can afford to maintain them. I bet her Jags don't run either and the Mercedes are probably the kind usually seen here - at least a quarter of a century old. But no one will point and stare with awe at a new Honda or Toyota. My Totoyta Matrix is nearly 12 years old and has never conked out, although it sadly lacks the "Wow" factor.

1 hour ago, DoctorK said:

I have a feeling that this classic Rolls Royce Silver Shadow might not look very good in real life

If it turns white when left outside, I would say you're right.😄 A fun case.

[CrazyInAlabama]

20 February

“You Can’t Buy Me Love”

New, Season 11, Episode  91

(Bobby Grigsby vs. Marcelino Lomeli)      

From the show site: A man says his younger ex-boyfriend accepted a car loan but refuses to repay him; the younger man denies that they were "dating" and says he eventually had to Google "how to get rid of a sugar daddy." Who was manipulating whom in this case?

Plaintiff Bobby Grigsby suing defendant/ex-boyfriend Marcelino Lomeli for repayment of a car loan.   Suing for $2,185. Plaintiff telling his story gets bleeped a lot

Defendant denies it was a loan, but a gift as a Sugar Baby from plaintiff. He also says it wasn't a loan, and he felt coerced to sign the agreement to repay.  

Plaintiff keeps saying it wasn't a romantic relationship, and he was just being nice.   However, he's now ticked off Juarez and Tewolde with his foul language, but made the person who bleeps foul language happy, if they get paid by the bleep. 

Plaintiff paid for a car, and defendant still has it, but it's in plaintiff's name.  Leading to defendant swearing and getting reprimanded too. 

Corriero takes over the questioning.   Poor Corriero doesn't understand any of the slang plaintiff is using.  (I don't either).  Corriero thinks the money wasn't a loan.   

$1800 to plaintiff, only the price of the car loan.  

“Family Fallout”

Rerun, Season 11, Episode  30

p. 52, 21 October 2024

[AngelaHunter]

20 hours ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

Bobby Grigsby vs. Marcelino Lomeli

I think I lasted about 1 1/2 minutes. P, who found a "homeless, stinky drug addict" irresistible gives his testimony, which is peppered with obscenities since he doesn't know any appropriate words, had more bleeps than a Hell's Kitchen episode, and was riddled with a zillion "Like like like. It had me yelling, "OH STFU you moron!" and finding my "Off" button before hearing anything from the creepy, smelly little troll Def.

20 hours ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

made the person who bleeps foul language happy, if they get paid by the bleep. 

😄

On 2/19/2025 at 5:56 PM, AngelaHunter said:

Tippin Mae Harkins vs. Tula Fae Mooney

Since I couldn't bear the Grindr love story, I reluctantly watched this. It was bizarre, with "Tippin", perky, dramatic, and animated, acting like she was dishing with her friends or looking for a reality show. Or maybe she took too many "Wake Ups".

"Tula" was the direct opposite - bizarre, subdued, and appeared to be heavily medicated or in the grip of hypnosis and gave answers not really related to the questions. I was puzzled until Tippin mentioned that that apartment was crammed with junk. Then I thought, "Aha!" Tula must be a hoarder, with a typical, flat hoarder demeanor.

I left this one before hearing about the blood.

[CrazyInAlabama]

“21 February

“Boulevard of Broken Leases”

New, Season 11, Episode  92

(Waneta Woodruff vs. Sam Caparell)       

From the show site: A woman says she overpaid rent for a year because her landlord didn't tell her how much was paid by a rental assistance organization; the landlord denies receiving overpayments and says the organization makes tenants well aware of their portion.

Plaintiff/former tenant Waneta Woodruff suing defendant/former landlord Sam Caparell for repayment of her portion of rent, because she claims the rental assistance organization paid more than she was told.   Suing for $2300, suing for triple damages, including the security deposit on the place she rented after being evicted.   Defendant says she was evicted after allowing tenants into the unit without being on the lease.    

Defendant says the organization tells tenants exactly how much their part of the rent payment will be. Defendant says every month the charity tells tenant and landlord about the upcoming rent payment. 

Defendant/landlord says the charitable organization paid the $2,300 security deposit.   Unlawful tenants included plaintiff's daughter and boyfriend, her dog, and others.   Plaintiff was supposed to move out on 25 March, didn't move out for a few days later.  Defendant says plaintiff painted rooms and some walls other colors than the white required by the lease.   Defendant says there were damages from damaged floors from dog urine.   

Corriero says plaintiff causing electric outages by overloading circuits and defendant or representative having to go turn power back on. 

Tewolde asks about the security deposit, but why would plaintiff  get a security deposit back, when the charity paid that money?   Charity should get the money back.    Also only plaintiff's video shows the move out inspection with landlord, he trashed the photos he had after the eviction hearing. 

Plaintiff's video doesn't show open cabinet doors, and is very selective with what they show.   

Defendant says the cabinet doors were inoperable.  Exhaust fan in kitchen was broken, fridge was brand new and trashed.  Roach infestation in plaintiff's room, and kitchen cabinets.  Also, floor was supposed to be dry mopped, not soaked down the way the boyfriend is doing.   

Tewolde wants an itemized list to tenant, but it's not her security deposit.  Court says disputes were to be settled with the housing court, but plaintiff didn't go to the court.  Security deposit is jurisdiction of the housing court.  Plaintiff left no forwarding address, California law says in this case mail to last address (the apartment), and if it is left unclaimed in 21 days, then the issue is over.  

My view the $2300 should go to the charity, which is the organization that paid and is owed the money. 

Plaintiff receives $1850, minus the damages plaintiff admits.   Juarez dissents, because the case should have gone back to the housing court.  (Because the court pays the judgments, defendant isn't out anything.   In the interviews after the case, defendant says plaintiff was letting homeless people stay with her, including her daughter.  )

“Lickity-Split on the Permit”

Rerun, Season 11, Episode  34

p. 52, 25 October 2024

Edited February 21 by CrazyInAlabama

[AngelaHunter]

On 2/21/2025 at 3:22 PM, CrazyInAlabama said:

Tewolde asks about the security deposit, but why would plaintiff  get a security deposit back, when the charity paid that money? 

I didn't get that either. She lives on charity, so why should she get the money that came out of the pockets of others? That video - zip zip. They took the stove burners out? I didn't get that either.

I don't think the P checked out that dress from the back view. If she had she'd never have worn it. Or maybe she would.

The landlord sounded ridiculous. No, he never took any pictures of the trashed place and never sent an itemized list. Why would he? Only use a Swiffer on tile floors? That only picks up dust. It doesn't clean spills or watermarks. He says the "exhausted" was broken, and he had to "ramify" something else, whatever that means. And if the judges would just open those cabinet doors, they'd see the mess and hordes of roaches. Oops, they can't do that. 

He was good to her because she was a single mother. Can one still get special SSM status even if the kids are big grown-up adults? When does that ship sail?

I don't think she deserved anything back, and maybe if the landlord had the sense to take some pictures, send the itemized list, and provide the judges with the cost to fix anything she might not have. 

On 2/21/2025 at 3:22 PM, CrazyInAlabama said:

“Lickity-Split on the Permit”

Rerun, Season 11, Episode  34

Unreal. I have an idea. If you're doing a big construction job that eventually amounts to 50K or so, go to a reputable, licensed contractor firm instead of hiring some guy that someone knows, write up NO contracts(!!) for a project this size, hand over cash to some 3rd party- the elusive "Gabriel" - in this case, and just cross your fingers that it will all work out. That was some wig Def was sporting.

Watching JT and Papa fighting (again) over this was more entertaining than the case!😄

[CrazyInAlabama]

24 February

“Careless Car Care”

New, Season 11, Episode  93

(Angie Rodriguez and Raymond Carrillo  vs. David Egea)     

From the show site: A couple claims their mechanic received money from their insurance company, outsourced their car repair to someone else for a lower price, and then pocketed the difference. But the mechanic claims he did everything above board. Is his defense "an affront to the judges' intelligence?"

Plaintiffs/car owners Angie  Rodriguez and Raymond Carrillo suing defendant/mechanic David Egea for taking money from the insurance company, having the repair work done by a substandard shop that charged less, and stealing the difference.    Car is a Kia Seltos. Suing for $5,000. 

Car was picked up by defendant, work started in January, and not finished until May. 

Damage was the front end of the car, and most wasn't repaired when the car was returned.   Plaintiffs have a list of what worked on the car before defendant started working on it, but the items on the list were broken when car was returned. Defendant says plaintiff Rodriguez wasn't on the registration or insurance.  The at fault driver's insurance paid for the repairs, $7600, with a $1,000 deductible. 

Judges find defendant's defense to be ridiculous, and unbelievable.   Defendant keeps claiming that plaintiff Rodriguez wasn't registered, so guessing that means on the registration?   She should have been listed on the insurance though.   

$5,000 for plaintiffs. 

“Sold Short”

Rerun, Season 11, Episode  41

p. 52, 6 November 2024

[AngelaHunter]

1 hour ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

“Careless Car Care”

Def is a scamming, lying, shifty, evasive crook who probably belongs in jail.

Other than that, looking at Ms. Rodriguez and her enormous fake lashes, her enormous, over-inflated lips,(so big she seemed to have trouble moving them), the enormous cleavage she chose to display here and seeing how no women want to have anything natural anymore made me think of the truth of this.

 

[CrazyInAlabama]

25 February

“Love Don’t Live Here Anymore”

New, Season 11, Episode  94

(Laniya Bishop vs. Christopher Whiley Byes)     

From the show site: A woman claims it made sense to put her partner's car in her name, but after she broke up with him, his payments stopped coming. He claims she refuses to let him see their son over this, but he shouldn't owe for a car that she kept. How did this dispute drive such a wedge between these former sixth grade sweethearts?

Plaintiff /girlfriend Laniya Bishop suing defendant / ex-boyfriend Christopher Whylie Byes for car payments, unpaid tickets, remaining balance on the car    Suing for $5000.

Plaintiff had car in her name, .because defendant had no credit or license.   They weren't living together, so car had to be in her name.   Car was to take their son to school, etc.   So, plaintiff was to have loan in her name, but defendant would make payments.   She actually got him two cars, and the first year he made the payments.  When defendant got a car in his name, he stopped making payments.

When defendant stopped paying, plaintiff told him to give the car back.     Plaintiff was responsible for the remaining loan amount, plus unpaid tickets defendant racked up.  Plaintiff also had to pay the shortfall after car was sold by finance company.  

I'm sorry, plaintiff came to court with unclean hands, she knew defendant had no license, but was going to drive it anyway.    I wouldn't give the plaintiff a penny.   Then, plaintiff had defendant arrested for domestic violence, 

Plaintiff reported car stolen, police found and impounded the car.   They couldn't get car out of impound, registration was expired, and defendant didn't have a license.  Plaintiff finally had to pay to get car out of impound, it's in her mother's driveway.   Car is inoperable, and plaintiff wants to pay the car off and sell the car.  

Defendant went to jail for the assault, four or five days.  he learned nothing.  He still maintains he doesn't owe anything for the car after he was arrested, and didn't need the car anymore.    Defendant did an interet show with a bunch of money, for stupid reasons.   

Judges decide to pay $5,000 to plaintiff. 

“Plea for the Car Key”

Rerun, Season 11, Episode  36

p. 52, 29 October 2024

 

[CrazyInAlabama]

26 February

“Lights! Camera! No Action”

New, Season 11, Episode  95

(Anthony Mack vs. Francisco Siimplicio)     

From the show site: A videographer takes the stand to defend his right to his raw footage. To his understanding, he was hired to highlight a store's grand opening with a short social media reel. But then the business owner started demanding all five hours of his footage. Is he obligated to hand it over?

Plaintiff/store owner Anthony Mack  suing defendant / videographer Francisco Simplicio for all of the raw footage of plaintiff's store's grand opening that defendant filmed.    Suing for $2500.   Defendant believes that raw footage belongs to him to produce the social media reel, but plaintiff wants all of the film.   Defendant is counter suing for $5,000.   

Plaintiff thought defendant would produce the short video, plus all raw footage for the store opening, for five hours of filming.    Defendant was paid $200.   Defendant says for $200 he filmed, did the short video, and plaintiff could get someone else to edit and produce other things.  Kwench is the water filter business/franchise owned by plaintiff and daughter.   Short video is very good.  

Corriero says videographer holds the copyright to the raw footage, and edited video.  

There are texts between plaintiff's daughter Crystal,  and defendant, about the raw footage.    Defendant offered to sell copyright for all of the footage to plaintiff.  

Sonia, the court officer, has to tell the defendant to stop interrupting the defendant and the judges. 

Defendant submitted two voicemails from plaintiff.

Plaintiff certainly thinks he's getting a lot for $200 payment to defendant. 

Judge Juarez says oral contract, and no meeting of minds beyond the short video.

Counterclaim by defendant dismissed. 

Plaintiff claim dismissed, and Judge Juarez urges both sides to work this out.  

 

“Pit Bullying”

Rerun, Season 11, Episode  35

p. 52, 28 October 2024

[CrazyInAlabama]

27 February

“Fair the Truth Lies”

New, Season 11, Episode  97

(Garrett  Brunnquell vs. Alexandr Lipencov )     

From the show site: When a drone pilot returned from a trip to Peru, he found that he had a new roommate. Each tenant in the three-bedroom house had their own lease, and as the senior tenant, he became responsible for collecting their utilities payments. But this new guy allegedly didn't pay his share. Can the judges help him with this unfair situation?

Plaintiff/senior tenant Garrett   Brunnquell suing Defendant/new roommate Alexandr Lipencov for not paying him for a share of the utilities. Suing for $4,000.

There wasn't a signed contract, but defendant still lived there, and has no intention of paying utilities.  

Defendant says he shouldn't have to pay utilities when he was working elsewhere. 

Plaintiff receives $3,241.

 

“Real Housewives of the Trailer Park”

Rerun, Season 11, Episode  37

p. 52, 30 October 2024

 

28 February

“The Niece Who Broke the Lease”

Rerun, Season 10, Episode  173

p. 50, 12 August 2024

“Not in Kansas Anymore”

Rerun, Season 11, Episode  48

p. 53, 15 November 2024

 

[AngelaHunter]

On 2/27/2025 at 3:24 PM, CrazyInAlabama said:

“The Niece Who Broke the Lease”

I tried to watch this, but P's hairpiece thingy, which truly looked like she'd grabbed a well-used mop from a janitor's closet and pinned it to the back of her head, was too distracting for me.

On 2/27/2025 at 3:24 PM, CrazyInAlabama said:

Garrett  Brunnquell vs. Alexandr Lipencov

Are big square glasses, like the ones sported by Garrett, the latest hipster fad?

[CrazyInAlabama]

7 minutes ago, AngelaHunter said:

I tried to watch this, but P's hairpiece thingy, which truly looked like she'd grabbed a well-used mop from a janitor's closet and pinned it to the back of her head, was too distracting for me.

Are big square glasses, like the ones sported by Garrett, the latest hipster fad?

Yes, the huge square plastic frames are a trend, the one after that is with sloping sides, and looks even stranger.    

[AngelaHunter]

2 hours ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

Yes, the huge square plastic frames are a trend, the one after that is with sloping sides, and looks even stranger.   

Thanks. I'm not keeping up with trends, and I never knew they moved on from head socks, neckbeards, and earlobe plugs.

[CrazyInAlabama]

3 March

“The A/C Unit Has Me Boiling”

New, Season 11, Episode  97

(Claudia Soto vs. Eduardo Soto)

From the show site: Despite a handyman's attempts to repair and replace a defective A/C unit, the homeowner refuses the replacement and demands a refund, leaving both parties in a heated dispute.

(Litigants are both named Soto, not related). Plaintiff/home owner Claudia Soto suing defendant/handyman Eduardo Soto for full refund on an air conditioning unit. Suing for $4,272 for selling her defendative merchandise, and failing to repair it.   Eduardo installed three mini splits for Claudia, and she claims she had no air conditioning for a month. 

Defendant is a handyman, who was paid $950 for the first unit,  Plaintiff wasnted one unit first, then she wanted two more.  All three units were installed in a couple of days.  $2850 was the total defendant was paid for the three units.   Defendant says plaintiff wanted the first unit sitting on the floor, and that plaintiff's husband would put a shelf under the units.   

Damages plaintiff wants is for one unit, $950, and the rest is for lost wages and pain and suffering for a month without air conditioning. 

Defendant claims they came to an agreement, but plaintiff never signed the agreement.   Defendant says after the agreement that he received a texted death threat from an unknown number.  Plaintiff denies knowing anything about the death threat.  He made a police report about the threat and refused to deal with plaintiff again. 

Plaintiff denies her kids would sent a threat like that.  

Plaintiff claims $2700 for replacing one unit, and placing all three unit placed up on the wall.   Plaintiff is a salaried employee, so lost no salary. 

Judge Juarez says only refund of purchase and labor for one unit, $950, saying she had two working a/c units.  Corriero says $2,850 to plaintiff for all three units, labor, and work time lost.  Juarez is totally ticked at Corriero.  Tewolde says only one unit also.  Juarez keeps disagreeing with Corriero, and so does Tewolde. 

Plaintiff receives $2400 for mounting three units, and one unit refund. 

“Furry Bar Brawl”

Rerun, Season 11, Episode  38

p. 52, 31 October 2024

[AngelaHunter]

1 hour ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

Juarez is totally ticked at Corriero.  Tewolde says only one unit also. 

Oh, Papa! He comes riding in on his white horse, sword drawn, to protect the tearful little damsel in distress from being taken advantage of.

$950 for one of these units, including installation, is very cheap. I got a new one back in '21 when my deck collapsed. It was $3200, everything included. I have only one, and it cools over 2,000 sq.ft. The plaintiff must live in one honkin' big house if she needed three of them. Or maybe she didn't bother finding out anything about these units, just trusts anything a Man tells her, then whines about it later. It's the "I'm just a poor little woman who knows nothing" excuse.

Only one didn't work, but she wants over 4K from the shifty, shady def. - all she paid for them (even the two that work) plus time missed from work(although she was paid for that...?). Papa vows to her that he won't let anyone take advantage of her! He wants to give her the whole 4K, and he gets really nasty and surly about it in deliberations. 

"I'm not saying that just because I feel sorry for her!" he grumps at those Mean Girls whose hearts don't bleed for weeping little ladies, even though he totally did.

I can only think the other two will be mighty relieved when he steps down.

[CrazyInAlabama]

I'm hoping the replacement for Corriero is someone like Adam Levy (Judge Judy's son from Tribunal Justice), who doesn't take the side of anyone who cries or whines.   

My guess is the woman needed 3 mini split units because her house wasn't set up for central air.   What did she do for a/c before the mini splits?     

[DoctorK]

5 hours ago, AngelaHunter said:

I can only think the other two will be mighty relieved when he steps down

I will sure be happy when Corriero is gone. His reasoning is squishy and he can't hold his own against either of the other judges. His departure can't come too soon.

[AngelaHunter]

16 hours ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

What did she do for a/c before the mini splits? 

Sweated a lot? She said she got the first one for her son's room. I don't see any with fewer than 12,000 BTUs, which is what I have, and that's way too much for one room.

13 hours ago, DoctorK said:

I will sure be happy when Corriero is gone.

Even though he often makes me roll my eyes and say, "Oh, Come ON!" out loud, I can tolerate him since I know we'll usually get satisfaction when he loses against the Mean Girls, but I understand how you feel due to my undying loathing for The Levin, the mere sight of whom makes me feel violent.

Judge J is more neutral, but I think Papa Mike irritates Judge T as much as he does you, and she often can't hide it. 😄He certainly flabbergasted her again yesterday when he declared - with the air of a stubborn mule - that P should get everything she asked for, just because, you know - little lady with tears.

 

[CrazyInAlabama]

4 March

“Fast Cars, Slow Refunds”

New, Season 11, Episode  98

(Chad Mosbey vs. Jay Press)        

From the show site: A man says he paid for a remote-control race track but never received it; the hobby shop owner argues that his website clearly states that orders can take up to 30 days and accuses the customer of launching an online smear campaign.

Plaintiff/buyer Chad Mosbey claims defendant/remote control shop owner Jay Press for a full refund for a remote control track that never arrived.  Suing for $2,053 for item and legal fees.  

Defendant shop owner says the website clearly states orders can take up to 30 days to arrive, and plaintiff sued too soon.    Counter claiming for defamation. 

It would be a drop ship, plaintiff orders from defendant, who in turn orders from supplier, and supplier ships directly to plaintiff.   

Supplier of the track told plaintiff that the order didn't exist.   

Supplier never had an order from defendant's hobby shop for the track, then defendant says that he had to pay for the track before the order was officially placed.    

Then, defendant says he didn't pay for the order at first, and then says he never paid for the track.  Defendant apparently spent the money at the strip club. 

Defendent took the money from plaintiff, never produced the race track, and claims the bad reviews from plaintiff tanked his hobby shop business.   Defendant claims the supplier cut him off.  

Plaintiff admits he's flawed like anyone else, Corriero says that he's not flawed.  

None of the judges can stand the defendant.  Defendant claims he was called a thief, and Judge Juarez agrees that defendant's a thief. 

$1,420 to plaintiff.   Defendant told to drop dead. 

 

“Evicted by a Snake”

Rerun, Season 11, Episode  50

p. 53, 19 November 2024 (Posting date is 20 November 2024)

 

[CrazyInAlabama]

5 March

“Car Flopping”

New, Season 11, Episode  99

(James McCune  vs. Christopher Rawlins)     

From the show site: A car-flipping venture takes a dramatic turn when the financier accused the mechanic of abandoning repairs and not repaying a loan; the mechanic fires back, saying his partner refused to cover final repair costs, forcing him to tow the car.

Plaintiff /pharmacy tech James McCune suing defendant /mechanic Christopher Rawlins for not repaying a loan.  The litigants were going in together on a car flipping business.  Suing for $4,000 Loan was $1200, plus $400 fee for 33 1/3% interest.   This loan was for the lift. 

Defendant says plaintiff’s interest rate was 33%, and illegal interest.  $4250 is the counter suit. 

There was a contract on the first vehicle, $1600 loan from plaintiff to buy vehicle, and then split the profits.    First car was a 2001 BMW.  Defendant says once he started working on vehicle, the mechanical problems were much more than they expected, and cost a lot more money than they expected.

Corriero asks plaintiff a good question, for once.  He asked plaintiff if he expected to be repaid the $1600 even if they made no profits, and McCune says he did.   

Defendant wanted to sell the car for $6,000. Plaintiff claims the extra money was not needed, and thinks defendant was ripping him off.   Defendant called it quits when plaintiff stopped the money, and wanted repayment.   So, defendant sold the lift that the $1600 financed with the loan.   

Judge Tewolde asks defendant if he considered fixing and selling the car, and paying the bills, but he couldn't afford to do that. 

Both litigants claim the other party breached the contract. 

Juarez says no one breached, Tewolde agreed.   Corriero says both breached. 

$1260, $1200 for the loan, and 10% interest to plaintiff. 

 

“The Nipsey Hustle”

Rerun, Season 11, Episode 48

p. 53, 18 November 2024

[CrazyInAlabama]

6 March

“A Cabin in the Woods”

Rerun, Season 11, Episode  61

p. 53, 17 December 2024

 

“A Ruff Attack”

Rerun, Season 11, Episode 26

p.52, 15 October 2024

 

7 March

“Walkin’ the Dog”

Rerun, Season 11, Episode  16

p. 51, 30 September 2024

 

“El Cami-No”

Rerun, Season 11, Episode  13

p. 51, 25 September 2024

 

[AngelaHunter]

On 3/5/2025 at 3:28 PM, CrazyInAlabama said:

“Car Flopping”

Some people. like this pharmacy tech, must watch too many reality shows: "Flip houses and cars, for fun and profit! It's easy!"

He believed a 23-year-old beater BMW - what's with so many litigants and their obsession with ancient BMWs? - could be made perfect with $300, (my car is in great shape and just getting my winter tires put on and an oil change done costs more than that!)with the Def mechanic insisting that in his neck of the woods, people would pay for $6,000 for a car nearly a 1/4 of a century old, after he worked his magic on it. Of course, the plaintiff also thought he could charge 33% interest and had no idea that is illegal.