The People's Court - General Discussion

[SRTouch]

I instantly named him Jeffrey Dahmer in my head. He had no empathy, no remorse and dead eyes. In the hallterview he was saying sorry type words, but it came off like he was repeating what someone said he should say. I got the feeling he truly couldn't comprehend that anything bad had happened.

Ah, everything I've read says I made the right decision in not watching. Yet another case where an owner refuses to accept responsibility for a untrained, unrestrained dog. I'm a firm believer that 99.9% of dog attacks (whether against a person or another animal) could be prevented by proper training and socialization.

When an owner doesn't provide a dog guidance, it's no surprise when the dog reverts to its breed and instinct. Was the breed developed as a herder, a guard, a fighter, a companion whatever? After generations of a breed being selectively bred for a strong hunting instinct, expect a dog has a strong prey drive. The instinct can almost always be controlled with training and proper supervision, but left to its own devices, don't be surprised if a dog that has been bred to hunt, hunts the neighbor's cat.

As a kid, one of my dogs was a purebred dachshund (my only purebred animal, ever). Dachunds were bred to hunt tunneling animals, including badgers, so they were developed to investigate tunnels and be fearless hunters. Normally I'd describe that dog as intelligent and well trained, but once he went into hunting mode it was like he went deaf. You had to figuratively knock him upside the head to keep him from trying to dig out a rabbit hole. (Note I said figuratively, actually it meant physically pulling him away and diverting his attention.) Like I said, he was my only purebred - I've always preferred mutts. He was very smart, but the only dog I've ever had that once it became focused on something, would not respond to voice commands. The trick to handling him was to pay attention to his body language and diverting him before he became too focused. If you maintained control, you could sit him next to that same rabbit hole and he'd completely ignore it.

I'm just using him as an example. His instinct gave him a very strong prey drive. If he decided a kitten was prey, he'd go after it. But, as a dachshund, he was small enough that he could be manhandled by someone who didn't know how to maintain control. An untrained, unrestrained large dog would be a lot more dangerous if he had the same prey drive. Instead of a kitten, he might decide a cat, a dog , or heaven forbid, a todler, is prey. I don't blame the dog, but the human who hasn't learned to control him and left him free to roam.

Edited February 13, 2016 by SRTouch

[teebax]

My beagle is lik that. If he catches a scent, he will totally ignore anything I say. That's why I keep him leashed, which is a concept most court show litigants can't seem to comprehend.

[AngelaHunter]

I doubt Harvey wanted a "peek down her top." He's gay.

 

That's why he makes all those nasty, stupid, insulting, ancient, derogatory jokes ONLY about women - women he doesn't even know: "Jumper/Poker/Copper/Spreader? He hardly knew 'er!" The worst was, "Liquor? He hardly...." stops. Giggles like little school girl with his half-witted peanut gallery. Levin, I hate you.

 

I am not a person on the rabid PC train,  who goes around looking for something to offend me, but this IS offensive. If I were appearing on this show and heard him say about me/my case, "SPRAYER? HE HARDLY KNEW 'ER!" I think I'd walk out and punch him in his ugly face.

[teebax]

That's why he makes all those nasty, stupid, insulting, ancient, derogatory jokes ONLY about women - women he doesn't even know: "Jumper/Poker/Copper/Spreader? He hardly knew 'er!" The worst was, "Liquor? He hardly...." stops. Giggles like little school girl with his half-witted peanut gallery. Levin, I hate you.

Harvey doesn't hate women because he's gay; he hates women because he's a pig. His orientation has nothing to do with it.

[AngelaHunter]

Harvey doesn't hate women because he's gay; he hates women because he's a pig. His orientation has nothing to do with it.

 

I really don't know why he thinks it's okay to make constant, demeaning jokes directed only at women. Maybe it IS just because he's a lowlife scuzzbucket pig in general. I can't help but wonder if JM, who is quite sensitive to these things and is quick to beat down anyone who is insulting towards any segment of the population, has said anything to Levin. If not, it's kind of disappointing.

[NYCFree]

My 16 month old Labrador Retriever will fetch anything tossed. We didn't train her to do this, she does it purely on generations of breeding. We got our lab from a breeder who breeds for health and temperament, not show qualities. We did this because we've never owned a dog and she will eventually be a hearing assist dog for our hearing impaired son. My dog is also super strong, which will come in handy if she ever has to pull my sleeping son out of bed, to respond to a fire alarm he may sleep through.

I write this because although we got her for some specific breed qualities, we also never let her out in public without a leash, and we are have ongoing training to make her a good canine citizen.

[teebax]

My 16 month old Labrador Retriever will fetch anything tossed. We didn't train her to do this, she does it purely on generations of breeding. We got our lab from a breeder who breeds for health and temperament, not show qualities. We did this because we've never owned a dog and she will eventually be a hearing assist dog for our hearing impaired son. My dog is also super strong, which will come in handy if she ever has to pull my sleeping son out of bed, to respond to a fire alarm he may sleep through.

I write this because although we got her for some specific breed qualities, we also never let her out in public without a leash, and we are have ongoing training to make her a good canine citizen.

If not for court shows, I wouldn't know so many people didn't use leashes; I thought everyone did.

[SRTouch]

If not for court shows, I wouldn't know so many people didn't use leashes; I thought everyone did.

I live in a trailer park, and based on my little corner you're right. I see a lot of people walking their dogs on leash, but seldom see a dog off leash. With the exception of one little yappy dog across the street, I can't remember the last time I saw an unleashed dog. That dog is no problem; it is never out unless the owner is with it. It yaps at everything it sees move, including a leaf blowing by, but quiets down when its owner tells it to be quiet. It also stays in its own yard, even though unleashed.

I'm sort of the crazy cat guy around here. Three of my cats want nothing to do with the outside. A couple go out, but only if I'm with them. Frank is a senior, maybe 13-15yo, and he stays close by, and more often than not will come when called. 5 minutes outside and he's ready to come back inside. GG (actually Gandalf the Gray) is only about 18 months. He wears a harness and leash when we go out. I stay with them whenever we're out.

[DoctorK]

 

He wears a harness and leash when we go out.

Most of my Mom's cats were also harness trained and seemed to be comfortable with it. I live now in an area where coyotes are a danger, so when I get my own cat (definitely a rescue cat) I will do the harness thing, hhave my new buddy out in the yard when I am working but within my range to protect him or her from an attack.

[SRTouch]

Most of my Mom's cats were also harness trained and seemed to be comfortable with it. I live now in an area where coyotes are a danger, so when I get my own cat (definitely a rescue cat) I will do the harness thing, hhave my new buddy out in the yard when I am working but within my range to protect him or her from an attack.

We have pastures on two sides of the trailer park, and a big field on another, so coyotes are a big danger for my cats. Before moving here I lived within a couple blocks of 2 busy 4 lane streets, so they've been inside cats since I adopted/rescued them.

[SRTouch]

First off, thanks to those here who pointed out these idiots dog owners on tv are the exception, not the norm. After watching so many cases on tv, I sort of forgot all the responsible dog owners out there. Now I'm back to looking forward to watching MM spank the first defendant - and boy does he deserve it after his little smirk during the intro.

First case is pit bull vs yorkie attack. Defendant owns pit bull, which he admits repeatedly escapes through holes in fence. Plaintiff says at least three attacks on other animals, and animal control has yet to do anything except issue numerous citations (defendant doesn't know what a citation is). After loosing case defendant assures us dog won't get out again because he's a responsible owner. I agree with plaintiff, it will happen again, defendant has learned nothing. Two of the three attacks occurred after the incident defendant is in court for.

Final thought on this case, that plaintiff is one strong dude!

[AKA...CJ86]

Wow, this season's been the season of the Dog hasn't it.

[rcc]

That selfish dog owner in the first case was a jerk. As JM said "you only care about yourself" and made all kinds of excuses for the dogs getting out because of the bad fencing. His buddy had no testimony for JM but was along because he had a car. The defendent who sauntered in like he was all that can't even drive himself to court. What a loser! Hopefully Animal Control will take those dogs away from him soon.

 

The architect was an incompetent fool.

 

The last case with the "disabled" plaintiff who took her mother in because her siblings won't was a real piece of work. What is the nature of her "disability" I wonder. A sore neck from all the jewelry she was wearing because it was all too heavy. Defendent/mother said she went into Philly to sell drugs. The plaintiff said the mother was with her on those trips. JM told the defendent "you reap what you sew." So true in this case.

 

The producers really dug into the bottom of the barrel with these litigants today.

[cattykit]

First off, thanks to those here who pointed out these idiots dog owners on tv are the exception, not the norm. After watching so many cases on tv, I sort of forgot all the responsible dog owners out there. Now I'm back to looking forward to watching MM spank the first defendant - and boy does he deserve it after his little smirk during the intro.

I need to meet some responsible dog owners, because I have to dodge dogs on the loose on my drive to and from work almost every day.  I gave up trying to take walks in my neighborhood because I was being accosted by big dogs on the loose.  I even have idiots walking one dog on the leash, one dog loose, and as I'm pulling up to my mailbox to pick up the mail, the loose dog is doing its best to get under the wheels of my car and the owner doing nothing to stop the dog.  I have to get out and make sure the mangy mutt isn't wrapped in my car.

 

I could do with a few fewer dog cases.  It's been one just about every day lately.

 

 

I do have a couple questions. How did plaintiff keep that ugly yarn doily on her head? If I heard right, plaintiff is unemployed getting disability. Yet she regularly flies cross country buying jewelry. Mom says she's a drug trafficker. There's that missed court date and possible warrant. The hubris of daughter is incredible.

Is that what that was?  Or was it just incredibly bad hair/weave color?  Amazing the fashion monstrosities that occur by choice.

 

I love when "jewelry" is pronounced as "jurry."  Daughter is definitely no prize but mom also clearly has been rode hard and put up wet.  Don't you have to have a work history to get disability?  (My daughter's trying to get disability--long story--but she can't because she's never worked.)

[AngelaHunter]

I couldn't watch the first case. I cannot watch another dog case. Don't want to even know what it was even about. Nope. Uh uh! No dogs.

 

That architect was one slippery, pompous scammer. I could be wrong, but I really think that once he had the 2500$ he had no intention of doing a damned thing in the following 18 months. He never bothered to find out if the construction would be legal and probably thought the plaintiff would just go away after a year or so. I never understand professionals who are willing to go on this show and let everyone within calling distance determine never to hire them, rather than just pay back the money they wrongfully kept. Maybe he really thought he would win, which makes him not only shady, but dumb.

 

Tiffany - disabled mother of four: The green yarn-wig, the dress, the shoes, the "jury", the nails, the allegations of drug dealing... how does one care for four kids, plus buy all of the above on disability payments? How much could those payments be for someone who probably never held a steady job, so much that she can buy a car not only for herself but for Momma? Maybe her street corner is particularly lucrative?

[WhitneyWhit]

Tiffany - disabled mother of four: The green yarn-wig, the dress, the shoes, the "jury", the nails, the allegations of drug dealing... how does one care for four kids, plus buy all of the above on disability payments? How much could those payments be for someone who probably never held a steady job, so much that she can buy a car not only for herself but for Momma? Maybe her street corner is particularly lucrative?

I was side-eyeing the hell out of her story of the stolen iPad how she was just doing a good deed and ended up charged with receiving stolen property.

 

The defendant in the dog case; you could practically see the question marks over his head anytime MM asked him a question.

 

I don't know how people like the architect stay in business. I doubt that's the first time he's screwed someone over, wouldn't word eventually get out?  And no matter how many times we see it, I love any business owner who says "no refunds" and believes that gives them carte blanche to do whatever they want.

[AngelaHunter]

I love any business owner who says "no refunds" and believes that gives them carte blanche to do whatever they want.

 

I know! They think "No refunds" applies even when they break the contract. Yep, dumb. After watching this show for so long, I no longer want to hire anyone to do anything but if I have to, there will be contract that covers every single thing.

 

I was side-eyeing the hell out of her story of the stolen iPad how she was just doing a good deed and ended up charged with receiving stolen property.

 

 

I was trying to picture myself turning in to the police an item I had found and the cops slapping handcuffs on me. Don't think so.

[SRTouch]

I was trying to picture myself turning in to the police an item I had found and the cops slapping handcuffs on me. Don't think so.

I find it hard to believe someone would try to sell that story to a judge. If she really doesn't know if there's a warrant from the incident, she should just tell the judge she can't talk about it as it's an open case.

[teebax]

Thanks for the recaps. Y'all have saved me from having to watch another dog case. I'll fast-forward to the second case, which sounds interesting.

[rcc]

"It's a Spanish issue" says the plaintiff. I would say it is an accountability issue when your $900 bag is damaged due to your negligence and stupidity. And I would bet that as a student she received financial aid to buy that bag too. Does she mean that since JM is also Spanish that's how she ruled. Hmmm ...

 

Another dog biting case with irresponsible owners.

 

A golf course owner who doesn't want to pay for damage to a car's windshield. Arrogant and irresponsible.

Wow, this season's been the season of the Dog hasn't it.

Yes it has and more on today's show.

[teebax]

"It's a Spanish issue" says the plaintiff. I would say it is an accountability issue when your $900 bag is damaged due to your negligence and stupidity. And I would bet that as a student she received financial aid to buy that bag too. Does she mean that since JM is also Spanish that's how she ruled.

I haven't seen the case yet, but MM is not Spanish; she's Cuban.

[rcc]

I haven't seen the case yet, but MM is not Spanish; she's Cuban.

I know but that's what the plaintiff said. To her probably all Spanish speaking people are Spanish. The defendents are hispanic as is JM.

Edited February 16, 2016 by rcc

[SRTouch]

I know but that's what the plaintiff said. To her probably all Spanish speaking people are Spanish. The defendents are hispanic as is JM.

Well, some folks do make that assumption. As a kid we had a family friend whose family spoke Spanish at home. He was very quick to correct you if you called him Mexican - he was Puerto Rican.

[WhitneyWhit]

"It's a Spanish issue", no honey, it's a plaintiff is full of shit issue. Her dumbass totally tried to clean that bag with whatever she found in that bathroom. And honestly, I'm always surprised at the most ridiculous shit litigants will call the police over. What did she think a cop was going to do about bleach in a bag?

 

The second defendant; holy shit, her dog bites so many people, she can't keep them straight. Where is animal control?

 

The third case was boring, but the defendant was a bit smarmy. He thought since he wasn't negligent, that meant he wasn't responsible for the plaintiff's  broken windshield, he learned differently.

[arejay]

If the DVR description says "blahblahblah DOG blahblah OTHER DOG", I delete in toto, without even scanning for otherwise entertaining moments.  I can't, just can't.

[NYGirl]

OMG those dog owners were such idiots.  The dog bit 2 people and their Answer was that the plaintiff was a man who grabbed her ass so she dropped the leash.  WTF.   The plaintiff was a young woman who was jogging.  How come animal control hasn't taken that dog?

[arejay]

 

How come animal control hasn't taken that dog?

                 

 

       ....or ordered those people put down?

[AngelaHunter]

We've seen cases before of golfers damaging property or injuring someone with their golf balls and refusing to compensate that person. It's infuriating. This douchebag-hairdo'd idiot can afford to play golf all the time, which is not cheap, but had to be dragged into court to make him pay $267.00 for the windshield he busted out. Does no one have any shame anymore? If anything I was doing resulted in property damage, I"d be only too willing to pay for it. Outrageous, IMO.

 

Purse bleaching: Another one looking for a payday. Her purse already had all kinds of ink and sharpie stains over it, but those were okay. Just the cleaning product stains made it unusable. She's a student who says thing like "There wasn't nothing major,"  and doesn't know what the word "pristine" means. I swear I'm going to start saying "baffroom" soon.

 

So not only does JM base her rulings in favour of a litigant if she's a  woman, but being "Spanish" trumps being a woman. Terribly, blatantly biased she is!

 

I did enjoy how each time JM mentioned the bag, the price of it increased from 700$ to 900$ to 1000$.

[SRTouch]

"It's a Spanish issue", no honey, it's a plaintiff is full of shit issue. Her dumbass totally tried to clean that bag with whatever she found in that bathroom. And honestly, I'm always surprised at the most ridiculous shit litigants will call the police over. What did she think a cop was going to do about bleach in a bag?

Even if I believed everything the plaintiff said, I'm not sure the defendants should be held responsible. Her story is that she knocked over a bottle, it was open, and fell in her bag. It doesn't matter to me whether the bottle was open - she caused the accident. But I totally agree with MM, I don't believe her story.

The second defendant; holy shit, her dog bites so many people, she can't keep them straight. Where is animal control?

I know it's not funny when there's a dog bite, but I had to laugh this time. When the defendant came in she kept looking at the plaintiff, and I thought we were going to have a shouting match. Nope, defendant was just trying to recognize which person her dog has bitten is suing. Turns out her answer to the complaint was written about a totally separate incident. As plaintiff said in hallway, it boggles the mind.

The third case was boring, but the defendant was a bit smarmy. He thought since he wasn't negligent, that meant he wasn't responsible for the plaintiff's  broken windshield, he learned differently.

Not sure he learned anything - he still maintained he shouldn't be held responsible on the way out.

NOTE: At least they switched seating around today, but we've been seeing the same people on the bus for a long time, now.

[cattykit]

I wouldn't pay $9 for that ugly-ass bag, much less $900.  She said it was frumpy, and I agree, even though I'm pretty sure she had no idea what she meant by saying it was frumpy.

 

I'm also tired of people who throw "I'm pregnant" around over and over, as if the world has to stop so they can get off.  Who gives a fuck that you got yourself knocked up?  It's your job to take care of yourself, not other people's job to take care of you.

 

And not sure how the plaintiff's blatant racism flew by.  I think if MM had heard the Spanish comment, plaintiff would be sporting a new asshole.

NOTE: At least they switched seating around today, but we've been seeing the same people on the bus for a long time, now.

 

I'm sure they run through a whole boatload of episodes in a day for the bus.  Without the commercials and the blah-blah I suspect each case takes no more than about 10 minutes.

 

 

OMG those dog owners were such idiots.  The dog bit 2 people and their Answer was that the plaintiff was a man who grabbed her ass so she dropped the leash.  WTF.   The plaintiff was a young woman who was jogging.  How come animal control hasn't taken that dog?

I'm trying to imagine the other guy who got bitten and imagining him grab-assing the defendant, which is what she claimed, and I just, just can't.  I hope that case comes to TPC, too!

Edited February 16, 2016 by cattykit

[teebax]

I agree that the bigoted purse lady should have lost because I don't believe her story. How could you? And her bag was already all fugged up, which is why she tried to clean it.

That being said, if I were the salon's insurance agent I would advise them to keep the cleaning products somewhere else or at least locked up in the bathroom. All it takes is one curious kid to go to the bathroom and drink something with bleach in it.

Just like JJ is boycotting cell phone cases, I'm boycotting dog bite cases. I'm so over them. We need someone to revamp Animal Court and get some of these cases off of my court shows!

Edited February 17, 2016 by teebax

[SRTouch]

Today's first case is dude claiming a bar is responsible for his computer being zapped as he was setting up for karaoke night. Hmmm, I suppose the cause could be bar's faulty wiring, but could also just be a fault with plaintiff's equipment. Anyway, plaintiff had nice graphics for his theory, but really no evidence - case dismissed.

2nd case: talk about constructive eviction. Whole family living in great grandma's brownstone, with one great granddaughter and girlfriend living free upstairs. Granddaughter used to pay rent, but she lost public assistence because she failed to follow the rules about looking for work. So she and gf have been living there rent free for years. Great granddaughter leaves gf in apartment, and either moves to Texas or goes there for a few weeks. The family decides it's the perfect time to reno the apartment, so they demo the place, with free loading gf still there. Now gf, who has never paid rent, is suing because some of her stuff which she left there bagged up for months, is missing. And suing because she had to move, and has been living in shelter for months. Then of course there's the normal emotional distress, Yada yada. Silly case, really just a continuation of fight between feuding sisters. Case dismissed.

3Rd case: Plaintiff homeowner says defendant landscaper damaged vinyl siding on house. Defendant says he sent over contractor to replace damaged panels, but plaintiff wants all new siding. Plaintiff was longtime customer, 10 years, but finally got fed up and sued because she felt landscaper was taking advantage. JM rules in favor of plaintiff.

I started a little landscape company after I retired from the Army. Plaintiff was the type of customer I wanted, the kind who would bring out coffee and pie when you take a break. Defendant should have bit the bullet and had his contractor friend replace the siding. Fact is, my business was 99% referrals. Losing one customer wouldn't hurt, if you're any good you have a waiting list of potential clients. But, lose a customer because they're unhappy will snowball into losing several customers. Everyone they referred will hear their story. Even if he lost the profit for a year on her yard, he would make up for it in customer relations as the story made the rounds between his clients.

[break21]

Count me in as someone who is sick and tired of the dog cases.   In yesterday's case, golf guy has enough money to play golf but can't give the lady $300.00 to fix her window? 

[zillabreeze]

I wouldn't pay $9 for that ugly-ass bag, much less $900.  She said it was frumpy, and I agree, even though I'm pretty sure she had no idea what she meant by saying it was frumpy.

 

Amen!  It was cheap looking.  Purses like that are described as "slouchy" in the catalogs.  Genius plaintiff needs to open her legs less and some books more.

 

I think she was indeed cleaning out her purse while getting her hair done, then decided to help herself to the cleaning products in the baffroom.  When she realized she screwed up the bag, she committed to making someone else responsible for her own stupidity.

[rcc]

Today's case with the sad sack girlfriend of the relative living off her great grandmother was really pathetic. The whole lot of them should get their act together.

 

The first one went right over my head as it did JM with all the talk about electronics. LOL

 

We had a vinyl siding incident by a contractor's truck and we just had him replace the damaged siding. It was light blue and if you looked ever so closely you could see the difference in the shade. But we didn't think much of it. As long as it was replaced we were satisfied.

[AngelaHunter]

QuoteToday's case with the sad sack girlfriend of the relative living off her great grandmother was really pathetic. The whole lot of them should get their act together.

 

3500$ for some sneakers, a pair of shoes and some DVDs? I couldn't figure out if Great Grandma owned this place or not. At first I thought not, but then with the talk of renovations, I thought she did and the whole gang of freeloaders piled in when she moved out. Not sure why plaintiff and her girlfriend are homeless all this time. They haven't paid rent in ages and they look able-bodied enough to find jobs. I don't think JM really wanted to hear about the bonding over weed smoking and liquor drinking.

 

Quote

The first one went right over my head as it did JM with all the talk about electronics. LOL

 

The plaintiff was extremely annoying, with his attitude and talking over JM. I think he felt he'd confuse her with all his tech-talk and she'd automatically find in his favor. He's not an electrician but felt qualified to say exactly what caused the short. Don't think so. Next!

 

I liked the def. in the siding damage case in the hall, admitting his employees cause damage "all the time" as though that's completely normal. It's not.

Edited February 17, 2016 by AngelaHunter

[WhitneyWhit]

Was there any reason as to why those young, able-bodied women were unemployed? Other than being professional freeloaders? I loved her grandstanding with my toilet, my door, my tub, even though they didn't own  the place and had apparently said to hell with paying rent.

 

I liked the def. in the siding damage case in the hall, admitting his employees cause damage "all the time" as though that's completely normal. It's not.

 

I loved that. "Hey, we damage people's property all the time, what makes her so special?"

[SRTouch]

 

I liked the def. in the siding damage case in the hall, admitting his employees cause damage "all the time" as though that's completely normal. It's not.

Sounded like he has multiple crews, and not enough supervision. He needs a supervisor with each crew who inspects the job when they finish. He's right that accidents happen. However, the customer should learn about any damage when notified by the landscaper.

[maggiemae]

Re - the siding damage......it is quite narrow and seems like they used a riding lawnmower? Not even much grass. What about a weed-wacker or at the least a little mower?

[AngelaHunter]

He's right that accidents happen. However, the customer should learn about any damage when notified by the landscaper.

 

I had a landscape contractor working on my property. He crashed his little Cat into the frame around my garage door, putting a big dent in it. Never said a word about it and I only found it after he left.  

 

What about a weed-wacker or at the least a little mower?

 

 

Too lazy to do that, I assume.

 

Speaking of lazy:

Was there any reason as to why those young, able-bodied women were unemployed?

 

That's what I was wondering. There are pretty much always jobs in housekeeping at most hotels, but maybe that's not good enough for them or the work is too hard.

 

 

 

[SRTouch]

Re - the siding damage......it is quite narrow and seems like they used a riding lawnmower? Not even much grass. What about a weed-wacker or at the least a little mower?

actually, I just went back and looked again. I agree, area is to narrow for rider - unless they are REALLY lazy. An area like that, it would probably be faster to just run a walking mower up there, a couple passes and they'd be done. A self propelled walker is as fast as even a zero turn rider, until you start getting into large areas. Of course a self propelled walker means you have to walk

[BubblingKettle]

Here's an article that popped up on my FB feed from Good Housekeeping Magazine ----  I Went on People's Court -- and Lost.

http://www.goodhousekeeping.com/life/a36848/lost-on-the-peoples-court/

 

I don't think I remember the case.

[DoctorK]

 

Today's first case is dude claiming a bar is responsible for his computer being zapped as he was setting up for karaoke night. Hmmm, I suppose the cause could be bar's faulty wiring, but could also just be a fault with plaintiff's equipment. Anyway, plaintiff had nice graphics for his theory, but really no evidence - case dismissed.

He deserved to lose because he didn't prove his case, however, I think that his claim was probably correct. JM does not understand how surge protectors work or the difference between line voltage and signal voltage. What the plaintiff described sounds like a grounding fault, which left the ground on his panel floating and would not have been prevented by a surge protector. When he connected to the USB port on his computer that could have dumped a significant charge into the USB port (low voltage/signal level) and cooked it. I am glad that in the hallterview he concluded that he should get an outlet tester (under $10), which plugs in and immediately shows if there are any faults in the wiring, missing ground and reversed hot and common show up more often than you might think. The only way he could have won was by bringing in an EE as an expert witness, which would have cost more than his damages.

Edited February 18, 2016 by DoctorK

[SRTouch]

The only way he could have won was by bringing in an EE as an expert witness, which would have cost more than his damages.

Sounds like you know this stuff, while I just have a general idea. Like you said,he needed expert testimony to back up his charts, otherwise it's just one theory of what might have happened.

[rcc]

Here's an article that popped up on my FB feed from Good Housekeeping Magazine ----  I Went on People's Court -- and Lost.

http://www.goodhousekeeping.com/life/a36848/lost-on-the-peoples-court/

 

I don't think I remember the case.

I always thought that the court show producers make the show entertaining by any means possible but this is outright wrong. Blank papers. Wow!

[AngelaHunter]

The "Your Majesty" plaintiff who thought JM is royalty says that having his car towed cost him 24,000$ - what a slimeball. Parking illegally, racking up tickets, having no registration or insurance, etc? Never mind all that. He was racially discriminated against. Whatever.

 

The big screen-Vizio-loving momma suing her son for 400$ made me angry. Maybe I'm wrong but I"d be willing to wager a few dollars that she never paid a cent in child support in all the years that her son was growing up. JM sometimes sounds naive or is speaking for herself when she lectures people on how families need to stick together. In this case, I don't blame the son one bit for not seeing his mother who went off with a man and left him when he was three years old. This mother survived cancer (and her son came around to help her!) and she's fixated on a stinking 400$ which is absolutely nothing compared to what she should have paid in child support all those years. Sheesh!

 

That contractor deserved every barb JM threw at him. He was a despicable human being, basically stealing 2000$ from the plaintiff, just because he thought he could. I don't know about other areas, but around here I've never heard of general contractors folding for lack of business. It's usually the opposite and they have too much business. So glad that lady got her money back from that scam artist.

 

Edited because I can't spell after two glasses of wine.

Edited February 18, 2016 by AngelaHunter

[SRTouch]

Looks like AngelaHunter and I were posting recaps at same time --- oh well, sh*the happens

First we have ridiculous claim against tow company. Plaintiff thinks NYC is plotting with tow company to discriminate against to him. Case dismissed.

2nd case is Mom suing son for repayment of loan made in 2011. Mom wasn't around when son was growing up, and admits in court that part of the reason she's in court is to try to reconnect with son. Case dismissed, and they end up hugging in hallway.

3rd case we get to see MM give contractor a hard time for terrible concrete job. Contractor says he was licensed when he did the job, but has since lost his license and his business. Looking at pictures, it's not hard to understand why. 8 months ago he replaced a slab off a driveway and now it's falling apart. His excuses include: the concrete company sold bad concrete, the weather was too cold, the lady used rock salt during New England winter, he was willing to come redo it but customer sued instead of waiting till he got around to it in six months. Wow, he actually thought that would fly - he went out of business because of lack of customers, but was to busy to come back and give the lady what she paid for.

It's probably a good thing the slab failed as quickly as it did. I would think it should be reinforced concrete if it's right off the driveway, and I don't know that I'd trust his flaky, cracked concrete. Now the customer will get money back and she can get a concrete man instead of this guy.

Edited February 18, 2016 by SRTouch

[cattykit]

Here's an article that popped up on my FB feed from Good Housekeeping Magazine ----  I Went on People's Court -- and Lost.

http://www.goodhousekeeping.com/life/a36848/lost-on-the-peoples-court/

 

I don't think I remember the case.

I gathered from the article that her episode hasn't aired yet.  Thanks for posting it.  It'll be interesting to see when this woman's case comes up if it really was as slam-dunk as she thinks it ought to be.

 

The article certainly gives the lie to the idea that you would come on this show with an unwinnable case because TPC is going to pay the judgment.

 

 

2nd case is Mom suing son for repayment of loan made in 2011. Mom wasn't around when son was growing up, and admits in court that part of the reason she's in court is to try to reconnect with son. Case dismissed, and they end up hugging in hallway.

The family that sues together stays together?

[BubblingKettle]

The big screen-Vizio-loving momma suing her son for 400$ made me angry. Maybe I'm wrong but I"d be willing to wager a few dollars that she never paid a cent in child support in all the years that her son was growing up. JM sometimes sounds naive or is speaking for herself when she lectures people on how families need to stick together. In this case, I don't blame the son one bit for not seeing his mother who went off with a man and left him when he was three years old. This mother survived cancer (and her son came around to help her!) and she's fixated on a stinking 400$ which is absolutely nothing compared to what she should have paid in child support all those years. Sheesh!

Yes, I so agree with you! I get so annoyed when JMM doles out her antiquated guilt trips. She doesn't seem to respect that some people need to move on in order to survive (emotionally). I think the son should have gotten some kudos for becoming a functioning, seemingly decent guy (based on what we observed) after having his mother abandon him at a tender age. And let's face it, the mother was there to bitch about an effing TV set (making sure she mentioned the measurements). JMM put words in her mouth by making up the "I think you're here just so you could see your son." Uh, no -- she  initially filed a suit in her local courthouse because of money and a tv.  When JMM makes these types of suggestions that seem to reflect her personal religious ideals, it makes me nuts. 

[AngelaHunter]

. And let's face it, the mother was there to bitch about an effing TV set (making sure she mentioned the measurements). JMM put words in her mouth by making up the "I think you're here just so you could see your son." Uh, no -- she  initially filed a suit in her local courthouse because of money and a tv.  When JMM makes these types of suggestions that seem to reflect her personal religious ideals, it makes me nuts.

 

I understand that JM is very emotional about her family and I can appreciate that. She obviously had/has a family with close and strong bonds but not everyone has that -  in spite of their best efforts - and I'm surprised she can't recognize that. Giving birth does NOT always make someone a mother. As JJ says - cats, dogs and guppies can have babies. (and I say they are often better parents. Well, maybe not the guppies but you know what I mean!) I have a friend whose mother had nine kids and NEVER was she a mother.

 

Even the mom here looked befuddled when she was informed that she was there to see her son, and not to get $400 and/or a 40" VIZIO TV. Sorry, JM. I know your heart is in the right place but blood is NOT always thicker than water. Sometimes it's just an accident of birth and a person is better off just walking away, as I think the son is, in this case.