The People's Court - General Discussion

[Brattinella]

I am so happy that my cable company has deigned to put TPC back on!  Another place I can commiserate and snark with you lovely people!

See you after the show!

[Guest]

On ‎9‎/‎1‎/‎2016 at 4:51 PM, AngelaHunter said:

Soap Bubble Boy: "We met when we was in college."  No, there is no hope.

I enjoyed the repeat of the model who has never modelled (but could make 2500$ if she DID model and who has not a single picture of herself anywhere) and her yappy, hyper, tiny little "It's a crime. It's a crime! It's a crime!" husband.

Yeah, and JM could have been a brain surgeon.

Reminds me of someone I was in contact with who justified her shoplifting by saying that her current job does not pay for all the items she needs to satisfy her expensive taste.  It took me more than a moment to process that statement.   It's been several months but the truth is I am still trying to process it.   Not sure it's ever going to happen.

Edited September 2, 2016 by PsychoKlown

[Brattinella]

20 minutes ago, PsychoKlown said:

Reminds me of someone I was in contact with who justified her shoplifting by saying that her current job does not pay for all the items she needs to satisfy her expensive taste. 

Wow.  What a horrifying 'person'.  That is scary as hell.

[Brattinella]

I haven't seen the MM version of the "Bought my 3 brothers $200 sneakers for Christmas" case yet.  Both of them, father and daughter made me sick.  It was such obvious collusion, I am so glad JJ didn't fall for it.

[Guest]

5 minutes ago, Brattinella said:

I haven't seen the MM version of the "Bought my 3 brothers $200 sneakers for Christmas" case yet.  Both of them, father and daughter made me sick.  It was such obvious collusion, I am so glad JJ didn't fall for it.

Try to catch it.  JM's version is quite sappy.  

And if you get the chance check out PC's facebook page. 

The devoted, put-upon sister (scammer) has quite the saucy tongue.   I blushed reading her posted response. 

She really should use some of that money for etiquette lessons.   Oh, yeah, and to buy a new wig. 

[AngelaHunter]

Quote

Reminds me of someone I was in contact with who justified her shoplifting by saying that her current job does not pay for all the items she needs to satisfy her expensive taste. 

I agree. If she doesn't have the brains/talent/or motivation to better herself, let the stores pass on the price of her thievery to non-thief customers, because she deserves the finer things.

Quote

Yeah, and JM could have been a brain surgeon.

Reminds me of something I read once: "I could have been a great artist, if only I could paint."

[Guest]

11 hours ago, AngelaHunter said:

Reminds me of something I read once: "I could have been a great artist, if only I could paint."

Oh Angela - that is the best. 

I have so many of the coulda/woulda/shoulda people crossing my threshold daily.   This is an excellent quote to bring them back to reality - or at least in the same zip code.

Perfect.  Just perfect.

[cattykit]

Finally, finally new episodes.  I have my DVR set to record only new episodes.  Of course if it's like last year, they'll show a week or two and go right into reruns again.  My fervent wish, year after year, that they update the cheesy set has gone unfulfilled yet again.

What was the point, symbolic or otherwise, of having MM put Doug Llewellyn's jacket on him?  To prove he's so old he needs help getting dressed?  Is this a one-day wonder or is Curt relegated to VO?

[AngelaHunter]

Quote

Is this a one-day wonder or is Curt relegated to VO?

I haven't watched yet, but in my world, Curt would be relegated to bathroom attendant, or parking cars, or anything where we don't have to listen to his stupidity.

[BubblingKettle]

I decided to tune in today to see if the new season had begun. Now I can't wait to tune in again tomorrow to see if Curt is again doing his VOs from his new location (bathroom).

The jacket delivery was, indeed, an awkward addition. Instead, they could taken the viewer into JMM's pretend office where JMM and Douglas could be telling Doug (and the viewer) that they're so glad to have him back.

[AngelaHunter]

It was a bit awkward and rushed, but wow. Doug looks great, still straight and slim at 77. What an improvement. Now if only we could get rid of Levin, send him back permanently to his sleazy TMZ and Miss BumBum contestants, this show will again have the air of class it sadly lost with No-Neck Hall Clown and the Shyster Levin with his gaggle of outside morons.

[SRTouch]

Some new cases, at last!

FIRST CASE: tenant suing to get deposit back. Claims place was unlivable because of bedbugs, so she wants bed replacement, too. Couple problems with her story, well landlord had problems,too. Plaintiff was presentable and well spoken, just not sure of her story. Says a friend alerted her about the bedbugs, but months go by before she brings in an exterminator. OK, I might be inclined to accept that she wanted to move because she was afraid the bedbugs might be back, but fact is that she brought in three friends to replace her on the lease. Like MM pointed out, she must not be a very good friend if she's trying to move friends into an apartment she deems unlivable for herself. My own thought was that she wanted to move, and just used the bedbugs as an excuse. I thought her shocked look when the landlord denied telling her other apartments had bedbugs was something she practiced in front of the mirror. I think lawyer mommy, who was in court for moral support, had told her the only way she could win was by showing landlord had ignored the problem. (Lawyer mommy, who is a prosecutor, refused repeated invites from MM to testify - probably because she didn't want to be caught up in daughter's lies.)  She tried saying landlord told her others had bugs. Even if he had, it should be no surprise for him to deny it in court to get out of paying. Logical step, to me at least, is knock on the doors of the other 52 apartments and get witnesses or statements from the neighbors who supposedly had bedbugs. OTOH, landlord is caught trying to do keep part of the deposit for damages they've already settled on. Little side note was that their jurisdiction would give double the amount wrongfilly withheld from the deposit. MM ruled that they DID wrongfully withhold some of the deposit (the portion they had already settled on), but plaintiff jumped the gun and filed before the deadline was up - so no double award.

SECOND CASE: Plaintiff suing because longtime friend who never finished paying for computer work. Defendant was using a 15 year old desktop that bit the dust. Plaintiff looked at the old system, and told defendant it would cost more to fix than to replace. He had an old system he could let him have for $300. Defendant pays the $300. Problem arises when he gets online, because part of what he wants to do is proprietary and requires a Dell system. Since the software won't work unless he's using a Dell, plaintiff goes ahead and fixes the antique, ending up sinking $480 into the old system. (Doncha just hate those proprietary licensing agreements which force you to buy from certain manufacturers.) Unfortunately, plaintiff did the additional work without talking it over with the defendant beforehand. Defendant bit the bullet and bought a new $1500 Dell, and refuses to pay the plaintiff the additional $180. MM says sorry, there was no agreement after the first $300, so defendant doesn't have to pay.

THIRD CASE: slam dunk case. Couple bring in antique chairs to be reupholstered because cat peed on them. Instead of stripping chairs of all stuffing and fabric to get rid of the smell, shop pulls off the covering fabric and sets them to the side to air out for ten months. Eventually they recover them, putting new fabric over smelly stuffing. As soon as chairs are delivered lady smells the old cat pee. She takes them to a different shop. In the process of re-reupholstering the chairs, the new shop finds the old cat pee soaked stuffing, and plaintiff's have the evidence and pictures in court. To top it off, shop is countersuing for the fabric, yet couple has the "Paid In Full" receipt with the fabric listed. Oops. Plaintiff wins. Wonder if this guy considered how potential future customers would react when he states on national TV that his shop never strips off the old stuffing. Hey, if I was paying 2 grand, I would expect all new stuffing.

[ElleMo]

14 minutes ago, SRTouch said:

THIRD CASE: slam dunk case. Couple bring in antique chairs to be reupholstered because cat peed on them. Instead of stripping chairs of all stuffing and fabric to get rid of the smell, shop pulls off the covering fabric and sets them to the side to air out for ten months. Eventually they recover them, putting new fabric over smelly stuffing. As soon as chairs are delivered lady smells the old cat pee. She takes them to a different shop. In the process of re-reupholstering the chairs, the new shop finds the old cat pee soaked stuffing, and plaintiff's have the evidence and pictures in court. To top it off, shop is countersuing for the fabric, yet couple has the "Paid In Full" receipt with the fabric listed. Oops. Plaintiff wins. Wonder if this guy considered how potential future customers would react when he states on national TV that his shop never strips off the old stuffing. Hey, if I was paying 2 grand, I would expect all new stuffing.

HAven't seen this yet -- but wouldn't it make more sense to put new stuffing in instead of letting them air for 10 months?  You'd get your money faster and now have room for new inventory.

[AngelaHunter]

Quote

. Defendant was using a 15 year old desktop

15 year old desktops or 20 year old cars - our litigants will fight to the death for them.

 

Quote

Claims place was unlivable because of bedbugs

Bedbugs are a real danger and scourge these days. but no way did plaintiff have "thousands" of bedbugs on her bed and not notice it sooner.  I enjoyed this case if only because we had litigants who could speak actual, proper English without murdering the language. Not a single "Had came"!

[OhioSongbird]

If I went to his shop I would take one look at him and leave.  Dude just oozes sleaze......

After 30 days I'd been calling asking for my chairs.  10 mos is more than generous on the plaintiffs part.

[DoctorK]

Quote

but plaintiff jumped the gun and filed before the deadline was up

I love lawyer mommy's shocked reaction to hearing this, she grabbed the paperwork and paged through it, realized that if she had paid attention to the dates (suit filed one day too early), her delicate flower daughter would probably have gotten the double amount bonanza. I agree with SRTouch that daughter decided she didn't want to live there any more and grabbed on this claim to get out of the lease.

[ElleMo]

15 hours ago, DoctorK said:

I love lawyer mommy's shocked reaction to hearing this, she grabbed the paperwork and paged through it, realized that if she had paid attention to the dates (suit filed one day too early), her delicate flower daughter would probably have gotten the double amount bonanza. I agree with SRTouch that daughter decided she didn't want to live there any more and grabbed on this claim to get out of the lease.

Loved her hallway interview where she said she was proud of her daughter.  Because you should be proud when your daughter goes on national TV trying to scam her former landlord. 

[SRTouch]

FIRST CASE: Plaintiff hires dude to trim a couple trees, and remove one big tree from her yard. He comes and works works for 1 day, then disappears, and leaving debris scattered across plaintiff's and neighbor's front yards. (Anyone want to bet dude bothered to get permission from neighbor before dropping the tree in their yard.) After 10 days he supposedly comes back and does a little cleanup, but most of the debris remains, and more trimming needs to be done. Dude, who must be a little hard of hearing from running chain saws as he yells instead of talks, is all decked out in jacket with matching yellow shirt and tie. His excuse for not completing the job is that he underbid the job and couldn't pay his workers. (Bid was for $1600 with $800 paid upfront.) Yep, I've done landscaping, and sometimes you underbid a job. So, sometimes you don't make anything, or even lose money on a job. But you don't start a job and leave it half done, with debris scattered over two yards. Hey, at the end plaintiff just wanted the debris gone. If it were me and I couldn't pay the help, I'd be over there a couple hours in the evening every day carting off debris by myself - which would have been enough to keep the plaintiff from suing. And MM is 100% right to give the plaintiff a hard time about leaving trash in the neighbor's yard. She cries about having to pay her son to clean up her yard, but does nothing about the neighbor's. In the end MM lets the guy keep $500 of the $800 he was paid, since he did cut down a tree. Don't know what dude was whining about in hallterview. Claims to be such a good guy that everyone takes advantage of him, yet takes money from people for work he doesn't finish, and messes up the neighbor's property without trying to clean up.

SECOND CASE: wedding gone wrong. Plaintiffs show up in court with the whole wedding party. Plaintiffs arranged to hold the wedding and reception at defendant's venue, which she advertises online. A week before the big event they find out that the venue doesn't have the right permits from the town to do weddings. Turns out the town notified defendant in 2014 that she could not rent out her property for big weddings/corporate events. Lots of double talk from defendant about how she didn't understand the town's permitting, and could have worked around the rules and gotten it permitted. So they ditch the defendant, find somewhere else, and now want their money back, as well as pain and suffering (must not watch court TV if they think they can get pain and suffering for venue scheduling mixup.)

Case is worth watching just to watch MM's reaction to defendant's request that she put a gag order on the plaintiffs to keep them from helping the town coming after her for violating the permitting. Then defendant mutters under her breath that MM gets or is crazy.

THIRD CASE: Kids fund drive screw up. Seems the defendant gave the kids were given coupon booklets to sell, but didn't get all the unsold booklets and money back from the kids. Plaintiff fronted the coupon book purchase with her credit card, defendant got the books and never paid up - oh and it turns out he was also collecting money from the parents for other things he never delivered. Plaintiff still defending the likable defendant, but wants her money back. MM agrees, and orders defendant to pay her. Defendant acts like he's an innocent victim - not sure who he thinks should pay for the missing get books and money.

[Brattinella]

Crap I missed another one!  *Gotta remember to set the DVR*

4 minutes ago, SRTouch said:

Turns out the town notified defendant in 2014 that she could not rent out her property for big weddings/corporate events. Lots of double talk from defendant about how she didn't understand the town's permitting, and could have worked around the rules and gotten it permitted. So they ditch the defendant, find somewhere else, and now want their money back, as well as pain and suffering (must not watch court TV if they think they can get pain and suffering for venue scheduling mixup.)

Case is worth watching just to watch MM's reaction to defendant's request that she put a gag order on the plaintiffs to keep them from helping the town coming after her for violating the permitting. Then defendant mutters under her breath that MM gets or is crazy.

^^^^THIS one right here is worth the price of admission! :))

[cattykit]

53 minutes ago, SRTouch said:

Case is worth watching just to watch MM's reaction to defendant's request that she put a gag order on the plaintiffs to keep them from helping the town coming after her for violating the permitting. Then defendant mutters under her breath that MM gets or is crazy.

 

Aside from MM's reaction, I can't believe the defendant doesn't understand that this is binding arbitration, not a real court, and that MM would not have that authority.

And it looks like Doug Llewellyn is here to stay!  Now if Judge Wapner would please pop in...

Edited September 6, 2016 by cattykit

[ElleMo]

1 hour ago, cattykit said:

Aside from MM's reaction, I can't believe the defendant doesn't understand that this is binding arbitration, not a real court, and that MM would not have that authority.

And it looks like Doug Llewellyn is here to stay!  Now if Judge Wapner would please pop in...

Plus, he is on National TV!!  Even if the plaintiffs say nothing, the episode can be used against them.  Can't wait to see this episode.

Wapner is in his 90s.  But if he is an active 90 (like Stan Lee) I would love to see him too!

[AngelaHunter]

Quote

Don't know what dude was whining about in hallterview.

I don't know either, since I couldn't understand most of what this belligerent person was saying, other than that he thinks the client should suffer the loss if he doesn't know what the job will cost him. The neighbour "wanted the bark). Not sure what that means.  I just had to have a huge tree, broken in a recent storm, cut down. The guy I hired came, saw, gave me a price, cut down the tree and removed all  the branches and debris from my property and my neighbour's property (and I wouldn't dream of leaving stuff on their yard and would have cleaned it before I did my own yard). End of story.

Quote

Plaintiffs show up in court with the whole wedding party.

Elizabeth, despite her demure appearance and speech, creeped me out. Total unrepentant shyster she is, and even after being lambasted by JM, was still smirking and saying the judge "Likes to go nuts." Well, Liz - it's scammers like you that make her nuts. On the other side, someone really needs to inform litigants the meaning of "pain and suffering." Breaching a contract does not fall into that category.

Quote

Defendant acts like he's an innocent victim - not sure who he thinks should pay for the missing get books and money.

The books and the money were just... gone. Who knows where?  *shrug* He may have been in charge of it all, but (all together now) "It's not my fault!" 

[califred]

Was the new brides hair streaked with crayon yellow or is my new tv messing with me.

crazy woman said in the hallway "It's none of the towns business what I'm doing on my property".  I'm betting she isn't insuring her property properly either.

[AngelaHunter]

Quote

But if he is an active 90 (like Stan Lee) I would love to see him too!

Here is Judge Wapner talking about how the sleazy Levin tried to tell him what to do.

[cattykit]

13 minutes ago, AngelaHunter said:

Here is Judge Wapner talking about how the sleazy Levin tried to tell him what to do.

Very interesting, especially the part about Jerry Scheindlin already knowing how he would rule before he heard the facts of the case.  Makes me wonder if Levin has tried to influence MM to rule any particular way. 

[Brattinella]

GREAT interview!  Thanks for posting it!

[AngelaHunter]

Here's another. Somehow I get the impression that JW wasn't a big fan of Levin.

 

[cattykit]

25 minutes ago, AngelaHunter said:

Here's another. Somehow I get the impression that JW wasn't a big fan of Levin.

Thanks, AngelaHunter.  Sadly, it seems to confirm that we'll never get rid of Levin in front of the camera.

[Merriwind]

So sad that Harvey Levin's mug and street interviews are still part of this show!

[Brooklynista]

I love how senior citizens have no filter. Harvey stands on a box to give him fake height like Tom Cruise? Priceless.

[ElleMo]

No Curt on the website.  http://peoplescourt.com/cast/.  Just Harry Levin, Douglas McIntosh and Doug Lllewelyn.  I've seen a few articles about Doug Lllewelyn returning but none mention why Curt left as hallway interviewer. He's still voice over announcer, correct?

[SRTouch]

What a disappointment!?! New episodes finally show up, and when I sit down to watch I get the rerun about two friends feuding over a cruise? I double check the channel guide and see I'm supposed to be watching a new episode. FF and see other cases I don't particularly care to watch again. Grrrr delete and go to Hot Bench. Yeh, rerun there too, but at least that's what I expect to see.

[Redcookie]

While Doug may be one of the old timers and people remember him fondly, I just can't with his halterviews. But when JMM gave him his coat and microphone at the beginning of the first episode, it was quite special. But oh dear....

[cattykit]

First case is just unfuckingbelievable.  45 year old woman living with 28 (?) year old man, who leaves her for her 24 year old sister and cleans out her furniture and her kids' belongings on the way out, and stiffs her on his share of the lease he signed as well.  Dude says he quit his car wash job because it didn't pay enough, but hasn't found another job in three months (yeah, right, I believe so much he's on the legitimate job market).  He says the plaintiff was his sugar mama but is now just a cougar because she just can't get enough of his worldly endowments.  MM asks him if there's ever a time where he doesn't do what he wants because he wants it and he flat out admits no.  MM is righteously indignant at the absolute lack of any conscience, and dude accuses her of sticking together with the plaintiff because they're both women, so MM tosses him out.  Plaintiff wins, of course, but I'd say good luck trying to collect.

Second case, the plaintiff's car is towed for illegal parking.  She squawks for a second about how she really wasn't obstructing the driveway, but that's dispatched pretty quickly.  The real issue is that she couldn't find her car until considerable time and effort had passed.  In said process, she racked up storage fees and rental charges and lost work time that she wants the towing company to pay.  Towing company is able to prove they followed all their procedures, including handing the tow slip to the police desk, who failed to log the tow which is why no one could find her car.  MM tells plaintiff she has a case against the city but not the towing company.

Third case, plaintiff needs to have a gas stove reconnected for his business during a cold winter.  The gas company says because the gas has been off for 1 1/2 years, external services of a master plumber are required for a leak test, which leads the plaintiff to the defendant via an internet search.  The test is passed on the second try, but the gas company says the defendant is not on their list of licensed plumbers for the town and therefore they won't accept the test results.  Defendant is licensed in other towns but let his license in that town lapse.  Defendant says it would cost about $100 to renew his license, against almost $600 the plaintiff paid him, and then claims plaintiff says the gas company wanted a permit pulled as well.  Plaintiff has nothing in writing from the gas company for any of this, but MM orders defendant to return the fee.

Edited September 7, 2016 by cattykit

[BubblingKettle]

"Wayyyyyt, what does deceptive mean?" Ugh, why didn't I hit Mute on stupid Harvey and his roadside dopes?!

[AngelaHunter]

Quote

45 year old woman living with 28 (?) year old man,

Quentin, be still my heart! I haven't finished watching but just had to comment on the highly desirable, fugly, slack-jawed Missing Link who looks as though he would smell really bad. He's 26, looks 50, and just gave up his lucratrive career at the carwash. I guess they weren't paying him what he's worth. Plaintiff, 45, thought he was a real prize (enough of a prize to expose her children to this cretin) since she was with him for two years and would still be with him if he hadn't been "messin'" with her sister. "Low life", "degenerate", "jerk" and "amoral" were some of JM's words for him. He probably couldn't understand most of them so didn't seem overly insulted. But I really don't think he has the necessary functioning brain cells for that emotion. Wow, women these days (at least the ones we see here) are all too willing to debase and degrade themselves for anything that happens to be still breathing. A more disgusting specimen - physically, mentally, and morally -  I cannot recall.

Edited September 7, 2016 by AngelaHunter

[cattykit]

1 hour ago, CoolWhipLite said:

"Wayyyyyt, what does deceptive mean?" Ugh, why didn't I hit Mute on stupid Harvey and his roadside dopes?!

Better yet, DVR and FF are your friends.  After deleting commercials, the hallterviews, and the roadside dope session, I figure I might be watching 25 minutes worth of actual program.

[AngelaHunter]

Quote

After deleting commercials, the hallterviews, and the roadside dope session, I figure I might be watching 25 minutes worth of actual program.

Imagine how much more we could see if Levin got the boot? Judge Wapner says what I've said for ages: There's nothing Levin loves more than getting his increasingly flappy-jawed, ugly face on camera. This show has made me an expert on FF and Mute. Levin, please! Stick to your low-life TMZ and GTFO People's Court.

[sereion]

Doug Llewellyn! Talk about a blast from the past! I remember watching him when Judge Wapner was on the bench! So good seeing him again. I couldn't stand Kurt; he could be such a jerk.

[Eliza422]

2 hours ago, AngelaHunter said:

Quentin, be still my heart! I haven't finished watching but just had to comment on the highly desirable, fugly, slack-jawed Missing Link who looks as though he would smell really bad. He's 26, looks 50, and just gave up his lucratrive career at the carwash. I guess they weren't paying him what he's worth. Plaintiff, 45, thought he was a real prize (enough of a prize to expose her children to this cretin) since she was with him for two years and would still be with him if he hadn't been "messin'" with her sister. "Low life", "degenerate", "jerk" and "amoral" were some of JM's words for him. He probably couldn't understand most of them so didn't seem overly insulted. But I really don't think he has the necessary functioning brain cells for that emotion. Wow, women these days (at least the ones we see here) are all too willing to debase and degrade themselves for anything that happens to be still breathing. A more disgusting specimen - physically, mentally, and morally -  I cannot recall.

That defendant...when he said he was 26, my jaw dropped! That is one **rough** looking 26 year old, wow...and so amoral, yikes.

[SRTouch]

First case: sounded kind of boring, so I didn't back up and watch after vacuuming. Something about two 50 something year old women fighting over money that went back and forth over an 18 year friendship. Sounded like the fight started because one lady was dating the other's married brother.

Second case: plaintiff suing over failure to pay for work done as a marketing specialist for defendant's business. Defendant says there was never a meeting of the minds, of course no written contract. He agrees he owes, but says not as much as she's asking. Both litigants are hefty folks with that slack jawed face some obese people have where they look at the world with their mouth open. Ah ha, doesn't take long to learn this lady is one of those who get paid to send out mass emails - SPAM, I hate spam (both email and the canned processed meat). Going to be an uphill battle for me to agree to pay a spammer. Then slick defendant starts talking and takes no time to develop a dislike for this smooth talker. Another of those litigants who doesn't want his name or company name used. He's here representing his son's company, but he's let's us know he's "only" the CEO. MM dissects he's testimony and his written answer to the complaint,  and it's obvious to me this guy planned to use the plaintiff and for awhile and then stiff her. What makes it worse is that he negotiates the bill until the plaintiff is giving him a 50% discount, and he still doesn't pay. MM points out to the plaintiff that her billing invoices have multiple math errors, so maybe Mr CEO has a reason to get fed up with plaintiff. Still doesn't mean he should not pay, but now he doesn't look quite as shady. In the end, MM goes over the billings and emails and determines dude owes more than he thought, but less than what plaintiff is claiming. Funny thing, had he paid her the final invoice at the agreed upon 50% discount he would have saved a little over what he has to pay after the ruling. Plaintiff is lucky she came to TPC instead of JJ. JJ would have thrown out the case when she found the math errors on the invoice instead of figuring out who owed what.

Third case: a tenant suing claiming landlord was renting an apartment which couldn't pass section 8 inspections. Broker found the apartment, plaintiff's paid deposit, but never moved in because section 8 inspector flunked the place. Landlord's story is all over, he did the stuff the inspector wanted, he refused to do part of what they wanted, he negotiated with them, yada yada. In the end place never passed, so tenant couldn't move in, he has to give back the money. I found landlord fun. First off, the shaggy hair, t-shirt, colorful jacket, then the soft voice which doesn't seem to match. Then he argues with MM that he has no problem with section 8, but in the end says he sold the apartment because being a landlord was to much headache. If I heard right, he never went to apartment, instead let a broker/manager handle it. Then tries to argue with inspection results which he says he's never even seen because the broker handles all that.

I found the plaintiff's case troubling. Not that she shouldn't get the deposit back, but that she's been on section 8 for 20 years, and ships her household goods and furniture back and forth to Puerto Rico. So, we have a woman who can't afford rent in Puerto Rico moving to where the cost of living will be much much higher. Course I don't know where she lived or where the new apartment is, but when I compare costs in San Juan to NYC http://www.numbeo.com/cost-of-living/compare_cities.jsp?country1=Puerto+Rico&country2=United+States&city1=San+Juan&city2=New+York%2C+NY I'm just about ready to head south. Guess there's no reason not to move where rent will be 2-300% more when someone else is footing the bill.

Edited September 8, 2016 by SRTouch
Adding link

[cattykit]

38 minutes ago, SRTouch said:

Ah ha, doesn't take long to learn this lady is one of those who get paid to send out mass emails - SPAM, I hate spam (both email and the canned processed meat). Going to be an uphill battle for me to agree to pay a spammer.

For once I was listening to the intro VO and caught that right away, so was completely prepared to hate the defendant.  I still hate her, but have to hate someone who's willing to engage her services as well.  A plague on both their houses.

Fried SPAM, however, with a bit of yellow mustard, can be delicious.

[patty1h]

The email spam lady and the defendant both skeeved me - she has this "I'm innocent" tilt to her head and wide eyes the whole case.  The dude had his tongue poking out of his mouth the whole case.  Then, when they were talking to Doug Llewellyn in the hall, the woman's titanic boobs  made my eyes bug.  Those things... woof.

[BubblingKettle]

1 hour ago, SRTouch said:

First case: sounded kind of boring, so I didn't back up and watch after vacuuming. Something about two 50 something year old women fighting over money that went back and forth over an 18 year friendship. Sounded like the fight started because one lady was dating the other's married brother.

Second case: plaintiff suing over failure to pay for work done as a marketing specialist for defendant's business. Defendant says there was never a meeting of the minds, of course no written contract.

I think there was no meeting of the minds because there was a lack of minds. The woman seemed slow, and I guess her husband holds it against her (the way he chastised her for speaking out was a bit too much). And the defendant was also a mouth-breather.

Whoa - Mr. I Am Still Alive in the Section 8 case -- what a look!

For the longest time, I've been trying to figure out if JMM has a lisp or bad dental work. Her issue seems to have gotten worse -- but I think that has helped me solve the mystery. She must have ill-fitting dentures or bridgework because she tries to keep them from slipping.

[SRTouch]

1 hour ago, cattykit said:

Fried SPAM, however, with a bit of yellow mustard, can be delicious.

Many years ago, when Reagan was President, I served in Honduras.  The Army, in its infinite wisdom, decided to send all the Army cooks home at the same time and staff the mess hall with locals. One meal it was regular Army cooks, next day they're on a plane heading north and we have a bunch of Hondurans, only a couple who speak English, trying to run the mess hall. Not saying the Hondurans were bad cooks, but no way could they run an US Military mess when they couldn't even read the regulations and recipes they were supposed to be operating. Course, didn't take long for the bigwigs to figure out we needed an experienced mess sergeant to tell them what was needed to pass the needed inspections to serve the meals. (No doubt it helped that we had a field hospital full of high ranking officers.) Anyway, for a couple weeks all our meals came from cans. Twice a day for two weeks we had spam in just about every way imaginable, with MREs for lunch. Powdered eggs with diced spam everyday for breakfast... yummy. Eventually it was powdered egg omelettes with onion and cheese, once they figured out the requirements for storing refridgerated stuff and fresh produce. After a couple weeks we had a mess Staff Sergeant and the recipes had been translated, so things got back to normal. But I swore off spam for all time.

Edited September 8, 2016 by SRTouch
Wording changed

[cattykit]

16 minutes ago, SRTouch said:

Many years ago, when Reagan was President, I was served in Honduras.  The Army, in its infinite wisdom, decided to send all the Army cooks home at the same time and staff the mess hall with locals. One meal it was regular Army cooks, next day they're on a plane home and we have a bunch of Hondurans, only a couple who speak English, trying to run the mess hall. Not saying the Hondurans were bad cooks, but no way could they run an US Military mess when they couldn't even read the regulations and recipes they were supposed to be operating. Course, didn't take long for the bigwigs to figure out we needed an experienced mess sergeant to tell them what was needed to pass the needed inspections to serve the meals. (No doubt it helped that we had a field hospital full of high ranking officers.) Anyway, for a couple weeks all our meals came from cans. Twice a day for two weeks we had spam in just about every way imaginable, with MREs for lunch. Powdered eggs with diced spam everyday for breakfast... yummy. Eventually it was powdered egg omelettes with onion and cheese, once they figured out the requirements for storing refridgerated stuff and fresh produce. After a couple weeks we had a mess Staff Sergeant and the recipes had been translated, so things got back to normal. But I swore off spam for all time.

My only experience with MREs was when I went through Air Force Survival School (also early Reagan era), and Spam was never served at any chow hall I ever visited, but as one of the world's most finicky eaters, I completely understand eating something one time too many and swearing off it for life.

22 minutes ago, CoolWhipLite said:

Whoa - Mr. I Am Still Alive in the Section 8 case -- what a look!

For the longest time, I've been trying to figure out if JMM has a lisp or bad dental work. Her issue seems to have gotten worse -- but I think that has helped me solve the mystery. She must have ill-fitting dentures or bridgework because she tries to keep them from slipping.

Speaking of ill-fitting, I thought that was a nasty looking rug the defendant was sporting in case 2.

I haven't noticed anything about MM's dentistry except that it, like her face, is too perfect.  But with the kind of money she pulls down there's no excuse for not having perfect function as well as form.

[Brattinella]

Such a coincidence today!  We had fried SPAM sandwiches for lunch (the turkey kind) Yummy!

[AngelaHunter]

Quote

I found the plaintiff's case troubling. Not that she shouldn't get the deposit back, but that she's been on section 8 for 20 years,

I tried to keep my blood pressure down while watching this. I remember my first apartment - floors needed sanding, kitchen lino was disgusting, fridge was tiny and old and didn't work all that well and the stove was an antique. The bathtub had rust stains in it, etc. I was working hard every day, earning not much money but paying taxes and this is what I could afford. Obviously it would never meet the standards of someone who gets a free ride on the taxpayers' dime - not nearly fancy or elegant enough for them! Grr...

Quote

Ah ha, doesn't take long to learn this lady is one of those who get paid to send out mass emails - SPAM, I hate spam (both email and the canned processed meat).

Both litigants were pretty disgusting. For the last month or so, I've been getting hundreds of porn spam in one email account and would gladly see whoever sends it burn in an eternal fire. As an aside, I've often wondered about people like her. At a social gathering when anyone asks what she does for a living, does she say, "Oh, I blast everyone's email accounts with spam!" I was wishing JM would have told def. to put his revolting tongue back in his mouth. Ugh.

Plaintiff needs to put aside the spam for awhile and do something about her weight. The labored breathing, the reddened neck - not good signs.

Quote

Sounded like the fight started because one lady was dating the other's married brother.

More repugnant people. Yeah, I always give my money to my brother's girlfriend to "hold" for me. Wait, no I don't. I love how people here come and expose the fact that they're shafting creditors, the government or whoever, by hiding money and think that JM was born yesterday. IMO, they deserve whatever they get. "Rob" sounds like a true prince among men, well at least defendant thought so.

[Broderbits]

Patty1h said:

Quote

 Then, when they were talking to Doug Llewellyn in the hall, the woman's titanic boobs  made my eyes bug.

When you are going to appear on national tv there is no excuse not to have what we oldsters call "foundation garments". In her case they would need to be industrial strength. Another litigant with no mirrors at home......

[SRTouch]

45 minutes ago, Broderbits said:

Patty1h said:

When you are going to appear on national tv there is no excuse not to have what we oldsters call "foundation garments". In her case they would need to be industrial strength. Another litigant with no mirrors at home......

Well, just in the interest of equal opportunity snarking, defendant is obese dude in coat and tie that looks like he would need a bungee cord to button that coat. When I saw him coming through the doors with his little lady witness who barely comes up to his shoulder I thought Jabba the Hut