The People's Court - General Discussion

[SRTouch]

Oops, recap will either be late and not get done - today is the day for a trip to the City (here in Oklahoma, we never say Oklahoma City)

Edited September 7, 2018 by SRTouch

[Brattinella]

55 minutes ago, SRTouch said:

Oops, recap will either be late and not get done - today is the day for a trip to the City (here in Oklahoma, we never say Oklahoma City)

Oh, no!  That is a terrible drive and it's raining all day!  Be safe!

[AngelaHunter]

22 hours ago, meowmommy said:

I haven't forgotten how she jumped all over that poor personal trainer for almost nothing

I had forgotten that, and how she sneeringly called him a "big baby" for no reason at all when if anyone deserved it, it was these two behaving like toddlers when they are well-past the "fully-grown" stage.

 

22 hours ago, meowmommy said:

Notice she couldn't be bothered to show up. 

The "old lady" probably gave herself the joyous Christmas present of a private, peaceful evening away from her stupid, immature, idiotic,  jerk-off boys, but they had to go ruin that of course.

 

22 hours ago, meowmommy said:

I'm anal enough that when I get a call I don't recognize, I decline the call and Google the number. 

I always do that when there is no ID, because it's always scammers or telemarketers. This furniture store should have the name showing when they call. I don't know if they do, but if not, I don't blame her for not calling back. I've had pests and scammers call several times a day for a week, until I bought a Panasonic phone that will block up to 30 numbers.

Well, today we got a bunch of vicious guttersnipes, who seem on the fast track to success to shop at "Hooker's on the Point 'R' Us". Assault with a weapon (19 year old girl) arrests, bail, a bail bondswoman who seemed to agree with the bizarre def, that "disrespeck" or trash talking is a definite reason to tear up a bail contract which resulted in 5 months in Riker's Island for plaintiff. Def's screaming witness in a super-tight, very short skirt and spike heels gets thrown out and wiggles her large buttocks in front of Douglas as he escorts her out, and fake nails and hair and eyelashes and the whole thing was a such a damned disgrace even JM had no kindly words of wisdom for any of them. And where the hell did plaintiff get 3,000$? That's what I needed to know.

The Pawnshop Debacle: Plaintiff pawns irreplaceable pieces of jewelry - gifts from grandpa, etc -  which pawnshop conveniently "loses". Well, no one knows what happened, since the person who actually took in the plaintiff's stuff is conveniently absent today. Owner seems completely clueless and the receipt does not itemize the pieces and he doesn't know anything. Plaintiff gets 3500$ for her lost or stolen pieces.

Two Sainted Single Mothers fighting over rent. Plaintiff and her child move in with def and HER child, and pays her rent every month. Problem is def is not passing that on to landlord, because she needed that money to pay HER bills. Why should she pay rent when she can spend the money on herself? Stupid sow. She also has some boyfriend bunking in there all the time. Plaintiff gets her money back, because why should SHE pay def's bills? Oh, these roommates! Children, it's hard enough to live with someone you love, never mind with virtual strangers. And stop popping out babies you can't take care of!

[momtoall]

OT: meowmommy try downloading the Hiya app to your cell phone, names show up on the calls.

[meowmommy]

34 minutes ago, AngelaHunter said:

whole thing was a such a damned disgrace even JM had no kindly words of wisdom for any of them

So MM's all, take it down a notch, yadda yadda yadda, and yet these two aren't any worse than the two we saw yesterday.   The whole case was weird, right up to and especially including where MM calls Douglas up so she can smack him on the chest.  I'll be she's been wanting to do that for a long time.

52 minutes ago, AngelaHunter said:

Why should she pay rent when she can spend the money on herself? Stupid sow. She also has some boyfriend bunking in there all the time. Plaintiff gets her money back, because why should SHE pay def's bills?

Just incredible how much attitude the defendant had, considering she's nothing but a shitty tenant with a subletter.  "Listen, bitch...you live here until I say you live here."  Priceless.  I'll bet the "good relationship" she has with the property manager might take a small hit after they watch this.

And this is the MM who freaks out when there's no text chain; now she's lecturing them to use the phone!  SMH!!!  MM was righteously annoyed with the defendant, but then she fucked it all up by this gentle little lecture as if they were her daughters instead of litigants.  My brains are leaking out the side where I smacked it too hard.

1 hour ago, AngelaHunter said:

Owner seems completely clueless and the receipt does not itemize the pieces and he doesn't know anything.

No pictures, no jewelry, no information.  Why even contest the suit?

And why does MM so often automatically assume a male in proximity to a female constitutes a couple, even though they're presenting a business arrangement?

Agree with MM that the plaintiff had no business pawning items that had sentimental value to her.  Nothing from the catalogue and not even winning the suit will get them back.

[Broderbits]

1 hour ago, AngelaHunter said:

Well, today we got a bunch of vicious guttersnipes,

And that's putting it mildly!! Defendant literally made me sick to my stomach; Levin must personally screen these people so he can pick out the nastiest to reward with their 15 minutes of fame. I need to be a lot more discerning in the cases I choose to watch.

[aemom]

Case where his brother put a metal plate in his face:  That "apology" was the epitome of "Sorry, not sorry."  Wow, that was quite the case.  There was a great deal of histrionics by the P, but I have to admit, if some family member did that to me, I would probably be overly dramatic too.  Thankfully, my family is quite civilized and that's not how we roll.  The most exciting thing that usually happens on Christmas is that a wine glass gets knocked over.

 

On 9/6/2018 at 5:29 PM, AngelaHunter said:

Def. is an asshole, stating, "I saw one puncture mark and don't understand why that would cause 7 stitches." That's because you are neither a vet nor do you have a clue about dog bites. The surface puncture is nothing - like the tip of the iceberg. The real (and often massive) damage occurs unseen beneath the skin, you asshole.

Even worse, in the halterview, when Doug asks him "will you go back to the dog park?" his answer is "what other choice do I have?"  Uh, not going where your dog will bite another dog or a person?  Some people are such entitled assholes who think that the world is supposed to mold itself around their wants and desires.  This guy was no spring chicken either, so we can't just blame the youth of today for acting entitled.  Entitlement has no age limits.

 

On 9/6/2018 at 7:38 PM, meowmommy said:

I'm anal enough that when I get a call I don't recognize, I decline the call and Google the number.  Most of the time, of course, it's a bullshit call.  Seems to me, though, that this lady, if she supposedly is playing phone tag with the store, ought to have recognized the number immediately.  I hate that our old fashioned landlines were equipped with name and number caller ID, but now if you want the name on your cell, you have to pay the cell phone company extra.  

Seriously.  I finally stepped out of the dark ages two years ago and bought a smartphone because it was too painful trying to text my kids with a flip phone anymore.  But I get so many spam calls, that I rarely answer them on my cell and usually Google the number to find out it's a scammer.  As for my house phone, I don't want to spend the extra $10 it would cost to get Call ID ($5 for the call ID plus $5 for the network charge once you add a service to your line) and often get "Windows" calling me that they must repair my computer or a robot telling me that Revenue Canada is going to arrest me if I don't call them right back at this number.  There used to be actual people who would make those calls and one of them left a message telling me "God bless."  Sadly, people are taken in by this every day, so the scammers keep on trying.  But if you called me on my home phone and didn't leave a message, I would never know that you had EVER called me.  So, MM was right to give him the "leave a message, you dufus," speech.

Edited September 8, 2018 by AEMom
Typo

[babs j.]

I'm not very technically minded - still caught in the 20th century - don't even have a cell phone and I use the library's computer-but I have an answering machine.  When I retired and was home all day, I found that most of the calls I got were either hang-ups or junk.  And, being retired, most of the calls were trying to sell me insurance or stuff for aches and pains.  Now I leave my answering machine on two rings and very seldom answer it.  I do enjoy those automatic voices warning me that the IRS has taken out a warrant for me - got that Friday of last week.  They'll never take me alive - that should liven up things at the condo.

[AngelaHunter]

1 hour ago, AEMom said:

Even worse, in the halterview, when Doug asks him "will you go back to the dog park?" his answer is "what other choice do I have?"

Maybe he could do what I always did and take his dog for a walk, but I guess that's become unthinkable these days. You'd have to actually, well, walk. Dog parks and invisible fences - both the work of the Devil.

 

1 hour ago, AEMom said:

r a robot telling me that Revenue Canada is going to arrest me if I don't call them right back at this number. 

Oh, yes! My robot was quite threatening, telling me it was no use to try and hide because he knows my name and address, although he mentioned neither. I trembled in my shoes, cuz Revenue Canada is so very like the KGB or the SS.  Some East Indian, calling himself "Patrick" woke me at 7:00a.m. to inform me my computer was "sending out errors." He obviously has super powers. I will admit I kind of lost it and screeched obscenties at him before violently hanging up, which brings me to how much less satisfying it is to press a button to end a call than it was slamming down a receiver on an old-fashioned dial phone.

[Brattinella]

1 hour ago, AngelaHunter said:

woke me at 7:00a.m. to inform me my computer was "sending out errors.

SEVEN A.M.??  I cannot even begin to describe my response to this call.  Your ears would blister!

[AngelaHunter]

2 hours ago, Brattinella said:

SEVEN A.M.??  I cannot even begin to describe my response to this call.  Your ears would blister!

Oh, my response would have made a sailor blush. I'm not proud to say my language is not the most refined, but I started at age 18 working with a bunch of rough, older guys, so (all together now) It's not my fault! You should hear me when I'm watching some of the worst scumbag litigants on this show, especially scumbags who subject helpless children to their scum-baggery - rotten, low-down, skanky MethMom slut, I'm looking at you. The air turns blue and is sometimes so vile that my husband, who speaks the same way, is mildly shocked.

I bet I could put bigger blisters on your ears than you could mine. :D

Yeah, the 7:a.m. thing was a bit much, because usually I'm amused by someone calling me from Mumbai or whever, with an accent so heavy it's difficult to decipher, yet they always have Western names like "Kevin", "Justin" or "Andrew."

Edited September 8, 2018 by AngelaHunter
Ooops - Skanky Meth Mom? Wrong show - that was JJ. Sorry I"m drunk

[aemom]

3 hours ago, AngelaHunter said:

Some East Indian, calling himself "Patrick" woke me at 7:00a.m. to inform me my computer was "sending out errors." He obviously has super powers. I will admit I kind of lost it and screeched obscenties at him before violently hanging up, which brings me to how much less satisfying it is to press a button to end a call than it was slamming down a receiver on an old-fashioned dial phone.

I had the same sort of thing happen to me at 1:30 am and I completely lost my shit and also swore a blue streak at them. The best thing was that on my night table,  I have a real phone (not a cordless) in case of power failures. And because it was dark, not only did I get to slam the phone in their ear, but I did it repeatedly because I couldn't get the receiver back in the cradle.

[AngelaHunter]

5 minutes ago, AEMom said:

I had the same sort of thing happen to me at 1:30 am and I completely lost my shit and also swore a blue streak at them.

Something else I did was d/l a blood-curdling scream from YT, put it on my desktop and when these criminals call while I'm at the puter I give them a pretty good earful.:)

[meowmommy]

2 minutes ago, AEMom said:

I had the same sort of thing happen to me at 1:30 am

I got a text at 1:10 am the other night from a site where you send in your receipts to let me know they'd received it.  I wrote them a very nasty letter and I got back a canned "we're sorry for the inconvenience" response.  I wrote back, but what the fuck are you going to do about it to make sure it never happens again (no, I didn't say fuck but I should have).

5 hours ago, AEMom said:

here used to be actual people who would make those calls and one of them left a message telling me "God bless."  Sadly, people are taken in by this every day, so the scammers keep on trying. 

You wouldn't believe (or maybe you would) the number of obvious bullshit scams people forward and post on FB.  I practically have Snopes on speed-dial so I can refute them before they spread it to some other stupid person.

[Katy M]

4 hours ago, AngelaHunter said:

Maybe he could do what I always did and take his dog for a walk, but I guess that's become unthinkable these days. You'd have to actually, well, walk. Dog parks and invisible fences - both the work of the Devil.

What's wrong with wanting to play a game of frisbee with your dog?  

[AngelaHunter]

1 minute ago, Katy M said:

What's wrong with wanting to play a game of frisbee with your dog?  

I played ball and frisbee and did training sessions with my dogs (including a game of "Find it" in the house on rainy or freezing days) and of course took them for 2 - 3 walks each day and to baseball fields in the evenings for a good run. All the kinds of things dog owners did in the past before the recent advent of dog parks, where owners stand and gab while their dogs get into fights. Throwing balls and toys into an already overly-excited group of dogs is not a good idea. 

[Katy M]

1 minute ago, AngelaHunter said:

I played ball and frisbee and did training sessions with my dogs (including a game of "Find it" in the house on rainy or freezing days) and of course took them for 2 - 3 walks each day and to baseball fields in the evenings for a good run. All the kinds of things dog owners did in the past before the recent advent of dog parks, where owners stand and gab while their dogs get into fights. Throwing balls and toys into an already overly-excited group of dogs is not a good idea. 

Well, what do I know?  I have a cat.  I throw a ball from the couch. She plays with it for five seconds. Then, I have to get up and go to the ball to throw it again, because cats are just too smart to play fetch.  They know enough to make you do all the work.

[aemom]

23 hours ago, meowmommy said:

And this is the MM who freaks out when there's no text chain; now she's lecturing them to use the phone!

I said the same thing! MM you are always telling people to get texts as proof, and now you're telling people to talk on the phone. *throws up hands.*

 

The bond case where the girl was sent to Riker's. Wow, that is cold blooded to do that to somebody.  I hope that she has better friends now and has cleaned up her act to stay far away from prison.

 

The pawn shop case was sad.  I'm sure their employee stole the jewelry. 

21 minutes ago, Katy M said:

Well, what do I know?  I have a cat.  I throw a ball from the couch. She plays with it for five seconds. Then, I have to get up and go to the ball to throw it again, because cats are just too smart to play fetch.  They know enough to make you do all the work.

I actually had a cat that would sometimes play fetch. He wasn't too bright, but he was the sweetest, cuddliest cat who loved people. I still miss him sometimes over 20 years later.

Edited September 8, 2018 by AEMom
Typo

[Katy M]

26 minutes ago, AEMom said:

I said the same thing! MM you are always telling people to get texts as proof, and now you're telling people to talk on the phone. *throws up hands.*

You're supposed to talk on the phone and then send a text or email as confirmation.

[CrazyInAlabama]

The biggest issues in the dog park case was that the loony defendant thought it was good to take his vicious dog to the park even after this, but also that other dog owners thought playing frisbee or throwing a ball into a group of dogs was going to end well.  

Edited September 9, 2018 by CrazyInAlabama

[DoctorK]

7 hours ago, AngelaHunter said:

Some East Indian, calling himself "Patrick" woke me at 7:00a.m. to inform me my computer was "sending out errors."

I haven't gotten these that early but I used to have fun with heavily accented people telling me that my computer was sending errors or that they were calling from microsoft security about a problem with with my computer being compromised. If I was bored I would talk to them and ask if they were monitoring my computer and when they said yes, ask them since you are into my system, what is the MAC address of my router. Instant hang up. It horrifies me that people still fall for these scams, especially the IRS scams.

Edited September 9, 2018 by DoctorK

[AngelaHunter]

2 hours ago, DoctorK said:

It horrifies me that people still fall for these scams

Sadly, the very elderly are often the victims. I know a woman of 83, fully possessed of all her marbles and owns her own business, who got a scammer calling and talked her into giving him remote access to her computer. Luckily, she got skeeved out and shut her system down.  Now she's afraid to turn her computer on.:(

If you want to have a few chuckles, check out YT vids where people play with these idiots and keep them on the phone for insane amounts of time.

But the Windows thing is nothing. Think of anyone who would fall for this Nigerian email:

Quote

How are you today? Please can you confirm this to us before we make a mistake, somebody called me today with this number 706-xxx-xx15 saying that he is your brother, he said that you died since 3 days ago and before this happened you asked him to receive the funds on your behalf. He forwarded his address for us to send the MTCN# direct to him;

XXX Odena RD S
Sylacauga, AL - Alabama 35150
PH: 706-xxx-xx15

But we are not sure about this. So that is why i am writing to know if this is true or not. Regarding the fee $67 which you are supposed to send earlier, I tried letting him know of the required fee he said that i should give him information to send the $67 so that we can update the payments then send the mtcn numbers to him since you are not alive again.

Please this fund is not something we could just make any silly mistake or sending it to the wrong person because the money is huge amount of money $2.500 000,00USD. So this man is getting us confusing on what he is saying.

I instantly emailed my brother (who does not live in AL) to ask him if he told them I am dead since 3 days ago. He confessed he did, that disloyal cur.

He got greedy when he saw the "$2.500 000,00USD." I was getting confusing trying to figure out exactly what this amount is. We see often here and on JJ exactly the kind of people who would rush to WU and send the 67$.

[PrincessPurrsALot]

Litigants,

We are yet  again getting far afield from the episodes.  General talk can head to the Small Talk thread.  Don't make us have to trap you in a hallway with Levin.

[VartanFan]

The criminal beatdown defendant brother was only 25.  25!!!  

Even though both of the women in the Rikers bail case were stunningly horrendous, I will give credit to the plaintiff who was able to keep it together and not interrupt or flip out.  I mean, she definitely had attitude but when JMM told her to keep quiet, she did.  When she first started her story, I though we were going to see her fly across the aisle and rip the D's face off.  Not that she shouldn't have because that women was an awful, awful person and I hope the P does go after the bail bondswoman.  Do you think she could have also gotten damages?  

[meowmommy]

2 hours ago, PrincessPurrsALot said:

Don't make us have to trap you in a hallway with Levin.

OMG, you know exactly how to hurt us!!!!

[AngelaHunter]

3 hours ago, PrincessPurrsALot said:

Don't make us have to trap you in a hallway with Levin.

I'm sorry! Please accept my abject apologies. I promise I'll never do it again, but please - no Levin! That would be cruel and unusual punishment.  "PUNISHER? HE HARDLY KNEW'ER!"

2 hours ago, VartanFan said:

I will give credit to the plaintiff who was able to keep it together and not interrupt or flip out.  I mean, she definitely had attitude but when JMM told her to keep quiet, she did. 

Maybe getting her ass put on Riker's Island for five months jarred loose some previously unused brain cell and she learned her lesson? I'd like to think so, but I doubt it.

[meowmommy]

9 minutes ago, AngelaHunter said:

That would be cruel and unusual punishment.  "PUNISHER? HE HARDLY KNEW'ER!"

I always thought the stories about someone's drink being spewed through their nose onto their computer were apocryphal, but now I'm here to tell you they're not!

[AngelaHunter]

23 minutes ago, meowmommy said:

through their nose onto their computer were apocryphal,

Definitely real. It's happened to me more than once - I swear it true but I have no evidence with me at this moment - usually while reading comments on this and the JJ forum.

Could we all chip in (I'll put it on my CC and you can all reimburse me later) and get someone to walk up to ShortAss Levin on the sidewalk and smash a pie in his fugly face? We can use shaving cream, since wasting whipped cream on that wee turd would be a damned disgrace.

[DoctorK]

2 hours ago, AngelaHunter said:

get someone to walk up to ShortAss Levin on the sidewalk and smash a pie in his fugly face

I have more serious things to do to him in order to improve the gene pool and raise the global IQ by a few points, but that is just me.

[AngelaHunter]

37 minutes ago, DoctorK said:

I have more serious things to do to him in order to improve the gene pool and raise the global IQ by a few points

OH, me too, but they would all be felonies.

[meowmommy]

1 hour ago, AngelaHunter said:

OH, me too, but they would all be felonies.

Murder?  He hardly KNEW her!

[CrazyInAlabama]

So mommy dearest told her idiot, obviously future Oscar and Emmy candidate actress daughter to sue for almost $10,000 for finger nail damage, lost acting jobs, and because what she wanted for her nails cost her $32 instead of $22?    What a couple of loons.    The daughter looked like the old ventriloquist shows, where every time the daughter said something, the mother's lips moved.     I hoped Judge Milian would kick mom out, and punch the daughter in the nose.    She was suing for tiny little cut that healed long ago, and then blamed a couple of scratches on her nail surface on the nail salon, however, she came to court with fake gel nails she had done since, so she was just there for the money, and the publicity, and it was all mommy's idea.   Doug had a lot of fun with Mom in the halterview, and she tried to blast the judge on her poor baby's pain and suffering.    Somehow, I doubt that we'll see Miss idiot on anything professionally, because she can't even talk for herself.     I suspect the entire case was to get publicity, and hopefully the money.    Unfortunately, the $32 that the plaintiff received was nothing compared to the stupidity of the plaintiffs, and I'm guessing it squashed any career prospects the daughter had.  

It just started, but the woman who got a restraining order against a handyman for house damage from Hurricane Irma is nuts.   And she's not hurting for money if she has a house in Clearwater FL, and she's a snow bird.      She's blaming him for tile damage on her porch, and she thinks he used a hammer to damage her tiles, and interior damage, and that's what Hurricane Irma did according to the handyman.     Unfortunately, her idea of hurricane preparations would have cost her too much, so she didn't do them, and she's blaming the handyman for all of the damage.    She did all of this plus, get a restraining order against the man during and after his son dying.   This raving nutso got a restraining order against the man because he was stalking her, taking pictures of her, and yet the handyman showed the video of her swearing at him.      The woman actually got a restraining order that he was stupid enough (against his lawyer's advice) to sign, so they confiscated his weapons, and left hers at her house.       Or does a permanent restraining order mean the police keep his weapons, permanently?  

He was stupid so he gets nothing, but I hope this case showed the local service people that this woman is a loon, and she's not to be trusted, and will claim all kinds of damage that was her own fault.     I felt sorry for the handyman, who probably supplements his retirement with watching the houses for neighbors (some places in retirement areas like this are 80% empty during the summer), and gets the village idiot for a neighbor.   I wonder if he gets his guns back?   I hope so, because I can see loony neighbor going after him or his family, because she's BSC.   

This is another example of why I would never move to a retirement community in Florida, because the snowbirds are mostly rich, and entitled, like this woman.  

I love the last case, where a man claims they towed his car illegally from assigned parking at the apartment house.   Unfortunately for him, he not only lied to the Judge, but he called her Miss, and we all know she hates that.    His wife's car is legal to park at the apartment, but his vehicle isn't so he loses big, and also make Judge Milian mad, so he's in big trouble.  

Edited September 11, 2018 by CrazyInAlabama

[SRTouch]

California (?) nail salon:  ah, must be my home State - California seems to be the only State with $10,000 max for small claims cases. P intro seems to claim poor Giselle's hand was a mangled bloody mess, yet D says she was happy when she left their shop and didn't complain until three days later. Ah, salon cases - in my mind they rank down around the bottom of my favorite - right around silly seamtress/dry cleaning cases but above dog cases. Even without @CrazyInAlabama earlier post, I knew P's stage mommy was going to be a problem. Seems Giselle flubbed her rehearsed opening statement, and mommy (who really had no business standing at the lectern) was quite the butt-in-ski. Maybe she was there as an expert witness. P had only recently moved to the area, saw an ad offering fake nails for $22, so this was her first visit to this salon. Ah, but 15 minutes into the procedure mommy (yep, baby Giselle needs mommy by her side when she goes to the salon) realises sweet Giselle is not getting the gel nails as per the advertisement, she's getting her nails painted (I actually wasted a good 2 minutes googling gel vs acrylic fake nails). Anyway, part of P's case may be for false advertisement, as the ad that brought her to the salon was for $22 and she was charged $32..... and this is a $9900 case? Oh, I bet she has lots of medical bills and proof of missed work to show us ?.  Anyway, about now MM takes time to tell mommy to stop coaching 21yo Giselle and take a seat - and then 30 seconds later has to again tell mommy that means she can't coach Giselle while sitting, and next time mommy will get the boot. Oops, quick glance from MM at the "false ad" and MM announces that ad is not for "gel nails," but for "gel enhancement"... ok, guess that's a whole different procedure which I am not interested enough to google - anyway, I take that to mean false advertising is out... Yawn.... Quick check and I see only 6 minutes have gone by.... ok, back to manicure (oh, and seems person doing the manicure isn't here - never good when shop owner, who wasn't there, shows up with hearsay testimony.) Anyway, P says manicurist ended up cutting her hands 3 times - and she tells us she still has scars on her fingers a month later... so MM calls her up to the bench. Uh, MM can't seem to find a scar, then sounds like Giselle says there was a scratch in the gel. Anyway, her trip to show her mangled scarred up fingers is a bust - I was waiting for MM to break out her magnifying glass, and sure enough, she brought it out but it only makes a very brief appearance. Well, what do you know - Giselle says she DID go to the doctor.... but the line was too long so she just went and bought some OTC ointment, so no medical records.... but surely this picture of a little scratch should be worth 10 grand.... geez, Giselle better keep her distance from my kitties cuz they often leave bigger scratches just jumping up or down on me. I got a nice long one a while back when one of my girls decided to go for a shoulder ride and jumped from the fridge as I walked by unaware. Ok, enough of little diva Giselle, time to talk to shop owners - remember, manicurist didn't make the trip, but he did sent a letter. Ah, unnotarized, and a typed translation as he apparently doesn't speak English - in other words, worthless as evidence. Time for the ridiculous damage claim. MM says she could see refunding the $32, but WTH did this $9900 in damages come from? Oh, seems Giselle is the next big mega star, but didn't feel up to going to casting calls because of the pain and suffering she was going through with her mangled fingers. Uh oh, for some reason MM brings mommy back up, and as we head to commercial we see mommy and MM arguing the silly damages - I zipped ahead at this point. Ah, Giselle is a winner - of $32 - rest of $9900 dismissed. And, hoboy, doesn't mommy have a lot to say about this ridiculous decision and how MM just wouldn't listen. Love how Doug shuts her off mid-tirade with, "you haven't been to court very often? There's the door, get gone!"

handy neighbor: silly case where P did some handyman work for his neighbor, then gets blamed for hurricaine Irma damage. Says she claimed he was stalking/harrassing him, got cops and lawyers involved, and he figures the mess cost him 5 grand. Her intro has him sneaking around taking pictures of her, putting glue in her door locks, etc, so she was within her rights to apply for a restraining order and any cost he incurred fighting it were justified. Like I said, a silly case stemming from a neighborhood feud. Seems these folks are neighbors in a retirement community - P lives there full time and D is a snowbird who only comes when it's cold up North. To keep from going stir crazy, P does a little handyman work on the side - definitely not in it for the money as he was only asking $40 a month to watch over D's place when she was away. Apparently this worked fine - up until Irma blew through. She was out of town for the summer, and he called to tell her that her house suffered some damage. She hired someone else to do the repairs, and things went along as before. Ah, but it turns out that when it's time for her to come down for the winter he has to leave town because of a family emergency - his son is in hospital in Atlanta. Ah, she isn't happy when she gets there - seems there was more damage then she expected and she figures the whopping $40 a month should have gotten a better response from old guy next door. So, P is dealing with son being in the hospital, and later dieing, all the while the crazy snowbird neighbor is blowing up his phone about damage to her house. When he gets home from Atlanta he's greeted with numerous messages on his answering machine about the damages. Over to D for an explanation. She has a plastic bag full of pictures of the damages she blames P for. So, dude is worried about his son, then grieving over son's death, and the crazy woman next door is going on about damage because he didn't earn his 40 bucks a month. Things escalate, couple months go by, she says he's stalling/harrassing her and her says same about her. She decides to go apply for a restraining order. Oh my, this woman IS crazy.. she keeps yapping to MM about damages and has MM yelling over her to prove P did any of these damages and not the hurricaine. Nope, bunch of nonsense (I decided this lady reminds me of the neighbor, Gladys, from Bewitched with her shrill voice)... but unlike MM I have the FF button so I zip ahead. Well, I zip ahead - but end up rewinding when I see a video. Ok, seems P claims D was berating him - she says no way, never happened - and he says I have video right here. Well, not sure it helps all that much she does call him a "mother" but doesn't finish with what kind of Mother and while irate, not the vulgar language he claimed. Also, shows he was on her property - yeah, it shows him complaining about her harrassing him, but he was the one with the camera so how do we know that wasn't scripted. Ok, she's a nut - not sure about him. But, as MM asks, why would a judge grant a restraining order? Ah, when cops arrived to serve the RO they ask if P has any weapons. Yep, sure enough, he has a few rifles and handguns - 15 altogether (may sound like a lot, but really not to a gun enthusiast as different types/calibers are - well - different, with different uses. Dude says he a hunter, and depending on what he hunts I can see multiple rifles and shotguns depending on the game - some hunters even use pistols for hunting, or carry a hand gun in case their prey decides to hunt them. Also, lots of gun range folks enjoy firing different calibers - even using old fashioned black powder.). So, at 6 am, P says it looked like SWAT arrived at P's place. Course cops aren't going to ignore all these weapons when serving a RO, even a temp order. No, to be safe they take his guns and, to get his guns back P has to prove he's not a nutcase. Ah, but when they appear before the judge for some reason the temporary order is made permanent. MM says what I was thinking, D must have lied in her application.... but no, when she reads the petition asking for a permanent order it's basically what we're hearing today - unproven claims for damage - no never pulled a gun or threatened me. Ah, P can't really collect, explains MM, on damages arriving from malicious prosecution when the judge who heard that case read the same evidence and granted the order. So, P gets nothing.

tow case: P claims his taxi was damaged after D towed his cab - says not while being towed but while being backed up at lot. Says now he can't use his cab until the repairs have been completed. D denies damaging the vehickle - oh, and it wasn't being used as a cab at the time.... it was parked in a Permit Only space where he has a contract to tow unpermitted cars - had no permit, so it was towed. Oh, and later tow guy says complex security reported the cab illegally parked - heresay, but I believe it since I already know P is full of it. P argues he was allowed to park there. Says he can prove his can had a sticker, says he has pictures, but when asked to produce the picture he offers up pictures, but none of a sticker on his car - well, there's something on the window, but no way to see if it's a permit or when whatever it is was there when picture was taken (this isn't a sticker permanently attached to a window, but a tag hung from the mirror that can be moved between cars.) When judge threatens to call to find out he says sure call, but when called complex say wife has permit, but no permit on the cab.. Ah, liar, liar, dude's pants on fire... permit only spot at the apartment complex, his wife's car has a sticker, he doesn't, so a legal tow, nope on that part of claim. Oh, and no Uber charges. Now, can he prove tow driver damaged his car making it so he couldn't use it as a taxi. Nope, pictures of damage all over the cab, looking like multiple little fender benders/parking by braille technique... nothing showing when they occured or to suggest cab needed to be removed from service. Right about now time is running out and MM is handed a message saying complex was called and disavowed cabby - dude is out in the cold. Uh oh, now, as @CrazyInAlabama said, dude calls dajudge miss. Case already over but this adds exclamation point.

Edited September 10, 2018 by SRTouch

[Florinaldo]

In the nail salon case, I think that in all probability the loathsome mother enjoys whatever extra income the daughter brings in and milks her "career" at every opportunity for every potential dollar (the daughter seems much too dim to have any say in it), including filing such a ridculous claim. 10 k$ for a few scratches on her nails? They are spiritual kin to the 5 k$ bad haircut guy on JJ last week.

The lady neighbour was a total loon indeed with much too much free time which she devotes to devising ways to make life miserable for other people. On the other hand, the plaintiff was an idiot for agreeing to the restraining order, probably because he wanted to rid himself of her annoying claims (and his son was dying at the time). Couldn't he have asked for a continuance?

The cab driver was another of those litigants who think that by endlessly repeating their lies, they can persuade other people to disregard facts and verifiable reality.

[AngelaHunter]

Two despicable scammers and one horrific, vile hag. Oh, and one vicious Dragon Momma who gave JM the Death Glare because her darling daughter was going to be paid thousands of dollars for some "modeling" job, but simply cannot show up for the job due to the terrible pain, suffering and disfigurement she suffered due to a nick on her finger. I wish JM had asked daughter to show some proof of any previous and profitable jobs she'd had in the past. The Gorgon Mama has some decidedly uncomplimentary comments about JM's competence, intelligence and ability to comprehend just what Daughter Dear truly did suffer, all in the name of fake nails. Doug gives her the bum's rush out the door.

Horrific, Vile Hag - who is so disabled here she must sit but looked pretty damned able-bodied in plaintiff's vids -  blames all the hurricane damage to her home on her super-cheap handyman. 10$ a week? I wouldn't even glance in the direction of the property for that amount of money. No, she has no proof or evidence that he went to her place, maliciously cut wires and destroyed the exterior and interior of her home, but it must have been him. What does a hurricane have to do with it? Hurricanes don't do damage, do they?  Little aside: I used to like going to Florida, but after hearing how so many people there are more heavily armed than the military,(15 friggin' rifles??)  I think I may have to forgo the palm trees and balmy waters for fear of being blown away.

2 hours ago, SRTouch said:

: P claims his taxi was damaged after D towed his cab

How many of you knew before we heard the mostly unintelligible BS testimony of plaintiff that he was all up for a scam? Another one who thinks that "Miss" is just another stupid woman who simply cannot grasp the intricacies of his case or can figure out his scamming photos. I just wish the tow guys could have been compensated for their wasted time and aggravation dealing with this petty scammer who thinks he can outsmart a judge. Duh.

ETA: BTW, did anyone get a glimpse of the freakshow going on with Levin's Peanut Gallery today? Even while FF'ing I couldn't help but notice the one dressed like some horror movie leprechaun. These are your fans, Levin. You asshole.

Edited September 10, 2018 by AngelaHunter

[meowmommy]

3 hours ago, SRTouch said:

and then 30 seconds later has to again tell mommy that means she can't coach Giselle while sitting, and next time mommy will get the boot.

Sounds like the Carlos Ramos School of Judging.

I don't pay such careful attention to all the details--what was the turnaround time on this case?  To go from a cut on a nail to teevee court in less time than it takes a nail to grow out???   I thought she must have been a hand model, but MM asked her and no, just a regular model.  And a not terribly attractive model.

This was a classic nuisance suit.  She should be penalized for bringing such an incredibly frivolous lawsuit.  Might be a record for shortest first case.

3 hours ago, SRTouch said:

Ah, P can't really collect, explains MM, on damages arriving from malicious prosecution when the judge who heard that case read the same evidence and granted the order. So, P gets nothing.

I don't understand this.  I do, but I don't.  But next time, her house needs to be in the path of Hurricane freaking Andrew, or Katrina.

1 hour ago, AngelaHunter said:

I used to like going to Florida, but after hearing how so many people there are more heavily armed than the military

I'd worry more about the nutjobs from Massachusetts who snowbird there.

7 hours ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

I felt sorry for the handyman, who probably supplements his retirement with watching the houses for neighbors (some places in retirement areas like this are 80% empty during the summer)

My block here in AZ is almost deserted.  Summer sucks because of the heat, but at least it's quiet.  When the snowbirds come back, lines get longer, traffic gets worse, etc.

7 hours ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

Unfortunately for him, he not only lied to the Judge, but he called her Miss, and we all know she hates that.

Fast track to losing your case--call MM Miss.

[DoctorK]

2 hours ago, meowmommy said:

I'd worry more about the nutjobs from Massachusetts who snowbird there.

Agreed, I live in Florida and I have no worries about law abiding gun owners, but the snowbirds as a group are a real pain in the ass, non tipping jerks (not all of course) who lecture us about how much we need to change Florida into a clone of their homes. His number of firearms is not unusually large, I am in roughly the same bracket, some are special competition rifles, some are historically interesting items (my pet is a 1941 M1 Garand with original barrel and rear sight (rare because that design tended to fly apart when fired and was rapidly replaced) , and in my part of Florida I have warm weather personal protection weapons and cooler weather weapons, it is all about concealment with various clothing.

[CrazyInAlabama]

I'm wondering if the permanent protection order means the man will never get his weapons back.  Don't even permanent orders have an expiration date?   That woman was so vile, and I'm betting her Massachusetts neighbors have a party every year the day after she goes south for the winter.  

[AZChristian]

11 hours ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

I'm wondering if the permanent protection order means the man will never get his weapons back.  Don't even permanent orders have an expiration date?   That woman was so vile, and I'm betting her Massachusetts neighbors have a party every year the day after she goes south for the winter.  

Good question.  As a legal (and non-violent) gun owner, I would be extremely upset to have valuable belongings taken away from me for no reason.  I looked it up online, and found this:

"If a Permanent Injunction is granted, it will be effective until it is changed or ended by the judge at either party's request, after notice and hearing, or until a specific date set by the judge (i.e., 1 year, 3 years, 5 years, etc.). The Permanent Injunction can require the respondent to have no contact with the petitioner, stay away from the petitioner's home and workplace, award custody, visitation, child and spousal support, and require the surrender of firearms. . . . (SNIP) . . . If you are the Respondent, you will have the opportunity to present your side at the hearing. If a final injunction has been issued, Petitioner or Respondent may move to dissolve an injunction at any time. "

It sounds like the word "Permanent" is used as an alternative to the initial "Temporary" injunction.  Given how horrified MM was that this injunction was granted, I would think that the plaintiff would do well to take a copy of the case on PC with him to speak to a (hopefully different) judge.  

As an old person living in a senior community in Arizona, I am horrified at the defendant's behavior.  We don't have hurricanes here, but are just coming to the end of monsoon season.  Our previously warm and cozy "Arizona room" (a completely closed in porch) flooded horrendously after a piece of a neighbor's meal roof flew off and damaged our rain gutter.  Other homes in our park had NO damage, some completely lost entire patio roofs.  This old biddy sitting in Massachusetts has NO idea what a hurricane can do.  Hopefully, there will be a different judge when plaintiff requests the dismissal of the restraining order . . . and THAT judge will agree with MM that the order should never have gone into effect in the first place.

[CrazyInAlabama]

I'm assuming that they live in the same neighborhood?   

I hope he does petition to have it lifted, and put the video of her into evidence, and shows the PC episode too, and he gets his life back.   I also hope that the next hurricane in that area of Florida centers on one address, and that the local handymen saw this case and no one will check on her house.     I think they film a lot more than they show, so I bet there's some juicy stuff on the raw footage too. 

 It was brilliant of her to do this, go on TV and say she's not back until October or so, and leaves in the Spring.   I hope every burglar in town saw that, and is dropping in even now, followed by the local teens having a party that requires more police than showed up at that man's house.     I think Parkland has everything to do with confiscations in Florida now, and since this case was not domestic violence, I'm not sure it should have been done anyway.    Next time the man should listen to his attorney.  

Edited September 11, 2018 by CrazyInAlabama

[meowmommy]

1 hour ago, AZChristian said:

Our previously warm and cozy "Arizona room" (a completely closed in porch) flooded horrendously after a piece of a neighbor's meal roof flew off and damaged our rain gutter.  Other homes in our park had NO damage, some completely lost entire patio roofs.  This old biddy sitting in Massachusetts has NO idea what a hurricane can do.

That would have been that really bad storm in early July, no?  Some of my shingles were pushed around, somebody's patio furniture cushions are still sitting in my neighbor's garden, and at the end of the street, a huge tree is still on the ground.  The old biddy might not have seen a Florida hurricane, but there have been hurricanes in New England and even tornadoes.  She probably accuses her neighbors in Massachusetts of dumping snow on her roof during a nor'easter.

44 minutes ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

I hope he does petition to have it lifted, and put the video of her into evidence, and he gets his life back. 

And this is where we wish MM was a real judge with real judicial powers, because of course she would have corrected that injustice in a nanosecond.

[AZChristian]

43 minutes ago, meowmommy said:

That would have been that really bad storm in early July, no? 

We're all the way out in the East Valley.  We had two really big storms within a week with no problem . . . but the third one is the one where the neighbor's metal roof segment apparently damaged our gutters, causing rain to cascade down our wall and flood the room.  Fortunately, Allstate has been on top of it, so we will be able to have our gutters and roof repaired or replaced.

[SRTouch]

The wedding is OFF: these two were long time friends (her intro says they knew each other for 40 years) who end up getting engaged once her previous marriage ends. Ah, but found they weren't a good match and called it off - intro says she called him a slob and broke it off. Sooooo, guess being love struck fools knows no age limits - these two are no spring chickens. Case sounds pretty simple... P says he purchased engagement and wedding rings, wedding was called off, D is keeping the rings so he wants her to pay the 2 grand they cost him. Ah, seems her defense is that the cost of the rings is offset by bills she ended up paying when they split... oh, and she says he owes her an additional grand since those bills are over and above what the rings are worth. Oh my, testimony begins with rehashing their long ago relationship - with D talking about what a wonderful month-long romance they had 40 years ago, and how he dumped her.... not sure WTH this has to do with the case - maybe long ago breakup adds to animosity in current breakup - but I guess it makes for a good story. Seems long ago these two had a whirlwind romance, but he disappears as he's a young 20 something afraid of commitment. Now, 40 years later, he gets online and finds an ad about finding your lost love, answers it, and they reconnect. Guess neither of them matured much in the intervening 40 years - within a couple days their passions have reignited, he moves in they sign a lease together, and he is buying rings.... really? These two are having way too much fun telling their story - I'm wondering if they're maybe fans of court TV and this is the story they came up with for their appearance. Years ago - true story - I had a friend make a couple appearances on Jerry Springer. Before his appearance he actually received a couple of suggested back stories to choose from - totally bogus back stories.... anyway, they live together awhile, then she gets fed up and announces she's moving out. Story is like the Odd Couple, she's neat freak Felix while he's messy Oscar..... ok, I'm done with the back story - back to case. Rings are his property - the old "given in contemplation of marriage" deal and marriage didn't happen. Then she comes up with her self help plan, saying while they were living together she paid more than her share of the bills.... uh, no, doesn't work that way. Even if she can show he owes her money, she still has to give back the rings (and with the way jewelry is marked up, she'll come out ahead because he probably overpaid.) Ok, she brought the rings and is prepared to give them back - no problem, main case settled..... thinking even more that these two are just here having fun and wanting TPC to pay for their breakup and breaking of their lease - time for this to be over... ah, but that's not what happens here.... oh, he gets the rings back, but her countersuit get dismissed without prejudice because her figures don't match and she's suing for bills she admits she hasn't paid and can't produce.... I would have just dismissed  - but I'm thinking this while case is nonsense and a waste of time - oh, and D laughs when her case is tossed.

not living up to her agreement: P says she's a licensed skin care lady (well, she used the fancy term, which I can't spell) says she and D entered into an agreement where P was going to provide laser hair removal for six months. She made the appointments, D prepaid, then backed out, protested the PayPal payment and got the charges reversed. P wants the money. D's argument is that P doesn't have a legitimate business so she shouldn't have to pay... sounds like buyers remorse to me but we'll have to wait see what the legal deal is with the licensing is in their jurisdiction - I seem to remember hearing that in some jurisdictions the State Medical Boards require laser hair removal to take place in a licensed facility, not just by a licensed technician. Anyway, this may be more interesting than the run of the mill salon case. Hmmm, P says things go fine first few visits, 4 treatments done and 1 appointment where D canceled. No says D, things did not go fine. Says, yes she purchased the treatment package in Sept, but says P didn't actually have the right equipment until Dec. Says in Dec she received a "trial" treatment which wasn't supposed to count as an actual treatment.... huh? says da'Judge, but you bought the package deal months earlier, so why doesn't Dec treatment count? And what's with P saying she gave monthly treatments Sept thru Dec and now D saying first treatment - the one that doesn't count was in Dec. Somebody is lieing - who bought evidence to show us? Not at all impressed with D hesitating when asked for dates - she did know what she was being sued for, right? You'd think she would have checked and have some texts from Sept thru Dec asking when these treatments she purchased in Sept were going to start happening... nah, she's making this stuff up on the fly and isn'the very convincing. Ok, P has her work calendar, and she at least sounds like she knows what happened when. Ah, and seems these two had lots of texts back and forth - has to be alot when MM says they texted a LOT, like daily texts for months. When MM asks when problems started, both agree things fell apart end of January when D called to reschedule her appointment and P told her the schedule was full so next day was out. Things got pretty nasty at that point, and that's when D reversed the charges - not hearing anything even hinting about questioning the license or legitimacy of P's business, but certainly unprofessional if she was saying/texting what D claims (not sure why D thought she could cancel an appointment with any professional and expect a next day appointment). Somehow D gets into how unprofessional it was for P to be asking for a tip after each session  (huh, thought she claims there was only one "trial" session). More D says less I believe her... and now I find she's a lousy tipper - BOO HISS, half my pizza delivery money comes from tips... ok, MM is getting the same vibe, even breaks into some Spanish when D dances around and gives answers to questions not asked instead of answering what is being asked - repeatedly. Nope, more texts MM reads more it looks like P will win (not just texts, we have voice recordings) - though she does get a lecture on keeping things more professional when dealing with clients and a suggestion for having clients sign in and specify what they're appointment is for. One thing I notice that always bugs me - in one of their recordings, they're discussing when D will arrive for her treatment, and P says she's lasering right then - hey, if it's me, if I'm the client/customer, get off the phone and focus on me - not because of the procedure, just because it's rude to carry on a phone conversation when you're with an actual living/breathing person - if it's an emergency, excuse yourself and take care of it or call them back when you've finished with the one you're with - same thing when roles are reversed - don't be yakking into your phone or Bluetooth while someone else waits in front of you..... Time's about up on this one, so we get a break and I have to FF past Shorty and his street gang. Ah, since both sides agree that some of those prepaid sessions never took place, MM says she considered refund some of those sessions, but she ain't a gonna do it since but now she doesn't believe anything D says as D continues to argue despite MM finding the texts contradict her story. P gets the money. And the question from intro about licensing will never be answered - bunch of hooey as it never came up in testimony. Hallterview more of the same with D continuing her story - maybe someone somewhere will believe her.

'nother cabbie after lost wages: well, actually P is an Uber driver. Seems D rear-ended him - apparently no question of who was at fault, as D's insurance paid for the repairs. Problem is, and reason there's a lawsuit, insurance paid for the repairs but denied the claim for lost wages while repairs were being done. Yeah, same type thing in my part time job delivering pizza - no rental company is going to rent me a car to make deliveries,  so if my vehicle is in the shop I'm at home not working. Problem is proving how much the driver missed out on. P is suing for 4 days missed work equalling a grand... really? Dude says he makes $250-350 a day? Even subtracting gas and other expenses, I'm thinking I have the wrong part time job. Ok, amount of damage kind of ridiculous - oh, and of course MM will waste a bunch of time on the accident even though D's insurance has already paid for vehicle damage, cuz, don'cha know insurance companies love to pay out money. Ok, if dude's car was actually sidelined he deserves something for missed work - just not $1,000. Hmmmm, actually, sounds like insurance was willing to pay him for missed work - but they were capping it at $65 a day, so barely what he claims to make on a bad day (but probably closer to the truth). Hmmm, if MM decided to go with that number, can D still get reimbursed from his insurance or does he have to foot the bill because the company has settled.  When D is asked, he really can't say much except he was told by his insurance company/agent the claim for wages was denied because P couldn't prove what he earned. When MM asks for P to prove what he earns she has same reaction - think it will come down to Rough Justice quesstimate. Dude's evidence actually disproves his $250-350 a day claim - even ignoring the fact his expenses were down when not working - or does Uber pay for his gas? Ok, case about over as time is running out. Yep, MM takes insurance figure of $65/day or $260 total. Course P thinks that's way too low. Still don't know if D can get that from his insurance - if they answered that I must have zipped by the answer.

Edited September 11, 2018 by SRTouch

[AngelaHunter]

2 hours ago, SRTouch said:

these two were long time friends (her intro says they knew each other for 40 years

A case so stupid and boring we had to listen to the history of these ex-lovebirds so as to extend the case to 15 minutes. She's a clean freak! He's a slob! He doesn't close the kitchen cupboard doors! Well, this was the case with my husband and me (I'm the slob) but somehow the lack of closing a cupboard door didn't result in our wedding being cancelled. There was no excuse for this case since it involved the return of the hastily purchased rings which def said she would gladly do. Why didn't she just do it? Why was this case even here? Only positive note - def. was beautifully dressed.

2 hours ago, SRTouch said:

 P says she's a licensed skin care lady (well, she used the fancy term, which I can't spell)

Was it "esthetician"? Not overly professional, is she, with her "This ain't Burger King" texts (she could have at least said, "This ISN'T") but anyway, def is a weirdo and both she and her boyfriend ("Me and him went") who wish to be as hairless as newborns I guess, weren't happy with the degree of acne treatments or hairlessness achieved or whatever. JM gives plaintiff a few tips on how to act in a professional manner. Boring.

2 hours ago, SRTouch said:

'nother cabbie after lost wages: well, actually P is an Uber driver.

I know plantiff was looking to line his pockets with a boe-nanza, but really, when someone is smashed in the back by some stupid goofball baby who just cannot stop playing with his little toys long enough to see or stop at a red light, the person he hits should be compensated to the maximum allowable.

[meowmommy]

3 hours ago, SRTouch said:

Ok, she brought the rings and is prepared to give them back - no problem, main case settled..... thinking even more that these two are just here having fun and wanting TPC to pay for their breakup and breaking of their lease

Probably so.  There's no way either one of them didn't already know she was going to be required to return the rings.  The reasons they broke up are totally irrelevant to the case, so of course we have to listen to the whole stupid story.  With MM giggling like it's all so cute.

32 minutes ago, AngelaHunter said:

Only positive note - def. was beautifully dressed.

Fiancee needs to learn the old rule, after you put on your jewelry, spin around and then remove the first thing you see.  Too many big clunky pieces--earrings, necklace, brooch, and bracelet--in one visual.  She sure as hell doesn't need rings to add to the ensemble.

I've noticed an increase in the number of California litigants.  Have they run out of NY/NJ/MA cases, since it seems it would be more expensive to bring in litigants from California?  Maybe today's litigants just wanted a free trip to NY.

36 minutes ago, AngelaHunter said:

Was it "esthetician"?

Sometimes also spelled aesthetician.  But she also said, "I repair skin."  Wasn't aware that aestheticians were also licensed dermatologists.  

3 hours ago, SRTouch said:

And the question from intro about licensing will never be answered - bunch of hooey as it never came up in testimony.

More than you ever wanted to know about laser hair regulations by state.

3 hours ago, SRTouch said:

Problem is, and reason there's a lawsuit, insurance paid for the repairs but denied the claim for lost wages while repairs were being done.

Sounds like the "lost usage" the car rental companies hit you with, above and beyond the actual damage to the car.  But I could see a flow of new lawsuits if we suddenly decide to pay everyone who's in an accident lost wages for not having a car while it's being fixed.  Or a new line item on our insurance premiums to cover it.  (Cha-ching!)  I assume that the current rental reimbursement rider on insurance policies only covers the insured, not the other guy.  Although the defendant's insurance was apparently willing to pay the plaintiff $65/day.

3 hours ago, SRTouch said:

Dude says he makes $250-350 a day? Even subtracting gas and other expenses, I'm thinking I have the wrong part time job.

Yeah, if Uber pays $30 - 45 an hour, everyone, including me, would be doing it.  Maybe he's driving 18 hours a day.  Especially since he said some days he doesn't drive because he's just too damn tired to leave the house.

[aemom]

Monday, Sept 10:  Two scammers and a horrible person.

 

On 9/10/2018 at 7:31 PM, meowmommy said:

I don't pay such careful attention to all the details--what was the turnaround time on this case?  To go from a cut on a nail to teevee court in less time than it takes a nail to grow out???

It was a month earlier that this all happened.  This was one of the most blatant cases of ka-ching, ka-ching I've ever seen on this show.  Reminds me of the case where the woman had a mole accidentally removed on her face and was freaking out about it.

 

On 9/10/2018 at 11:33 AM, CrazyInAlabama said:

Unfortunately, her idea of hurricane preparations would have cost her too much, so she didn't do them, and she's blaming the handyman for all of the damage.

 

On 9/10/2018 at 5:30 PM, AngelaHunter said:

10$ a week? I wouldn't even glance in the direction of the property for that amount of money. No, she has no proof or evidence that he went to her place, maliciously cut wires and destroyed the exterior and interior of her home, but it must have been him. What does a hurricane have to do with it? Hurricanes don't do damage, do they?  Little aside: I used to like going to Florida, but after hearing how so many people there are more heavily armed than the military,(15 friggin' rifles??)

Good God.  That poor man. I honestly think that woman might be affected with dementia, because there was no logic to her arguments.  The closest I live to hurricane areas are the worn out depressions that sometimes blow a lot of rain to our area, but even I know what kind of damage a hurricane can do, especially Irma.  I can't believe that she got a restraining order.  I'm just speechless.  And she was paying him $10 a week to do all that stuff? Just - wow!

 

The scammer on the tow case.  Nice try buddy, but MM is WAY smarter than you are.  She saw right through your scam. 

[CrazyInAlabama]

Today's was another special snowflake with idiot parents case-

Lady wearing one of those open shoulder tops (I hate them) just bought a former car parts store, to rehab (that wasn't an intentional pun) into a physical therapy shop, had the 19 year old criminal brats next door shooting arrows through the tall chain link fence, I think it's the kind with the vinyl slats in it, against her building and damaged the stucco, plus damaged a bunch of fence slats that are inserted in the chain link fence.     Then her contractor tells her about it, so she watches the video and sees the brats shoot the arrows, climb over her fence, take the arrows out of her stucco wall, and climb back over.  Then the idiots start shooting arrows again.   The father of the idiot, who is probably quite used to vandalism charges by neighbors, and police visits, says he'll fix it himself.   

He's also ignoring the fence damage, but fortunately the contractor fixed everything for $200.00.    Dad of idiot (kid comes by it honestly, both of his parents are jerks too), whines about the business owner's video cameras showing the vandalism and trespassing, and says he's suing for her illegal taping of his property, because he can't walk in his back yard in his underwear, or less than underwear.     This man is lucky he doesn't live here, because the local good old boys don't put up with losers like him and his son.

If I saw him on my video in his underwear, I would sue him for causing uncontrollable projectile vomiting, and eye damage.    Idiot and wife lose, and still are whining about building owner picking on their kid.     

Another thing, the building owner/business owners now have to worry about an arrow hitting people working at or visiting their business.   The poor lady received for replacing the arrow damage to the fence, and building $200.   

My guess is son isn't in court because his travel restrictions from parole don't allow it.    

A couple of old farts claim a 50 year old common wall cracked because of vicious attacks by workmen on the lady's side.     Big nothing, but they are another reason not to move to a place with a joint fence.   They must be going through their second childhood, because they're acting like two year olds.  

Man sold two box trucks to a now former employee, never registered in the defendant's name, or paid for the trucks entirely either.   Then defendant got two tickets, but never fixed the registration either.   Then the defendant has a pending workmen's comp. claim about hurting his hand at work, and a facebook posting two weeks before that about hurting it outside of work in a bar fight.   Another boring case.  

Edited September 12, 2018 by CrazyInAlabama

[SRTouch]

Oops recap late - slept in, then had the tablet lockup on second sentence (fiddled around trying to get it running, started to use phone, then realised I could ask google how to get the frozen tablet to work... so, tablet up and running, abandoned recap on phone and starting over on tablet.

not their baby: according to intro, P complaints to her neighbor's about their sweetie shooting up the neighborhood with his archery set are ignored. Seems P recently renovated a commercial building she had purchased - and sweetie next door figured it was the perfect tarket backstop for his archery - oh, and precious sweet boy is 19yo - so legally an adult. She's not here seeking a bonanza, just $200, the quote to get building professionally repaired. D has a couple defenses going. 1st, he claims he's in the construction business and he can do the repair just fine for far less money, no doubt true as the professional is no doubt charging more for the time to get there then the actual repair. Would have been nice if, as soon as P complained, D was over repairing the damage, but with their contentious relationship she doesn't trust him to do it correctly. From preview clip before case began, the D parents deny precious son is running wild in the neighborhood - from the clip we see MM calling 'rents up to watch video of precious sonny run amok. Oh, and from intro, that's another bone of contention - D claims P is always taking video - intro has him complaining now he can't walk around his place au naturale.  But, the cameras in question are security cameras, his real complaint is not that his backyard is in the background, but that his kid is on camera shooting arrows into the newly re-stuccoed building. Oh yeah, even after MM calls them up and shows them the video, they argue he's just a kid being a kid (uh, no, he's an adult committing a crime which could easily injure someone on neighbor's property), not really doing anything wrong, thought the fence would stop the arrow before it hit the neighnor's building, yada yada..... ah, precious snowflake in destined to end up one of those 60 immature yahoos who is set adrift with no one to handle their business when 'rents die. Future court TV litigant being supported by Byrd or big house resident. Oh yeah, some dead airtime as MM watches 19yo Robin Hood come onto P's property, pull arrows out of building, then go back to shoot them again (sort of negates the argument that he expected fence to stop the arrow.) Ok, long drawn out BS about how P is notified by her landscaper about the damage, she checks security video, tracks down the culprit (since of course D and his kid didn't make any effort to notify P). P is actually way too easy on these people - they seem to think it's fine to shoot arrows which ended up stuck in your neighbors' building... arrows have been killing far longer than bullets, and D acknowledges workers were on the property down range. Had it been me, I would have been calling the cops - not the realtor who had recently sold D the house kid was shooting from. Not sure what else there is talking about for the next 10 minutes - oh, wait, 'rents are going to go on about what an unreasonable meanie P is for catching son in the act and not letting pops do the repair... 'bout now, listening to D protect/defend the indefensible, I'd be wondering if it's too late for criminal charges and thinking about these nuts and whether a restraining order is needed - probably not enough to get a RO now, but get ready cuz these folks are ready to fight for snowflake. Ah, we can also talk about other damage - see it wasn't just a couple arrows in the building - no - there's also 15 holes through the fence (in video, looks like those privacy slats you can put on/through chainlink fences). Oh, and D now wants to argue about that - hey, video is only a couple shots, if sonny caused all this other damage where's video of 15 more shots. Geez, more nonsense, it's not like she's asking for much more than a statement that she isn't going to stand for sonny playing Robin Hood.... I zip ahead as it's almost time for decision anyway. D still arguing as MM gets up and walks out. Nonsense continues in hallterview - nobody was hurt, why is she picking on us, etc... no mention that sonny could injure/kill somebody next door instead of causing property damage.... nope, this folks learned nada - should have asked for more dollars to make a bigger statement. (Finally think I figured out what hubby was holding throughout the case... looked for a while like big crowbar - then wondered if it was a cane - no, as he turns to walk away in hallway I decide it must be one of the damaged fence slats - definitely not worth rewinding to be sure. Oh, guess from Doug' comment, sometime after I hit FF D brought up the being filmed walking around nude complaint says he's a'gonna sue. Yawn, that would probably burn out the camera, you old goat.

'nother neighbor feud: longtime neighnor's have a shared wall for 40years. D had some reno work done - P says her work caused damage on his side - D says not my problem - P ready to fight. 'Nother relatively small claim - he's only asking $700. D says her work didn't cause cracks on his side - wall is old, cracks have been there and not result of her renovation - she ain't about to pay for his side of the wall. Sounds like a yawner - only fun fact from intro is about how D supposedly says she can do whatever she wants on her side of the wall - then at end of intro we hear she wants judge to order P not to do anything on his side.... uh oh, crazy old folks feuding. Ok, when testimony starts we learn not exactly what I was thinking - not a common wall in a building. Not, this is a 4 foot wall along the property line. Ok, no one really knows if wall is on one side or the other of the property line since no one has a survey. Way back when, P added a privacy fence on his side for - well privacy - wall was only 4 foot - his new wood fence mounted on metal posts that didn't touch wall. Well, the fence is now old, and needs to be replaced. She replaced part of the fence by mounting a fence on top of the wall. When he wants to repair the rest the same way she declares it's HER wall, he can't put new fence on top like she did, she wants him to put his section next to the wall like he did the old fence back years ago. Huh? Sounds like it would look better (even from her side) if he just continued her repair. Not sure if he's telling it like it is or it maybe these two even know what they're fighting over. Time to get her side.... nope, I'm lost. Sounds like he went along with her, replaced the part of the fence she didn't already do, then she brings back her handyman and starts tearing down part of the wall where P already did his side. Her plan at that point was to put a couple more rows on concrete blocks on top of the old wall.... still lost, now sounds like after he complied with her request with side portion of the repair, she is going ahead and making his repair wasted effort/expense. Now, from his side fence looks silly, she's happy from her side, and she wants judge to order him now to do anything to improve his side. Ok, time for neighbor counseling from MM... Back to case, both sides being unreasonable and the FF button gets used. Nobody gets what they're asking for - basically because of the first question asked and answered - nobody has a survey showing who owns the wall, so neither side can make the other pay for repairs or stop the other from making repairs. Big waste of time.

silly veeehickle sale: P says he sold two commercial box trucks to D - D still owes money on the purchase - and to make things worse, trucks still registered to P a year later, and D has been racking up tickets which are coming back to P. Suing for $875 (geez, bunch of low money cases today) D says whole thing a bunch of nonsense. Says original price was discounted because one truck needed repairs. Admits he received 2 tickets (P has evidence of 4), but when he tried to pay P for the tickets he was refused. D says things went south because he was an employee of P, filed a Workers Comp claim, and now vindictive P is trying to muddy the water. Uh, maybe the Workers Comp case has something to do with why D doesn't want trucks in his name. Hmmmm, turns out D used the trucks about a year before bothering to make the trip to DMV and get them registered. Seems P was turning business over to a son, D was an employee at time trucks were sold, just wasn't much urgency to get the last $500 of money owed. Ah, then six months later D quits - still owing $500 - files the Workers Comp claim - is using the trucks and getting tickets on P's registration. P understandably miffed when D starts dodging get him and ends up filing this case. Unless D can show something about the $500 being discounted, he owes it since he admits that was the original deal. Tickets and any late fees - D has to pay the ticket plus penalties, but can skate on penalties if he proves he offered to pay before they were assessed and P refused. Uh, did I mention this was a silly case. D doesn't help his case much. He argues the purchase price, but agrees he still owed $500. Says after having and using trucks for two months, they renegotiated the price and the final  $500 was forgiven (P shaking his head and has hand up). Ok, up to D to prove - which he can't. We waste some time on Workers Comp claim - MM has nothing to do with that case except as potential reason for P to go back on his gift forgiving what D admits was owed. Actually, even though it has little to do here with this case - it's kind of fun to hear about. Apparently, at least according to P, dude got into a bar fight and posted on FB that his hand was hurt.... then filed the claim claiming his hand injury happened on the job - oh, and claim still ongoing, and D has missed multiple meetings attempting to settle the claim. Hoboy, then we get to the tickets. When MM asks why he didn't register the truck, he tells us P said not to worry about getting the tag switched - and let's slip he didn't even have a license. Uh, really, P apparently has a 30 year successful business going - has 20 similar vehicles on the road and these two were available after P pulled them from use and replaced them. And we're expected to believe he willingly let an unlicensed driver buy them and use them under P's business name (either uninsured or still insured by P no doubt). Ok, possible if P is a lousy, fly by seat of pants type - nah, nope, not believing it for a second. Oh well, times about up - little rant from MM about D kicking gift horse P in the mouth. Hmmm only problem with P's case is that evidence shows D owes $800, and I think he's asking for $875... not sure where the other $75 came in. Doesn't matter, he gets $800 he can prove.

Edited September 12, 2018 by SRTouch

[AngelaHunter]

57 minutes ago, SRTouch said:

not their baby: according to intro, P complaints to her neighbor's about their sweetie shooting up the neighborhood with his archery set are ignored.

I couldn't understand much of what defs said, but it was nice that Daddy Grandpa was schooling JM on the law concerning security cameras, because what if he's striding around in his tighty whities? I kind of doubt plaintiffs were hanking for some footage of that.  Poor baby boy, who is only 19 - what's wrong with him going out there and shooting random arrows around? Boys will be boys. At the start of this I thought the "kid" was maybe 12 and was wondering what the hell he was doing with the bow and arrow. Mommy was typical, "Oh my sweet boy! Why are picking on him?" Never mind that "My son, My son" was vandalizing other peoples' property, and didn't have the guts to even apologize or pay for his damage. Let Mommy and Grandpa cover for him. Robin Hood didn't have the cojones to appear here today. Guess he couldn't get time off from his important job.

1 hour ago, SRTouch said:

'nother neighbor feud: longtime neighnor's have a shared wall for 40years. D had some reno work done

I couldn't make heads nor tails of this nonsense, so gave up.

1 hour ago, SRTouch said:

Apparently, at least according to P, dude got into a bar fight and posted on FB that his hand was hurt....

A 34-year old man and father who is proud to have the world see him acting like a fool - fighting in a bar! - (maybe he thinks that's really macho!) and then be shown up as a liar and deadbeat here. That's something you'd expect from some foolish 18-year old. Didn't P. say he helped D pay his child support? And I have to wonder why on earth P. thought D. would pay him what he owed, considering he doesn't even support the kids he made, but hey, going to bars is expensive.  Plaintiff says he's been in business for 30 years and maybe this is the first time one of his employees shafted him, but I hope he never extends himself again this way for shifty ingrates.

[Cobalt Stargazer]

12 minutes ago, AngelaHunter said:

I couldn't understand much of what defs said

Daddy Grandpa and Wife both had accents of some kind, I want to say German but I can't really place it. I'd like to say it's nice that he offered to fix the plaintiff's fence, but they're not apologetic at all and the idiot son isn't even there. MM noted that the defendant seemed to think the plaintiff was obligated to let him repair the damage because it was going to cost all of two hundred dollars. For a professionally done job by a contractor, that's not bad, but Daddy Grandpa's indignation over the whole thing was just ridiculous. Did they ever explain why the son wasn't there?