The People's Court - General Discussion

[SRTouch]

10 hours ago, Florinaldo said:

She shrugged off every example of damage as if they were all part of everyday life to be expected in any apartment she lives in. A hard lesson for the landlord, but I bet it will be a lasting one and that he will not make the same mistakes again. At least he got some money awarded to him.

Looking at the pix brought back memories of when I used to work for an apartment complex. Somehow, my job painting apartments when people moved out morphed into being the first to enter the apartment. Yes this woman was truly disgusting, but far from the worst I saw. Thing is, she really doesn't see the filth and grime - it's just the way she lives and brought up her children.

Edited April 25, 2020 by SRTouch

[AngelaHunter]

11 hours ago, SRTouch said:

 Yes this woman was truly disgusting, but far from the worst I saw.

That's for sure. Every time I need motivation to clean something in my house, I watch a  few minutes of "How Clean is Your House" on YT and before I know it, I've dug out my hand steamer and start blasting away. 😏

I think it was more her attitude than anything else that was disgusting. Turning that clean, lovely place into a slum and giving that "So what?" shrug was the worst part.

[AZChristian]

42 minutes ago, AngelaHunter said:

I think it was more her attitude than anything else that was disgusting. 

"How did the bathroom mirror break?"

"I just closed the cabinet door and it shattered."

No, Pig . . . you SLAMMED the cabinet door (which belonged to someone else) and it shattered.  You didn't report it to the landlord because (1) you didn't care, or (2) you knew it was your fault and you didn't want to have to pay for the repair.  That is NOT normal wear and tear.

I'm 73 years old and have NEVER had a bathroom mirror break when I simply closed the door.

[SRTouch]

1 hour ago, AZChristian said:

I'm 73 years old and have NEVER had a bathroom mirror break when I simply closed the door.

Yeah, but how many times have your doors fallen off the hinges? I still haven't figured out the melted microwave.......

[AZChristian]

3 minutes ago, SRTouch said:

Yeah, but how many times have your doors fallen off the hinges? I still haven't figured out the melted microwave.......

Mr. AZC and I were talking about it yesterday.  We had gone out on the patio to watch a "traveling karaoke" event going past in our senior community.

We had gone back into the house while waiting, and I went back outside first.  When he came out, he said "It's a good thing I checked the doorknob before closing the door when I came out.  You had turned the lock knob on the back of the door, and we might have been locked out."

I responded, "No problem.  We'd just do like that lady on People's Court and kick the door in."

He said, "Or we could just go get the key we have hidden in case we accidentally lock ourselves out."

But we just tend to think ahead like that.

[AngelaHunter]

2 hours ago, SRTouch said:

I still haven't figured out the melted microwave.......

It seems the heat went out in the place so she turned up the oven, probably to 450, and left the oven door open. I guess the microwave is over the stove, heat rises and it got melted. *shrug*.

My mother used to turn on the oven to warm the kitchen because we lived in a rented place with virtually no insulation in an area where it gets to minus 25-30 but she made sure she didn't put anything that could melt over or in front of it. Not really a complicated concept. 

3 hours ago, AZChristian said:

have NEVER had a bathroom mirror break when I simply closed the door.

Never, but maybe you all weren't rampaging around, fighting like wild beasts, ripping doors off hinges, smashing holes in walls, breaking cabinets and shattering mirrors?

[AZChristian]

1 hour ago, AngelaHunter said:

Never, but maybe you all weren't rampaging around, fighting like wild beasts, ripping doors off hinges, smashing holes in walls, breaking cabinets and shattering mirrors?

And in a house where five children were raised, not ONE of us ever scribbled on the walls.

[patty1h]

The virus has affected the setup of the show - Harvey is not standing on the street surrounded by a group of fans who he can banter with during the commercial breaks.  Instead, he's on camera in his home(?) as he comments on the cases.   I wonder if we'll get to the point the cases are done 1) in an empty courtroom and the litigants wear masks as they face the judge or will they 2) set up video cameras and train them on the people involved, talking from different rooms, while JM sits back in her chambers.  I know there are actual courts set up like that - usually when the person is behind bars already and they speak to the judge via remote setup.   

Last scenario is the show just goes to reruns until it's safe to have groups in enclosed places again.

[Silver Raven]

I had to laugh at the guy who wanted to appeal the ruling.  I guess he hasn't read the contract he signed.

[Maverick]

 The courtroom part is ready-made environment.  Except for Douglas collecting something from a litigant, all parties are generally separate.  You just have to eliminate the gallery.  The hallterviews would be a problem, which is a shame because Doug gets some good snark.  It's so close to the end of the season though I'm sure there won't be anything new until at least the fall. 

[patty1h]

2 minutes ago, Maverick said:

It's so close to the end of the season though I'm sure there won't be anything new until at least the fall. 

If I recall, JJ and maybe TPC, participate in May sweeps, where they roll out all new content for the month and use the ratings to gauge what they're going to charge the sponsors for commercials.  If that's the case, TPC may have 30 days of new shows ready to go.  I guess we'll see how that pans out.

[callie lee 29]

2 hours ago, patty1h said:

The virus has affected the setup of the show - Harvey is not standing on the street surrounded by a group of fans who he can banter with during the commercial breaks.  Instead, he's on camera in his home(?) as he comments on the cases.   I wonder if we'll get to the point the cases are done 1) in an empty courtroom and the litigants wear masks as they face the judge or will they 2) set up video cameras and train them on the people involved, talking from different rooms, while JM sits back in her chambers.  I know there are actual courts set up like that - usually when the person is behind bars already and they speak to the judge via remote setup.   

Last scenario is the show just goes to reruns until it's safe to have groups in enclosed places again.

Harvey is in the same room in his house he's doing TMZ from. Different lighting though. This is brighter, more like daylight.

[AngelaHunter]

First case was certainly not an original scenario but I found it quite interesting. 50-year-old letch goes to Columbia, finds 28-year-old sweet young chiquita on line there, and a long-distance romance ensues. Not all long distance though, since it seems he jets of to Colombia three or more times  a year to get some sugar. I guess no really young, attractive women in the US want him. He's kind of repulsive - nasty, sarcastic and abrasive. He tells himself his long-distance girlfriend is enamoured with him, just cuz he's so irresistable.  Finally he gets her the magic visa to come be his love. They get married. He's now 60 and she's 38. I guess he's not as irresistable as he thought since his new bride won't sleep in the bedroom with him. I have a feeling he might snore like a chainsaw. He decides she needs to go work to help pay the bills. She does so, getting a job as a bartender. But, she starts making friends and I guess he's not crazy about that, in the way of many insecure and/or older, unattactive men who get mail-order brides and expect them to be subservient and isolated from everyone. I guess he didn't get the memo that this romance is essentially a business deal.

And then we get police and restraining orders and guns and knives and bigamy (it seems the blushing bride already has a husband back in Colombia). but there's no way to know who's lying about all that. Anyway what he wants is for her to pay for a car on which he took out a loan in his name to get for her. It all boils down to JM informing him he needs to bring this up in the impending divorce.  Plaintiff? You want a pretty woman young enough to be your daughter, that's fine if you want to be realistic about the arrangement. Prince Charming you are not.

I had to note that it's revealing that def, in spite of being new to the country and not highly proficient in English managed to go out and get a job, when the majority of able-bodied litigants we see here are not able to do any job of any kind at all in many years.

Then we had a boring, douche-y type suing for the return of his whole 150$ - apparently very under-priced - for Bow Flex weights because there was something wrong with the used set he bought from def on FB. I just looked and saw a used set for about 1K. He whines to def about it 6 days later, even though he said he tried them before buying. He's suing for "harrassment" as well. JM gives yet another speech to explain to him what "As is" means, and gives him nothing. He informs Doug that he won't buy anything from FB ads anymore. Lesson learned, you twerp.

2 hours ago, patty1h said:

Instead, he's on camera in his home(?) as he comments on the cases. 

Levin might need to change the lighting in his lair. His close-ups made me gasp and recoil in my chair.

[Taeolas]

Most likely the cases have all been filmed months ago (pre pandemic) but Harvey's commentary is done closer to airing when they've pieced the eps together. That's how Harvey knows what case is coming up next and what the results are. 

They probably have enough in the can to get through the month now (hopefully) but after that who knows when we get new stuff. 

 

*Edit* And yeah Harvey needs to back up at least 1 metre from the camera, if not more. Preferably I'd like him to back up all the way off camera but at least get away from the super High Def closeup of his face. 

Edited April 27, 2020 by Taeolas

[Maverick]

 What is TMZ even reporting on? There's no celebrities to be accosted at airports and restaurants. 

 The guy in the divorce case was definitely a deluded cliche, but I didn't find either party believable or sympathetic. 

 I couldn't believe the barbell case took up half the show.  It was very clear cut.  I can't believe those things cost a grand used.  Knowing that, I'm guessing the seller knew they were effed up and was hoping to pawn them off on some dope too dumb to test them. 

[Broderbits]

19 minutes ago, Taeolas said:

They probably have enough in the can to get through the month now (hopefully) but after that who knows when we get new stuff. 

I checked ahead and my on-screen guide says next week is new.

I sat through the 1st case(low-rent Modern Family Jay & Gloria) waiting to hear about the bigamy, but sadly it was just a tease. Bait and switch!

[CrazyInAlabama]

Next week is the start of ratings sweeps month, (February, May, and November) where ratings are collected for every channel, 24/7.     The syndicated shows like TPC will run as many new episodes as they have available. 

I saw the rerun of the drama queen with the shattered shower door case, and had to turn it off when I realized which one it was.     It might have been a defective shower door, the way it was installed, or else the homeowners hit the glass, or dropped something that hit it just right, and boom it was gone.   

I loathed the husband of shower door woman, but I really hated her and her 'poor little me, can't do anything without being rescued by the husband' story. 

Edited April 28, 2020 by CrazyInAlabama

[AngelaHunter]

1 hour ago, Taeolas said:

And yeah Harvey needs to back up at least 1 metre from the camera, if not more. Preferably I'd like him to back up all the way off camera but at least get away from the super High Def closeup of his face. 

That's pretty harsh. Oh, wait. No, it isn't:

 

 

[Guest]

3 hours ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

I saw the rerun of the drama queen with the shattered shower door case, and had to turn it off when I realized which one it was.     It might have been a defective shower door, the way it was installed, or else the homeowners hit the glass, or dropped something that hit it just right, and boom it was gone.   

Wasn’t she sickening?  

Either she’s mentally deficient or she’s doing a poor imitation of Ted Baxter’s wife from the old Mary Tyler Moore show.   Georgette.  And the way JMM was yammering about her pedicure.  Holy cats!!  I don’t like feet. I certainly don’t like other people’s feet and we had to look at pictures of her pedicured dogs not once but twice.  Lord Almighty.  I couldn’t turn my head fast enough.

And the Dashing Romeo and his Fair Maiden case....I immediately thought of the Dateline episode where the exact same scenario occurred except the husband chopped the Russian wife into bite-sized pieces and scattered the chunks all over town.

She’d better pack her bags, leave the home and get away fast.  Not saying he’d do that but divorces get rough and I wouldn’t take any chances.  

On a side note I was just mentioning to my husband that it’s fortunate we’re not only married but also that we like each other...being quarantined ain’t easy but can you imagine being quarantined with someone so unhinged that you feel it’s necessary to sleep with a knife under your pillow.

I lead a quiet, uneventful, no drama life.  And I like it that way.

Edited April 28, 2020 by PsychoKlown

[AZChristian]

11 hours ago, PsychoKlown said:

On a side note I was just mentioning to my husband that it’s fortunate we’re not only married but also that we like each other...being quarantined ain’t easy but can you imagine being quarantined with someone so unhinged that you feel it’s necessary to sleep with a knife under your pillow.

I lead a quiet, uneventful, no drama life.  And I like it that way.

Amen, sister.  Our idea of excitement these days is doing our Walmart food shopping online and waiting for the appointed time to go pick it up.  It's like Christmas when we bring the stuff into the house, wipe it all down with Clorox wipes, and put it away.  Par-TAY!

[Florinaldo]

I have said before that HL's segments would benefit from dropping the peanut gallery and focusing on his legal opinion and analysis. The rubes rarely contribute anything relevant and are moslty taking an uninformed shot in the dark when answering his questions.

Whereas like him or not, his advice is generally sound and potentially useful. It's often just common sense, but that is precisely the quality which is sorely lacking in so many of the show's litigants. I doubt however that most of them would have the intelligence necessary to understand them and to put them into practice. On the other hand, the viewers could make use of them.

Yesterday's episode proved my point.

[AZChristian]

2 hours ago, Florinaldo said:

I have said before that HL's segments would benefit from dropping the peanut gallery and focusing on his legal opinion and analysis. The rubes rarely contribute anything relevant and are moslty taking an uninformed shot in the dark when answering his questions.

So many of the peanut gallery folks lately seem to have accents, as though they're just here on vacation.  Laws are different in other countries, so . . . not to sound mean . . . but the opinions of folks from elsewhere are just fluff in this situation.

[callie lee 29]

2 hours ago, Florinaldo said:

I have said before that HL's segments would benefit from dropping the peanut gallery and focusing on his legal opinion and analysis. The rubes rarely contribute anything relevant and are moslty taking an uninformed shot in the dark when answering his questions.

Whereas like him or not, his advice is generally sound and potentially useful. It's often just common sense, but that is precisely the quality which is sorely lacking in so many of the show's litigants. I doubt however that most of them would have the intelligence necessary to understand them and to put them into practice. On the other hand, the viewers could make use of them.

Yesterday's episode proved my point.

I actually don't mind Harvey. He gets a little dorky but he's that way in everything I've seen him on so I think it's his schtick (or maybe just him, who knows).  

 

I flipped over in the middle of the shower door case. I couldn't finish it - that woman's voice was like nails on a chalkboard. I did get he awesome gift of hearing her state her thankfullness at having her husband there as she (being a poor feeble female?) would never have been able to get out of the shower herself.  I mean are you just going to waste away and ide there? Can you imagine the death certificate? COD: utter stupidity because she couldn't figure out how to get out of a shower. 

[SRTouch]

Oh my, Judge Marilyn earned her money listening to these litigants today. Another 2 case day.

FIRST CASE: P left items to be sold on consignment. He has a contract saying items not sold after 150 days have to be picked up or will be considered abandoned. 1 item sold as time was running out, but there's a kerfuffle when he wants his money - seems contract also says checks for items sold will not be available until the 10th of the next month.  Dufus thinks he's special, he wants his money NOW! MM is giving him all kinds of leeway (cuz consignment people keep LOUSY records) but special snowflake just can't understand why he is bound by the contract...... he'd still be arguing, but finally MM shouted over him and dismissed the case. Haven't really talked about shop owner - reason MM was willing to let dufus P ramble on was she really wanted to find someway to penalize shop owners - yeah they had a contract, but they routinely scribble on the contracts to alter the terms instead of making notes/addendum. Also, in practice they ignore their own 150 time period, but wanted MM to enforce it here. Lucky for them, despite P's claim to be "continually in touch" with texts and emails, he can't prove any contact for almost a year. Case ran almost double in time, 35 minutes, but was simple contract case where P wanted to ignore contract

SECOND CASE: a cell phone repair shop case - P wants refund for repair which he says fixed nothing. Another shop owner who I REALLY wanted to lose. 1st, owner here arguing a case where he has no first hand knowledge, actually no evidence of any sort. 2nd, dude makes sweeping generalized statement anybody with any experience is going to question - the only reason a touch screen on a phone quits responding is from physical damage (dropped phone). An added issue - phone worked when P picked it up, but quit again after 1 day. Problem is, P picked it up and almost immediately went to Europe. Phone quit, so he says he bought a new one almost immediately...... which, if true hurts shop dude's claim that P used it for weeks before dropping it and coming back for free repair. Really not liking shop dude - but P sort of scattered brained and doesn't have his evidence ready....... again, MM offering a lot of leeway for P to get evidence he should have brought with him - she gives P a week to produce his evidence......... ah ha - Harvey tells us he submited his proof, so P scores a big $140 win

Edited April 28, 2020 by SRTouch

[patty1h]

31 minutes ago, SRTouch said:

FIRST CASE: P left items to be sold on consignment. He has a contract saying items not sold after 150 days have to be picked up or will be considered abandoned.

I couldn't pay attention to this case because I was mesmerized by the creepy face lift on plaintiff Murano.  Whatever doctor did the work needs to practice more on his lip work because those lips were janky.  The couple he was suing reminded me of older Woody Harrelson and any one of the Brady Bunch girls.

[Guest]

6 hours ago, AZChristian said:

Amen, sister.  Our idea of excitement these days is doing our Walmart food shopping online and waiting for the appointed time to go pick it up.  It's like Christmas when we bring the stuff into the house, wipe it all down with Clorox wipes, and put it away.  Par-TAY!

Ain’t it the truth!
 

21 minutes ago, PsychoKlown said:

Woody Harrelson!  That’s it. 

I kept looking at him and trying to figure out who he looked like, then they’d switch to the  Phantom of the Opera plaintiff and that shot me into cognitive dissonance mode.  I was thinking more geriatric Potsie from Happy Days but you Patty1H win the kewpie doll. 
 

I came here earlier than usual for extra special snark. Where’s AngelaHunter?

 

Edited April 28, 2020 by PsychoKlown

[AngelaHunter]

I'm here, PsychoKlown. I save this show to watch while I dine, hoping there won't be anything too stomach-turning.

 

1 hour ago, PsychoKlown said:

I kept looking at him and trying to figure out who he looked like, then they’d switch to the  Phantom of the Opera plaintiff and that shot me into cognitive dissonance mode.  I was thinking more geriatric Potsie from Happy Days but you Patty1H win the kewpie doll.

All wonderful comparisons. He was truly startling, but all I could think of was that he looks like he patronizes the same plastic surgeon as does Mickey Rourke. I saw a clear resemblance and the weird dye-job completed his look. Okay, he was maybe a mixture of Mickey and Howdy Doody? The deer-in-the-headlights defs are business people who wouldn't dream of keeping any sort of coherent records and sounded silly with their "I dunno" defense. Def hubby(?) looked like he'd been lapping up milk out of a bowl. And get a damned haircut. You look like a bum.

So plaintiff couldn't take his busted-up clock back because it wouldn't fit in his Jaguar and he couldn't check on his stuff because he spends the winter in Florida, yet was begging for a 250$ advance to get home? Yes, Jags and FL winters sound impressive but the car is probably 20 years old and his winter quarters could be some fleabag rented room. Since he was trying to peddle his emeralds for a pittance, I think that might be the case. JM asks defs where the emerald pendant is? "I dunno" is again the answer.

2 hours ago, patty1h said:

The couple he was suing reminded me of older Woody Harrelson and any one of the Brady Bunch girls.

"The Brady Girls Collect Social Security" edition.

3 hours ago, SRTouch said:

SECOND CASE: a cell phone repair shop case

It's the case of "Neither of Us Has One Single Scrap of Evidence of Any Damned Thing." What's wrong with hearsay anyway? We all swore to tell the truth.

 

3 hours ago, SRTouch said:

ah ha - Harvey tells us he submited his proof, so P scores a big $140 win

Thanks. I missed that because I cannot bear to watch one second of Harvey "Boiler? He HARDLY KNEW 'ER!"/ "It's the case of  Bye Bye BIrdie (for someone who lost a beloved pet)/"Did the plaintiff wig out?"(quip about someone suffering from cancer)" Levin's ugly mug.

[Florinaldo]

7 hours ago, patty1h said:

I couldn't pay attention to this case because I was mesmerized by the creepy face lift on plaintiff Murano. 

He reminded me of those people who get surgery to look like more feline, perhaps to get closer to their pet. But it may be natural in his case.

9 hours ago, AZChristian said:

So many of the peanut gallery folks lately seem to have accents, as though they're just here on vacation.

Aren't they recruited from people on the TMZ bus tour, i.e. they are mostly tourists? True there often are non-US accents, very often from Australia I believe, but even the people who are most certainly from the US exhibit a general ignorance of practices when it comes to renters' obligations, how binding contracts are, responsibility in case of an accident, traffic regulations and good driving practices, etc.

Edited April 29, 2020 by Florinaldo

[patty1h]

This mother suing a day care provider for $10K was ridiculous.  My gut is telling me that this frivolous case may have been brought by a person with some "issues", going by her somewhat robotic way of talking and what looked like shaved off eyebrows.  She did not accept that she lost the case, arguing with JM all during the verdict and after the gavel came down.

She kinda scared me when talking in the hall - she stood staring into space after Doug reinforced that she's lost and it was tense to see if she was gonna snap or something.

Edited April 29, 2020 by patty1h

[mtbingmom]

24 minutes ago, patty1h said:

This mother suing a day care provider for $10K was ridiculous.  My gut is telling me that this frivolous case may have been brought by a person with some "issues", going by her somewhat robotic way of talking and what looked like shaved off eyebrows.

I was wondering the same thing. She seemed to be rambling alot

Edited April 29, 2020 by mtbingmom

[SRTouch]

1 hour ago, patty1h said:

This mother suing a day care provider for $10K was ridiculous.  My gut is telling me that this frivolous case may have been brought by a person with some "issues", going by her somewhat robotic way of talking and what looked like shaved off eyebrows.  She did not accept that she lost the case, arguing with JM all during the verdict and after the gavel came down.

She kinda scared me when talking in the hall - she stood staring into space after Doug reinforced that she's lost and it was tense to see if she was gonna snap or something.

I did appreciate that she considers anyone she conceived a child with to be someone she has/had a relationship with....... but everything after that was downhill. As far as her case - well she just didn't have a case. Actually, to my way of thinking, day care lady would have been all kinds of wrong to give out info on the baby to anyone not listed on the contact info. MM tried to point out that it was P's responsibility to provide day care with court order, but P was so busy yakking she never heard WTH MM was saying - probably just like she never heard day care lady's explanation ( day care lady COULD have helped thing by asking for a copy of court order, but wasn't really under any obligation to).......... at end of day, all I can think is how that poor baby really got shorted in the mommy/daddy pool

Ok, already talked about first case - other 2 cases kind of silly.

2nd case was guy suing woman who bought his mobile home. Seems it took dude a year to figure out utilities were never taken out of his name and were being taken out of his bank through automatic withdrawal - when he finally figures it out, he's paid over a grand worth of bills for the D - he tries to go to see her in person - she won't come to door - sends regular letter - no answer - registered letter - no answer....... finally takes her to small claims......... case really fast when we go to defendant - she admits she has no defense other than not having the money to pay

3rd case - auto shop case over 25yo hoopty: p takes old hoopty in for alignment and inspection, but tells shop to do bare minimum to get it to pass - shop does exactly that, doing bare minimum so it'll pass inspection that day - hoopty owner parks thing for three months - tries to start it, won't start, so takes it somewhere else - new mechanic finds 3 dry rotted tires, busted brake line, bad suspension, and tell owner not worth fixing - of course owner decides first shop ought to refund the $700 he paid them to get it to barely pass inspection........ ok, if 1st shop was any good, they would have pointed out just how marginal everything was, but they did exactly what guy wanted and did bare minimum to pass inspection....... also defendant shop owner came to court prepared to show that most of what 2nd shop found wrong weren't items required to be inspected by law....... 1) brake line, even though rotten, doesn't fail inspection unless it's actually leaking - so says it would have passed even if rotted as long as it wasn't leaking; 2) tires allowed to be dry rotted until there are cracks over 1 inch long - says only 1 tire had cracks over an inch long, so he replaced that 1 tire; 3) and state doesn't require suspension to be inspected, so yeah, van had bad ball joints, but ball joints aren't part of safety inspection

Edited April 29, 2020 by SRTouch

[SRTouch]

1 hour ago, patty1h said:

This mother suing a day care provider for $10K was ridiculous.  My gut is telling me that this frivolous case may have been brought by a person with some "issues", going by her somewhat robotic way of talking and what looked like shaved off eyebrows.  She did not accept that she lost the case, arguing with JM all during the verdict and after the gavel came down.

She kinda scared me when talking in the hall - she stood staring into space after Doug reinforced that she's lost and it was tense to see if she was gonna snap or something.

Makes you wonder if there wasn't more to baby being taken away than she was willing to admit........ I'm with MM, I find it hard to believe her story of why she was denied contact by courts/child protective services and sole custody was granted to daddy (both parents have priors) - I gotta wonder what the previous court considered that P didn't share today

[AngelaHunter]

2 hours ago, patty1h said:

This mother suing a day care provider for $10K was ridiculous.

With her weird speech patterns and vacant, glassy stare, she seemed to be not quite all there or maybe heavily medicated, but she was together enough to set her sights on a big score here. I'm sure this poor, unfortunate child has a great future ahead of her. Her mother is loopy and thinks that "dating"(banging) some guy to whom she's not married and doesn't even live with (and who apparently had no interest in becoming a daddy) is good reason to "conceive".  Maybe it was a bid to hook the sperm donor, but that ship stopped sailing back in the 60's. Both of them have priors for violent behavior and they are so unable to control these violent tendancies that the child must be exchanged at the frickin' sheriff's office. Nice. Very nice.

 

17 minutes ago, SRTouch said:

Makes you wonder if there wasn't more to baby being taken away than she was willing to admit

Yeah, I can visualize this scene. The police weren't there to see what she did, but it has to be more than just a grab to the arm of the baby daddy. Her priors probably didn't help either. Does no one care about this helpless baby who is at the mercy of these two idiots?

1 hour ago, SRTouch said:

2nd case was guy suing woman who bought his mobile home.

Plaintiff is kind of a slackjaw, but def. who seemed to be a perfectly nice, genteel lady could be a bit of a scammer. Yes, a death is certainly traumatic but in my experience, it never excused me from paying my bills.  She knows she owes the money but thought by not answering her door or collecting her mail she could get away with it.

1 hour ago, SRTouch said:

3rd case - auto shop case over 25yo hoopty:

He's "basically" the kind of loud, big-mouthed, lame-brained, meat headed, Archie Bunker-ish type that I "basically" can't stand. Get some band-aids on your quarter-century old POS van and then if three months down the road you find out it's rotting from the inside out, sue the mechanic who worked on the old heap. The dinosaur is trying to die! Let it!

[Guest]

The above comments about today’s episode are quite accurate.  I’ll add a few meaningless ramblings but I think the group really nailed this one....

10 grand.  Really?  If you ignore the googly eyes her skin was absolutely flawless.  She had a beautiful ‘ensemble’ as my Nana used to say, pearls and very nice makeup.  Too bad she was prone to angry outbursts and that whole vacant look.  I missed her encounter with Doug because a piece of carrot went under the chair and I had to stretch out on the carpet to reach back far enough.   I also found a knitting marker while I was under there - doggone thing has been eluding me since 2018.

Second case.  I really, really disliked the old scammer bag.  First of all, admit it Toots, that you didn’t have the money to pay...mentioning your deceased son as an attempt for sympathy did not do it for me.  And you, you old goat - maybe your BINGO friends won’t tell you but I will...your hair is way too dark.  You’re what?  Pushing 80?  No one believes women over 40 still have shoe-black hair so cut it out.  Take that money you spend on a gallon of tar every month and apply it to your own electric bill.  Why should someone else pay?  Get a job.  Edited to add:  My husband, looking over my shoulder reading this said she was wearing a wig.  Even worse if true.  Wigs cost plenty, even those Eva Gabor wigs cost a few electric bills.  Either way, shoe black or plastic hair....get a job.

Third case.  Holy Hooptie.  Let me get this straight...this guy has a van from the year 95 and is accusing the guy who inspected it of NOT telling him that it’s an old van?  WTH?  Wonder if this slug lives in the same neighborhood as that thick-headed guy who sued the car wash because something under his 1957 Caddy (exaggerating, but I’m on a roll) was damaged by the water?  

Where do they get these people?  

[AZChristian]

Thanks for the recaps.  We had our weekly statewide covid update at 3:00, and it took up the whole hour.

Would have loved to see the trailer purchaser/defendant.  Sounds like a real piece of work.

[AngelaHunter]

35 minutes ago, PsychoKlown said:

Second case.  I really, really disliked the old scammer bag.  First of all, admit it Toots, that you didn’t have the money to pay...mentioning your deceased son as an attempt for sympathy did not do it for me.

Yeah, I don't get it. If you know you can't afford your own electricity bills from the get-go, why buy a buy a trailer where you know you'll have to pay them? OR, you can afford them but figure as long as someone else gets stuck with them you'll just cover your eyes, stick your fingers in your ears and chant, "I can't hear you!"? I know if I didn't get my electricity bills deducted from my account I'd be asking about it right away, because it's "Pay me now or pay me later".

41 minutes ago, PsychoKlown said:

 Wonder if this slug lives in the same neighborhood as that thick-headed guy who sued the car wash because something under his 1957 Caddy (exaggerating, but I’m on a roll) was damaged by the water?  

Probably. They certainly sounded the same.

[SRTouch]

'Nother 2 case day

1. tragic death brings feud over property: P's son and D's fiancè of 10 years is accidentally shot and killed in scuffle at party. There was no will, and instead of going to probate a free-for-all ensued resulting in feud over his stuff. Momma appointed herself in charge of distributing his stuff, and is here suing fiancè because she won't follow momma's plans. Fiancè doesn't exactly bother with the legal niceties, either, as shown by the non-running 1990 Mustang she says she bought years ago that she never got around to putting in her name. MM explains to these two that neither one of them is legally entitled to deceased's stuff. Dude has children who should inherit, not his mother or fiancè. Problem is, MM's explanation that case belongs in a probation court seems to be beyond these women's ability to understand. I gave up on watching as fiancè tries to explain away how she illegally transferred title to dude's Harley....... anyway, neither of these two have standing, although fiancè has a better claim as her daughter is one of dude's children. Case dismissed as it belongs in probate not small claims.
2. tenant suing ex-landlord: p is daddy of college boy who was the tenant. D is landlord who routinely rents to college kids. Daddy says landlord exaggerated mess left behind when sonny boy and his roomies moved out and is suing for over 2 grand - really, 2 grand?!? Is that what landlord charged, or is daddy asking double or triple because he thinks it was wrongfully withheld?..... turns out it was greedy landlord who overcharged, but also daddy over reached a bit (apparently he's trying to collect everything -including for stuff landlord legitimately withheld)......... landlord gets kind of testy during decision time and tries to school the judge on the law and she tells him to just stop talking...... MM decides landlord could legitimately keep only $335, and she doubles that in the award so P gets with $670...... oops, forgot to mention best reason to watch - daddy is a lawyer, so lucky MM is schooled in law from both sides of aisle

Edited April 30, 2020 by SRTouch

[AngelaHunter]

3 hours ago, SRTouch said:

tragic death brings feud over property:

Good lord. I started FFing as soon as I heard about gunplay at some party, but each time I stopped I heard something worse. Durrel(?) with all the kids, no marriages, exploding heart (yeah, I always worry about getting shot during "scuffles" at parties I go to), 10-year-engagement, of course no life insurance for these multiple kids, a ONE-YEAR-OLD getting PCP from some druggie daughter or grandaughter who left it on a spoon and Granny has done time for drug dealing. With all that, they're here fighting for the munificent estate of the fertile and lamented Durrell, which consists of a 30-year-old Mustang, which girlfriend left in the seller's name for 10 years - it's never been driven, yeah right, and some old motorcycle. Maybe a dirt bike too? Way to provide for your offspring, Durrell! Anyway, sorry, but girlfriends don't count when it comes to distributing the wealth of the deceased. Ugh. How do people live this way? It's all so gross and distasteful.

4 hours ago, SRTouch said:

tenant suing ex-landlord:

Some much-needed comic relief. Big-time criminal lawyer daddy sounds silly here as he tries to inform JM about deposit amounts and defend his big doofus looks-35-but-acts-like 13 baby boy. Landlord is kind of a kook. When I was renting, many years ago, not once did my landlord barge into my place to clean up after me. Of course I didn't spray paint the walls or leave booze bottles and garbage all over the floor. Maybe because I didn't have a Daddy to pay for me and fight my battles.

[SRTouch]

28 minutes ago, AngelaHunter said:

Good lord. I started FFing as soon as I heard about gunplay at some party, but each time I stopped I heard something worse. Durrel(?) with all the kids, no marriages, exploding heart (yeah, I always worry about getting shot during "scuffles" at parties I go to), 10-year-engagement, of course no life insurance for these multiple kids, a ONE-YEAR-OLD getting PCP from some druggie daughter or grandaughter who left it on a spoon and Granny has done time for drug dealing.

Ah, I must have been fast forwarding while they talked of Granny's dealing and the baby getting dosed with PCP...... not that I'm at all surprised.

[bettername2come]

Harvey Levin commenting from home is even more pointless than usual.

[AngelaHunter]

53 minutes ago, bettername2come said:

Harvey Levin commenting from home is even more pointless than usual.

Today his little home feed froze and I got a 60-second freeze frame closeup of "Gotcher point!"Levin's ugly mug. I think he must be hyper at not being able to shove his little mic in the faces of his usual pin-headed fan club. I wish I had the kind of ego that would make me believe millions of people want to see my face in HD.

[Guest]

SRTouch thank you for the recap. 

I had a Zoom meeting with a client and I heard TPC theme in the background   Do you have any idea how difficult it was to not say to her “turn your iPad to the tv sister so I can see it”     I’ve become spoiled by having my afternoons free, now a few clients want to talk at 2:00.  

Anyway, I  was able to catch Baby Huey and his dad fighting for the rights of every renting American  I wasn’t impressed and by no stretch of the imagination would I ever hire Daddy Huey to represent me in any case  

I missed the first case  Damn  I like when grannies are arrested, the decedent has a Harley and so many kids Maury Povich shakes his head.  You know if that’s the premise to the lawsuit....it’s going to be a dandy.

Thats all I have to add  That, and as a country...we’re screwed.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[AngelaHunter]

56 minutes ago, PsychoKlown said:

I had a Zoom meeting with a client and I heard TPC theme in the background   Do you have any idea how difficult it was to not say to her “turn your iPad to the tv sister so I can see it”    

Is it any wonder I love this forum so much?😂

56 minutes ago, PsychoKlown said:

I  was able to catch Baby Huey and his dad fighting

"Baby Huey" was my very first thought when I saw this big overgrown infant but I've used it in the past (Baby Hueys are getting much too numerous) and didn't want to be redundant. I wonder if Daddy Huey was embarassed at being so wrong at something so simple - thinking he could sue for double the money he got back. Wow.  Don't break the law, folks, unless you want this character or one of a dozen other lawyers - some much worse and way dumber - we've seen here representing you!

[Florinaldo]

Yesterday's two cases felt watered-down, as if they are not editing them as tightly as they usually do; they may need to make the most of what they had in the can before the confinement and are trying extend their stock of cases before having to switch to full repeat mode or perhaps in expectation of sweeps, assuming these are still on the schedule for May despite the special circumstances. Unless they are in the process of adjusting their format to hear cases in some virtual manner, without an audience.

On 4/30/2020 at 1:20 PM, SRTouch said:

tenant suing ex-landlord

Even if he was correct legally, that lawyer managed to look a little foolish, making grand legal arguments that went beyond the framework and context of small claims and overreaching in his demands. Too bad that the landlord was not careful with keeping records and written correspondence because he probably deserved more for the mess the kids left. Also, he semed a bit obsessive compulsive with regards to neatness so I find it very plausible that he did come in to clean up during the tenancy.

On 4/30/2020 at 6:58 PM, bettername2come said:

Harvey Levin commenting from home is even more pointless than usual.

As I have said before, he makes relvant legal points, even if they must appear self-evident to well-informed common-sens poeple (like all of us on these boards).

Too bad that judging from the general quality of litigants on TV court shows, those who could make use of his information are for the most part too dumb to understand them or to simply listen.

Edited May 2, 2020 by Florinaldo

[Guest]

14 hours ago, AngelaHunter said:

Is it any wonder I love this forum so much?😂

"Baby Huey" was my very first thought when I saw this big overgrown infant but I've used it in the past (Baby Hueys are getting much too numerous) and didn't want to be redundant. I wonder if Daddy Huey was embarassed at being so wrong at something so simple - thinking he could sue for double the money he got back. Wow.  Don't break the law, folks, unless you want this character or one of a dozen other lawyers - some much worse and way dumber - we've seen here representing you!

Yes.  You're actually the reason that it came to mind so quickly.  

But...you have to admit if there was any pudgy, doughy simpleton that deserved the title - yesterday's contestant was it.

And there's a chance the practice will be closing down and we've all been sort of, kind of looking for another job in the event it does happen.  Nothing's definite yet but with all this going on it's definitely "one more thing".  Anyway, if I do decide to work independently I must insist that absolutely no way will any sessions be scheduled at 2:00pm.   

I deserve a rainbow too.

[aemom]

On 4/28/2020 at 3:10 PM, patty1h said:

I couldn't pay attention to this case because I was mesmerized by the creepy face lift on plaintiff Murano.  Whatever doctor did the work needs to practice more on his lip work because those lips were janky.

 

On 4/28/2020 at 5:52 PM, AngelaHunter said:

All wonderful comparisons. He was truly startling, but all I could think of was that he looks like he patronizes the same plastic surgeon as does Mickey Rourke. I saw a clear resemblance and the weird dye-job completed his look. Okay, he was maybe a mixture of Mickey and Howdy Doody?

He reminded me of Alfred E. Neuman from Mad Magazine.

 

Both the consignment shop and the cell phone place were both businesses who had no idea how to keep proper records.

I'm surprised that Levin's recordings from home are so poor - He strikes me as very vain and I would have expected him to have a better setup.  I wonder when they actually filmed these episodes because seeing everyone in the courtroom and then Doug interviewing them juxtaposed with Levin's sad-sack quality coverage are very jarring.  It almost makes me feel like he was enforcing the TPC contract to have everyone do what they were always doing, while he would be nice and safe at home.  But I think that would be a stretch, even for him.

[SRTouch]

5 minutes ago, aemom said:

 

He reminded me of Alfred E. Neuman from Mad Magazine.

 

Both the consignment shop and the cell phone place were both businesses who had no idea how to keep proper records.

I'm surprised that Levin's recordings from home are so poor - He strikes me as very vain and I would have expected him to have a better setup.  I wonder when they actually filmed these episodes because seeing everyone in the courtroom and then Doug interviewing them juxtaposed with Levin's sad-sack quality coverage are very jarring.  It almost makes me feel like he was enforcing the TPC contract to have everyone do what they were always doing, while he would be nice and safe at home.  But I think that would be a stretch, even for him.

Could be wrong, but I thought Doug, Douglas and MM filmed in Connecticut while Harvey did his shtick from California 

[CrazyInAlabama]

Yes, The People's Court is filmed in Stamford, CT.   So is Maury.   

Judge Mathis is Chicago.   Judge Judy is L.A.    

[AngelaHunter]

1 hour ago, PsychoKlown said:

Yes.  You're actually the reason that it came to mind so quickly.

Oh.😊

1 hour ago, aemom said:

It almost makes me feel like he was enforcing the TPC contract to have everyone do what they were always doing, while he would be nice and safe at home.  But I think that would be a stretch, even for him.

Not really. Levin is all about Levin. No one else is real to him. They're all just fodder for his bitchy gossip machine and stupid ancient jokes.

1 hour ago, aemom said:

He reminded me of Alfred E. Neuman from Mad Magazine.

But without the smile.

[patty1h]

Anybody could have seen that the defendant in the case with the two veterans was going to be a problem when he walked into the courtroom with that stupid huge banner hanging from his shirt.  No one sane would need to go to that length to make the world known that he was in the military.   

Then he pulls out a toy soldier and a jeep to illustrate his disdain of the plaintiff only being a mechanic.  Then he curses and pulls out thermos and takes a swig.  He makes up that he is owed money for helping his buddy with getting social security benefits.  All of this to distract from the fact that he wouldn't pay back the money he owed.