The People's Court - General Discussion

[AngelaHunter]

On 5/7/2020 at 2:06 PM, SRTouch said:

Car burns up before delivery:

Well, this was entertaining for a variety of reasons. At least no children or animals were harmed in this zany comedy and these two had to be at the top 10 of zany, dumbass, sadsack, misfit kooks.

P buys a 1987 Porsche - I guess he thought tooling around in it might make him look all hot and sexy - for 1700$. At first when he said the def, who has some kind of garage/body shop, agreed to replace the brakes, give him 4 brand new tires and fix anything else needed on the ancient car - well above the purchase price - I was sure he was lying. But yeah, def actually admits he agreed to change the brakes, but not the tires. JM asks P if he can prove all this. "Yes", he replies. "I approved of all that." This set the tone for the case, with P replying in non-sequiturs to anything JM asked him, driving her into a frenzy of frustration. Does he have pics of the car before it got burned? Sure, he does. He hands them up, but oh - they're pics of after it got burned. That's when JM gave up and turned to the idiotic def. He owns the garage, but burned it down when some sparks caught from a Shop Vac he was using on a client's 2002 Xterra.  Insurance? Why no, he didn't have any of that. Why would he, with a business filled with volatile chemicals where other people's property is entrusted to him?

He's not paying for the P's old heap car because it wasn't totally reduced to ashes. The melted headlights, the shattered windshield, the scorched hood? Yeah, so? No big deal. There's a whole lot more nonsense, and plaintiff of course didn't bring the receipts for all the crap he ordered for this burned-out ancient car, but JM gives him the chance to figure it all out after the case. I actually listened to Droopy Dog who said that plaintiff did get awarded 4K. Oh and in the hall, def states the car was already in rough shape, being 22 years old. He thinks 1987 was 22 years ago. Doug tells him he needs insurance. *smirk shrug*.

On 5/7/2020 at 2:06 PM, SRTouch said:

4 grand for leaky patio roof: 

P meets D through his cousin or sister or something and hires him to put up an aluminum awning or shelter or something over his deck. Def does so, but it rains the next day and the thing leaks like crazy because the caulking failed due to the rain.  BUT when P calls him to ask him to fix it, D can't come because P's sister or cousin, Donatia, has filed a restraining order against D. I guess he beat her up. He says with the restraining order and on advice from his lawyer, he can't go to P's house, even though Donatia doesn't live there and this has nothing to do with P. Def worries about being arrested - probably not for the first time - but doesn't seem too perturbed about it here. P doesn't know how much it will cost to get this thing fixed and claims no one will come to fix someone else's work so JM asks D what he thinks the job is worth. "400$" he says. JM says she would have picked a lower figure but 400$ it is.

 

On 5/7/2020 at 2:06 PM, SRTouch said:

furniture sale gone wrong: 

I think this might have been the first time we've seen someone who buys old stuff - from FB, yet - and doesn't get stuck with "as is".  P is kind of an idiot, who like so many other litigants puts her complete trust in the word of a total stranger. BUT D assures P in a text or FB message that there is "No damage" on the bedroom set. P doesn't check anything when she goes to pick it up at a storage unit. It was wrapped up, she was being rushed, it was a dark and stormy night, and she trusted D and all the other usual excuses, blah blah. The furniture is trashed, stained and broken. Normally she'd be stuck with it, but Def's "no damage" guarantee means she has to give back the money P paid. Def, who is extremely "So what?" about all this, collected 475$ from the storage place for the damage and generously offered P 200$ of that, which means she would have gotten rid of the junk and still been ahead of the game beyond the price of the furniture. We know the show pays the judgment, so she really did get to keep that money. P can throw out the messed up furniture if D doesn't come and get it. I doubt she did. It's pretty well worthless. P gets her 600$ plus 17.70 she paid to Paypal and not the bo-nanza she was gunning for.

Edited May 9, 2020 by AngelaHunter
I really need to stop posting while drinking!!

[Florinaldo]

9 hours ago, ThePurpleArcher said:

Poor Harvey - he can't stand on the street corner in West Hollywood and pay the handsome studs to stand around him and flirt with him on camera. (It was so obvious he would pick the under-30 muscle hunks in tight tees to talk to in the crowd.)

I think HL is equally likely to call on the ditzy young women in the peanut gallery, perhaps even more so. He also often asks the more mature people.

If there was such a regular cornucopia of young males in tight shirts in the background, I  certainly would have noticed it. Or perhaps we get the "no-cute-boys" edit in my viewing area. 

7 hours ago, SRTouch said:

Car burns up before delivery:

Plaintiff is so hampered by his missing or injured eye, he had to bring the bills up to his nose in order to being able to identify them correctly. And yet he has a car. Would he be legally allowed to drive it, on the open road where there are other vehicles around, with such poor vision?

[Guest]

7 hours ago, AngelaHunter said:

He looks like Droopy Dog!

 

I was thinking more along the lines of Augie Doggiee

[AngelaHunter]

11 hours ago, PsychoKlown said:

I was thinking more along the lines of Augie Doggie

Come, now. He's way more "Droopy" than he is "Augie."

12 hours ago, Florinaldo said:

Plaintiff is so hampered by his missing or injured eye, he had to bring the bills up to his nose in order to being able to identify them correctly. And yet he has a car. Would he be legally allowed to drive it, on the open road where there are other vehicles around, with such poor vision?

True. Only his nose stopped him from plastering the papers directly on his one good eyeball. What does it matter if he's legally allowed to drive? Having no license/suspended license certainly doesn't stop any of our other litigants from getting behind the wheel.

[ThePurpleArcher]

11 hours ago, Florinaldo said:

I think HL is equally likely to call on the ditzy young women in the peanut gallery, perhaps even more so. He also often asks the more mature people.

If there was such a regular cornucopia of young males in tight shirts in the background, I  certainly would have noticed it. Or perhaps we get the "no-cute-boys" edit in my viewing area. 

I remember when Levin used to hold court in Times Square - outside the Palace Theater/ NY Vistor's Center around 9  in the morning during the spring and summer. Across the street was a well-known male strip club above the HoJo's with beautiful guys in their 20s-30s, and they stayed at the hotel next door to the Palace (worst kept secret in Times Square! LOL).  Anyhow, about fifteen minutes before taping, Levin's assistant would be on the sidewalk making phone calls on his cell phone and within a few minutes say to Levin 'They're coming now'.  Levin would grin from ear to ear.

Sure enough  - within minutes - about seven or eight of the strippers would exit the hotel and join the small crowd of 'tourists' . Harvey would get all giddy like a school girl. I never joined the crowd. When the cameras weren't rolling, he would only pay attention to these guys and they knew to flirt with him and make him turn red.   (I found out later that they would receive 'gift cards' for their participation, though no one else in the crowd did).

Those spectators off to the side like myself, and the tourists who gathered in front of Harvey, would be offered  tickets to that day's taping of the show. The male dancers would leave before the tickets were handed out - they had no interest.  The show used to tape a few blocks away on 5th Avenue, on the top floor of an old bank building. I never went because there were better things for me to do while visiting NYC on a nice summer day. 

[AZChristian]

12 hours ago, Florinaldo said:

Plaintiff is so hampered by his missing or injured eye, he had to bring the bills up to his nose in order to being able to identify them correctly. And yet he has a car. Would he be legally allowed to drive it, on the open road where there are other vehicles around, with such poor vision?

My brother complained constantly about not being able to see, and I went with him to a couple of eye appointments, where he also complained to the ophthamologist about his vision, and she confirmed that it was nearly blind in one eye and had problems with the other.

I became so concerned that I reported his vision issues to DMV.  They make a form available online for people to report drivers who have vision/health problems that potentially make them dangerous behind the wheel.

DMV sent the ophthamologist a form, asking about the vision problems.  At the bottom of the form there were two boxes.  One was confirming that the issues made him a dangerous driver.  The other said, "He's okay to drive."  Guess which one she checked.  

Fortunately, when he found out that his vision problems had been reported to DMV, he stopped driving on his own.

[Guest]

2 hours ago, AngelaHunter said:

Come, now. He's way more "Droopy" than he is "Augie."

You are so right but how many opportunities present themselves in any given day where I can actually post a picture of Augie DoggIe and legitimately say over and over “Augie Doggie, Doggie Daddy” without people raising an eyebrow?

I admit my post was based on pure selfishness.  

Anyone care to liken a contestant on TPC to Milton the Monster?  I know that theme song and am just itchin’ to post the words 🙂
 

 

[AngelaHunter]

3 hours ago, ThePurpleArcher said:

I remember when Levin used to hold court in Times Square - outside the Palace Theater/ NY Vistor's Center around 9  in the morning during the spring and summer. Across the street was a well-known male strip club above the HoJo's with beautiful guys in their 20s-30s, and they stayed at the hotel next door to the Palace (worst kept secret in Times Square! LOL).  Anyhow, about fifteen minutes before taping, Levin's assistant would be on the sidewalk making phone calls on his cell phone and within a few minutes say to Levin 'They're coming now'.  Levin would grin from ear to ear.

Sure enough  - within minutes - about seven or eight of the strippers would exit the hotel and join the small crowd of 'tourists' . Harvey would get all giddy like a school girl. I never joined the crowd. When the cameras weren't rolling, he would only pay attention to these guys and they knew to flirt with him and make him turn red.   (I found out later that they would receive 'gift cards' for their participation, though no one else in the crowd did).

Those spectators off to the side like myself, and the tourists who gathered in front of Harvey, would be offered  tickets to that day's taping of the show. The male dancers would leave before the tickets were handed out - they had no interest.  The show used to tape a few blocks away on 5th Avenue, on the top floor of an old bank building. I never went because there were better things for me to do while visiting NYC on a nice summer day. 

That's hilarious and sounds just like something ol' Harvey "Rubber?? He hardly KNEW 'ER" Levin would do.

ETA: Who wants a blast from the past? TPC from 1988. Even the commercials are entertaining: Danish style solid oak waterbeds for 699$!

 

Edited May 8, 2020 by AngelaHunter

[SRTouch]

Oh my, in a rut here - seems everyday I begin with comment about long cases which should have been edited down  to take half as long - today is another 2 case day

• sleep cap/wrap fail: P came up which stylish head wrap to wear to protect that fancy 'do people spend hours sitting in a salon getting - she thinks it's a marketable idea, and takes her design to D to get a prototype made before going to full production - MM gushes over this 'revolutionary' idea, but I pick up remote and start skipping ahead - D makes prototype/sample, P loves it, invest a couple grand buying fabric and orders more - then things blow up - seems D and her guys take a few shortcuts and don't follow the design as they cut the pattern - pretty simple case - I hate seamtress/sewing cases, so am just looking at this as a custom manufacturing job - P gave D design specs, and a sample made by her regular seamstress (regular seamstress wasn't set up/able to go to mass production) - D failed to follow specs - D breached and, since they cut fabric incorrectly it can't be reused - D gets nothing for botched manufacture and on hook for any unusable/ruined materials -  both sides after lotto money, with P asking more than twice what materials cost and D wanting money for labor to produce the screwed up product and cuz P bad mouthed them when they screw up........ 
• jewelry swapped at repair shop: P says he took his fancy gold chain to be repair when a link broke, and crooked jewelry repair shop swapped out his expensive gold chain for a cheaper one - looking for $1500....... D says P accepted the repaired chain and left with it, then later on made up this story of a swaperoo. ........ yawn...... sounds kind of boring - if P really didn't bother to verify he was picking up 'his' chain and only complained the next day, he'll have to have some convincing proof (or D will really have to seem shade as heck) - MM has 25 minutes to spend, but I have a button that let's me zip right through this stuff - yep, P can't prove his case, case dismissed (did so much zipping, first time I heard D say anything was hallterview)

Edited May 9, 2020 by SRTouch

[Guest]

52 minutes ago, SRTouch said:

sleep cap/wrap fail: P came up which stylish head wrap to wear to protect that fancy 'do people spend hours sitting in a salon getting - she thinks it's a marketable idea, and takes her design to D to get a prototype made before going to full production - MM gushes over this 'revolutionary' idea, 

I suppose. 

I have a shoulder length bob.  Nothing fancy and I wash my hair every morning so I'm not her target audience.  

I didn't listen to the whole case but did the Plaintiff address the "heat factor" of this silk and lace and double wrapped cap?  I think this cap would be like a heating pad on your head.  All I know is that if I put that on my head I'd be hanging off the bed for air.  

Defendants were cagey about the sample vs. prototype.  Simple question - why didn't they make one (1), get the plaintiff's approval then cut.  Defendants jumped the gun with the scissors.

Plaintiff was quite enthusiastic.  I wish her the best in her business endeavors.   Her cap might be a winner...just not for older women who prefer a cooler sleeping situation.  

  

[AZChristian]

21 minutes ago, PsychoKlown said:

Her cap might be a winner...just not for older women who prefer a cooler sleeping situation.    

Back in the "teased hair" days of the 60s and 70s, I used to just fold lengths of toilet paper to about five or 6 squares long and bobby pin it around my hairdo before going to bed.  Worked fine.

Of course, these days, who can risk wasting that much toilet paper?

Edited May 8, 2020 by AZChristian

[ThePurpleArcher]

2 hours ago, SRTouch said:

Oh my, in a runt here - seems everyday I begin with comment about long cases which should have been edited down  to take half as long - today is another 2 case day

• sleep cap/wrap fail: P came up which stylish head wrap to wear to protect that fancy 'do people spend hours sitting in a salon getting - she thinks it's a marketable idea, and takes her design to D to get a prototype made before going to full production - MM gushes over this 'revolutionary' idea, but I pick up remote and start skipping ahead - D makes prototype/sample, P loves it, invest a couple grand buying fabric and orders more - then things blow up - seems D and her guys take a few shortcuts and don't follow the design as they cut the pattern - pretty simple case - I hate seamtress/sewing cases, so am just looking at this as a custom manufacturing job - P gave D design specs, and a sample made by her regular seamstress (regular seamstress wasn't set up/able to go to mass production) - D failed to follow specs - D breached and, since they cut fabric incorrectly it can't be reused - D gets nothing for botched manufacture and on hook for any unusable/ruined materials -  both sides after lotto money, with P asking more than twice what materials cost and D wanting money for labor to produce the screwed up product and cuz P bad mouthed them when they screw up........ 
• jewelry swapped at repair shop: P says he took his fancy gold chain to be repair when a link broke, and crooked jewelry repair shop swapped out his expensive gold chain for a cheaper one - looking for $1500....... D says P accepted the repaired chain and left with it, then later on made up this story of a swaperoo. ........ yawn...... sounds kind of boring - if P really didn't bother to verify he was picking up 'his' chain and only complained the next day, he'll have to have some convincing proof (or D will really have to seem shade as heck) - MM has 25 minutes to spend, but I have a button that let's me zip right through this stuff - yep, P can't prove his case, case dismissed (did so much zipping, first time I heard D say anything was hallterview)

SLEEPCAP:  I was totally turned off by the plaintiff. She was such a show-off in front of the camera. As someone just starting a business, she needs a good dose of humility if she intends to stay in business, otherwise she will be turning off many customers. AS for the defendant, they lose the case for following directions ???? That's a nice message to send out there. "You did it wrong on the prototype so why didn't you just keep doing it wrong?"  That's like telling them, "You went through the first red light without causing an accident, so why didn't you just keep driving through all the red lights?"

 

CHAIN SWAP: Is there one good damn reason why she wouldn't let that sexy guy take his shirt off ? He offered to strip at least five times - and she says no ? WTF?  Meanwhile, in LA - Harvey was drooling on camera. I was, too. I wanted to see every inch of him and his tattoos. BTW, the defendant was guilty as hell. 

[Guest]

 I'm with you about the jeweler.  How did the chain get longer if it is the same chain?  Something mighty s'picious.  I guess JMM didn't want to see his nipples. 

Edited May 8, 2020 by PsychoKlown

[AngelaHunter]

3 hours ago, SRTouch said:

sleep cap/wrap fail:

Wow. The weave/wig culture is spurring innovative means to keep your weave from tangling or ripping out while you sleep. Well, I guess when you spend 14 hrs in a salon chair and pay about 1,000$ you don't want that weave going ratty on you. Hey, when I was very young, I would sleep in giant rollers to take the natural curl out of my red locks, so I guess I get it. I really don't know how the hell I did that. Anyway, I have no idea about the sewing stuff since I literally cannot sew a button on properly, but I always enjoy hearing JM speaking Spanish!

3 hours ago, SRTouch said:

jewelry swapped at repair shop: 

His chain is like Samson's hair. It gives him strength, it means everything to him and he really needs it to feel good about himself. Okay. I dunno, but did Samson's wife rip his hair out? I'd be more worried about being in a marriage with someone who would tear a chain off my neck than I would be about my chain. Those shirtless pics of him with his zillion tats - I'm with JM. I certainly didn't want to see his nipples in person either.

Jewelers have been known to swap diamonds. When I took my engagement ring to have the prongs tightened last year, along with my mother's wedding ring to have a diamond added, I made sure to find a family business that didn't send jewelry out to have repairs done since I didn't want my rings out of my sight. I stood right at the counter and watched the jeweler do the job in front of me. Not saying the def in this case swapped the chain (or maybe he did. Who knows?) but I just like to be careful. If the jeweler I saw told me I had to go wait outside, I'd have been quite suspicious. But maybe there would have a been a good part about waiting outside. While inside, the counter at which I was standing had more rings and I fell in love with another diamond ring and well - sold!😏

1 hour ago, ThePurpleArcher said:

Meanwhile, in LA - Harvey was drooling on camera.

Oh, gawd. So glad I FF his segments. Drooling Droopy Dog is the last thing I want to see while eating.

Edited May 8, 2020 by AngelaHunter

[bettername2come]

Not the target demographic, but the product does seem like a good one. I can see this being some kind of as-seen-on-tv product that does well in the vein of the turbie twist, although I thought MM was weirdly fascinated by it. Maybe her reaction is one of those things that would've been shortened in a 4 case episode.  

[CrazyInAlabama]

My guess is not all of the tattoos on chain guy were suitable for home viewing, or else JMM suspected he was on TV for the publicity for him, and his bod to get modeling jobs or something.   

What kind of good quality, solid chain can be ripped off someone's neck?    My guess it was never a good chain, or solid. 

I didn't like the sleep cap woman, because there are a ton of those out there already.    There was nothing innovative about the sleep cap.    The case should have been dismissed, the defendant did exactly what the contract called for.   I hope the plaintiff realizes that people who wear this will be overheated, and the cap won't be worn.    

 

Edited May 9, 2020 by CrazyInAlabama

[Maverick]

 Gold chain guy was such a douche.  I got a good laugh when he gave the Judge his shirtless photos showing off his overly tatted torso while he tries to smolder at the camera.   Even though that's supposed to be evidence of the chain being different, he doesn't provide a photo with the alleged replacement chain (because it would look too suspicious having a professional model pic with the fake chain and he wasn't going to submit a selfie, no doubt).   Nevermind the fact you don't need a sexytimes pic to prove that.   All you need to do is what MM did:  pull out a damn tape measure.   I was suffering some major second-hand embarrassment when he was talking about how his chain and medallion made him a man.  Just sad.

 The store owner was sketch, but have to agree with the Judge.  If it was so obvious this was a different chain (especially to someone who all but whacked off with it every day) then why didn't he notice at the store.   It's pretty serious to find someone guilty of theft and he didn't have a strong enough case.  He could have just as easily brought in a different chain.

[Florinaldo]

21 hours ago, ThePurpleArcher said:

Sure enough  - within minutes - about seven or eight of the strippers would exit the hotel and join the small crowd of 'tourists' . Harvey would get all giddy like a school girl.

Cute anecdote (although JJ would probably screech "that's hearsay!"). So the main thing we can take from it is that a gay man likes to stand in front of a group of handsome guys. Quelle surprise...

11 hours ago, Maverick said:

Gold chain guy was such a douche.

But he got what he wanted, even though he lost the case: he displayed his naked chest and ugly tattoos on national TV, although only on photographs. I agree that his "I need my chain to feel a complete man", with a comparison to Samson and his mane, was embarrassingly silly. I understand he needs every prop he can use to appear moderately attractive, but there are limits.

It just goes to prove that some men can be as self-centered and over-invested in their appearance as some women.

Which brings us to the other case:

18 hours ago, SRTouch said:

sleep cap/wrap fail:

JM called the plaintiff a "genius" for her invention. Her standards for that designation are disturbingly low. Unless she meant "ingenious" and got confused by the near homonymy.

Those things looked like stretchy kid-size long johns.

The case just proves that in a project like that you need a clear sign-off at every stage; do it electronically if you must, but a physical signature is mandatory for the most crucial phases. Each party was partly responsible for the miscommunication, although I got the impression that it was more the plaintiff's fault because her instructions were at best unclear.

15 hours ago, ThePurpleArcher said:

Meanwhile, in LA - Harvey was drooling on camera.

Not in our viewing area; we got the "no-drool" version. The TPC editing staff is certainly being kept busy with those variant edits for different markets.

Edited May 9, 2020 by Florinaldo

[howiveaddict]

7 hours ago, AZChristian said:

Back in the "teased hair" days of the 60s and 70s, I used to just fold lengths of toilet paper to about five or 6 squares long and bobby pin it around my hairdo before going to bed.  Worked fine.

Of course, these days, who can risk wasting that much toilet paper?

My grandmother wore a bouffant hairdo and always wrapped her hair in tp.

[AngelaHunter]

1 hour ago, Maverick said:

 I was suffering some major second-hand embarrassment when he was talking about how his chain and medallion made him a man.  Just sad.

Reminded me of has-been boxer who beat up his wife but howled that he would never harm his beloved car, only in reverse. Gold Chain Samson, who admits here in front of everyone that his wife tore it off his neck and he had to slink out and pay to get it fixed so he could feel like a real man again. He was "elated"! Yeah, a douche who submissively scampers out of the store when ordered to by sketchy jewelry guy. Maybe a bigger chain and a few more tats can ramp up his testosterone a little more.

[mtbingmom]

Quote

tragic death brings feud over property

https://www.newsday.com/long-island/suffolk/party-fatal-shooting-medford-stabbing-1.33483421

http://longisland.news12.com/story/40775055/police-gunman-in-fatal-medford-party-shooting-faces-judge

https://www.gofundme.com/f/rip-darnell-stink-smith?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=fb_co_shareflow_m&fbclid=IwAR0TXhJX1ac5vnQeu3EBruc1kLZHHDjZcFWxKUErmzwPzfbcoab3M5b2Pc4

[ThePurpleArcher]

10 hours ago, AngelaHunter said:

Reminded me of has-been boxer who beat up his wife but howled that he would never harm his beloved car, only in reverse. Gold Chain Samson, who admits here in front of everyone that his wife tore it off his neck and he had to slink out and pay to get it fixed so he could feel like a real man again. He was "elated"! Yeah, a douche who submissively scampers out of the store when ordered to by sketchy jewelry guy. Maybe a bigger chain and a few more tats can ramp up his testosterone a little more.

Kind of tells us all what a wimp he is inside that masculine body. 

[AngelaHunter]

9 hours ago, mtbingmom said:

https://www.newsday.com/long-island/suffolk/party-fatal-shooting-medford-stabbing-1.33483421

http://longisland.news12.com/story/40775055/police-gunman-in-fatal-medford-party-shooting-faces-judge

https://www.gofundme.com/f/rip-darnell-stink-smith?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=fb_co_shareflow_m&fbclid=IwAR0TXhJX1ac5vnQeu3EBruc1kLZHHDjZcFWxKUErmzwPzfbcoab3M5b2Pc4

This brings to mind the Irish Rovers' "Wasn't That a Party?"

Quote

When you speak about Darnell Stink Smith everyone will smile.

Darnell's middle name was Stink? Whoa.

 

[AZChristian]

9 hours ago, mtbingmom said:

https://www.newsday.com/long-island/suffolk/party-fatal-shooting-medford-stabbing-1.33483421

http://longisland.news12.com/story/40775055/police-gunman-in-fatal-medford-party-shooting-faces-judge

https://www.gofundme.com/f/rip-darnell-stink-smith?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=fb_co_shareflow_m&fbclid=IwAR0TXhJX1ac5vnQeu3EBruc1kLZHHDjZcFWxKUErmzwPzfbcoab3M5b2Pc4

Sorry - not recognizing the name.  Was he involved in a case on People's Court?  TIA.

[aemom]

On 5/5/2020 at 10:23 PM, Florinaldo said:

The usual greedy homeowner who wants an exorbitant amount of compensation well beyond the cost of the limited damage inflicted and even of the fence as a whole. I would have let the 100 $ stand, to teach her a lesson for being so rapacious.

I think she awarded $300, because the D was so lackadaisical in trying to remedy the situation.

On 5/6/2020 at 1:56 PM, SRTouch said:

Yet another two case day - and not exactly riveting cases at that..... as other have pondered, these feel like left overs just biding time til sweeps - problem with that is they may lose regular viewers with these duds - these cases could have been edited down and shown on a 4-case day.

Have we ever had a 4 case day? I only remember 2 and 3 case ones.

I totally agree that they are stretching out these cases to two per day to make them last. It just goes to show how much they are typically edited before we see them.

The shopping cart lady - both P and D were full of crap to some extent, but I was surprised by her wig. We have many orthodox Jews in my city but the wigs the women wear are all the same - brunette, chin length bob with no bangs. I wonder if the wigs are regionally fashion related?

 

I took a couple of hours to sit on the couch yesterday and play episodes in the background while I sewed a few face masks with my very basic sewing skills. They are going to become mandatory soon and I hate the ones that loop behind your ears which seems to be the majority of what's available - if you can actually find any. I'm curious to see if we get any Covid-19 related cases in the future.

[Guest]

14 minutes ago, aemom said:

 I'm curious to see if we get any Covid-19 related cases in the future.

Definitely.

The mantra of "I'll pay you when I get my tax refund" will be replaced with "I'll pay you when my c-Check comes in."

"I paid him with my c-Check for the 1964 four-door sedan that actually only came with three and a half doors."

"She didn't expect no repayment.  She was giving everyone money from her c-Check so I took it"

"I met him laying in the doorway of my godmother's apartment and when I let him live with me because he just got out of a unfortunate incarceration and had nowhere to go I didn't realize he'd take alll my c-Check money for cereal."

"I gave him the money so he could start a pit bull breeding business.  He said he'd pay me back when his c-Check arrived"

"We was getting married as soon as my c-Check came in.  And when he got paroled"

"I bought seven rooms of furniture with my c-Check and she put it out on the driveway and the rain melted it"

[AZChristian]

3 minutes ago, PsychoKlown said:

"I met him laying in the doorway of my godmother's  godsister's mother's fiance's brother's apartment 

Love the prediction of what we'll be seeing on PC next season, but felt this particular scenario needed to be made more specific.

[SRTouch]

1 hour ago, AZChristian said:

Sorry - not recognizing the name.  Was he involved in a case on People's Court?  TIA.

he was unfortunate victim who died of gunshot at momma's party. From posted links, turns out some else at party was stabbed. Momma sued Stink's fiancè of 10 years cuz fiancè wouldn't hand over an old car and motorcycle. MM tried to explain that Stink's property should go through probate and neither momma nor fiancè should inherit as he left behind multiple children (including a 6yo daughter with fiancè) 

[AZChristian]

Just now, SRTouch said:

he was unfortunate victim who died of gunshot at momma's party. From posted links, turns out some else at party was stabbed. Momma sued Stink's fiancè of 10 years cuz fiancè wouldn't hand over an old car and motorcycle. MM tried to explain that Stink's property should go through probate and neither momma nor fiancè should inherit as he left behind multiple children (including a 6yo daughter with fiancè) 

Thanks.  I remember the case now.  I was just totally blanking on it before your reminder.

[VartanFan]

22 hours ago, ThePurpleArcher said:

SLEEPCAP:  I was totally turned off by the plaintiff. She was such a show-off in front of the camera. As someone just starting a business, she needs a good dose of humility if she intends to stay in business, otherwise she will be turning off many customers. AS for the defendant, they lose the case for following directions ???? That's a nice message to send out there. "You did it wrong on the prototype so why didn't you just keep doing it wrong?"  That's like telling them, "You went through the first red light without causing an accident, so why didn't you just keep driving through all the red lights?"

I agree with all of this.  I believe the showoff plaintiff should have gotten - AT MOST - half back.  I did not love the verdict and do not love the streeeetching of cases to get a higher episode count.

[AZChristian]

14 minutes ago, VartanFan said:

I agree with all of this.  I believe the showoff plaintiff should have gotten - AT MOST - half back.  I did not love the verdict and do not love the streeeetching of cases to get a higher episode count.

I found it interesting that she said, "You put your hands through here, then grab your hair and crochet it through these tubes with your hands."

Um . . . I crochet.  It requires a hook, and takes a lot more skill and effort than PULLING your hair through a tube.  Also, the word "crochet" is defined thusly in Wikipedia:

"Crochet is a process of creating textiles by using a crochet hook to interlock loops of yarn, thread, or strands of other materials. The name is derived from the French term crochet, meaning 'small hook'. Hooks can be made from a variety of materials, such as metal, wood, bamboo, or plastic."

Exactly what textile was she creating?

[AngelaHunter]

7 hours ago, AZChristian said:

Sorry - not recognizing the name.  Was he involved in a case on People's Court?  TIA.

 STRouch pretty well covered it. JM informed her that girlfriends are not considered as beneficiaries, even if he was your baby daddy. Girlfriend did get about 2K from GoGimmeThat fund.

2 hours ago, AZChristian said:

Um . . . I crochet.  It requires a hook, and takes a lot more skill and effort than PULLING your hair through a tube.

I've crocheted for many years and I was puzzled at her using that term. I guess she doesn't know what the word means, even if she is a genius.

[AZChristian]

3 minutes ago, AngelaHunter said:

I've crocheted for many years and I was puzzled at her using that term. I guess she doesn't know what the word means, even if she is a genius.

I get the feeling she thought it was more impressive to say, "You crochet your hair down the tubes" instead of "You pull your hair down the tubes."  

Sort of like saying "I was incarcerated" instead of "I was in jail."  So much more impressive to be incarcerated, don't you think?

[AngelaHunter]

3 minutes ago, AZChristian said:

Sort of like saying "I was incarcerated" instead of "I was in jail."  So much more impressive to be incarcerated, don't you think?

Yeah, just like it sounds way classier to have a "physical altercation" than to say "We started beating the shit out of each other."

Impressive how easily litigants rattle these terms off, yet say things like "We had came."

[ThePurpleArcher]

4 hours ago, VartanFan said:

I agree with all of this.  I believe the showoff plaintiff should have gotten - AT MOST - half back.  I did not love the verdict and do not love the streeeetching of cases to get a higher episode count.

I'd like to see her go on 'Shark Tank' looking for money to invest in her business. The sharks will eat her alive and knock that cocky attitude right out of her. Especially when they start questioning her numbers, and the cost of manufacturing - and she inadvertently explains she lost a lot of fabric with one supplier. 

[mtbingmom]

10 hours ago, AZChristian said:

Sorry - not recognizing the name.  Was he involved in a case on People's Court?  TIA.

This was the mother who was suing her son's fiancee for a Mustang and a Harley. The son had been killed at a party. The case was on about a week ago, 

Edited May 10, 2020 by mtbingmom
Give info aout cae

[AngelaHunter]

22 hours ago, ThePurpleArcher said:

I'd like to see her go on 'Shark Tank' looking for money to invest in her business. The sharks will eat her alive

Especially when they ask her to explain exactly how she "crochets" her weave into the sleeves of that thing. I don't think JM was doing her any favours by gushing over her genius.

[ThePurpleArcher]

1 hour ago, AngelaHunter said:

Especially when they ask her to explain exactly how she "crochets" her weave into the sleeves of that thing. I don't think JM was doing her any favours by gushing over her genius.

I agree - she gave her very false hope. 

I am not a customer of her product, but as a former small retail businessman I can assure you tow things: That has a very short shelf life, and it will be easily knocked-off in a minute. 

[Florinaldo]

14 hours ago, ThePurpleArcher said:

That has a very short shelf life, and it will be easily knocked-off in a minute.

Yes, it would be difficult to get a patent for what I described earlier as "stretchy kid-size long johns". So no real legal protection as long as the copycats make a few cosmetic changes; and they may not even need to do so because any lawsuit against them would not be worth the cost or trouble. But she obviously thinks she will be moving to Millionaire Boulevard thanks to this thing.

Edited May 11, 2020 by Florinaldo

[AZChristian]

14 hours ago, ThePurpleArcher said:

I am not a customer of her product, but as a former small retail businessman I can assure you tow things: That has a very short shelf life, and it will be easily knocked-off in a minute. 

I could envision it being available very soon on a dusty shelf in one of those "As Seen On TV" booths at a local swapmeet.

[CrazyInAlabama]

I saw the bizarre (even for this show, it's bizarre) rerun of the dog cremation case.   The one where the defendant claimed he didn't owe for the dog cremation, and the return of the same animals ashes (as opposed to the group cremations without return of ashes).     The dog owner claimed he wanted to watch the entire cremation, because he didn't believe the cremation place would do his dog alone, and would give him some other ashes.     

Also, the dog owner was upset he couldn't watch the cremation.    The crematorium owner did say they charge extra for a video tape, and the person siting in a chapel area waiting for the ashes.    I couldn't believe that a single animal cremation, with return of ashes, and with home pick up was only $150.     The dog owner was all kinds of strange, and had no connection with reality.   

Edited May 11, 2020 by CrazyInAlabama

[SRTouch]

• lousy accordion: the old AS-IS staple of court tv cases, this time P bought D's grandpa's old accordion, hoping to teach his grandson how to make beautiful music, problem is, when he got it home and had an expert check it out it needed extensive repairs - wants to unwind deal and get back his $500........ D says she told P it had a broken wire that needed to be repaired, and promised it would work fine after that was fixed.......... question is, does that mean there an implied warranty that the repair was minor? (And yes, this is another half hour case - and for those who watch Harvey, today he's still all alone, unshaven, and looking ROUGH!)........ Apparently, none of the litigants actually PLAY the accordion, but as luck would have it, someone in the audience volunteers when MM wants to hear what it sounds like....... guess she needs something to fill time........ ok, he wasn't just buying the accordion, but this one is made to to hook up to an amplifier - when he goes to see it, D's dad play the accordion, but she doesn't have all the cables to hook to the amp - which I guess is what the intro called a broken wire - so P sees the accordion played, just doesn't hear it through the amp......... dude has no case without something in writing or the D admiting what she delivered wasn't as promised - guess we'll get to that eventually, but first Gerry, from the audience, is called upon to play us a tune......... we're supposed to buy that all this with Gerry is totally a surprise, but somehow Douglas has a stool for her to sit on when she gets to the front......... ah ha, P already said he has lots of friends who play the accordion, but for some reason he neglected to bring anyone along when he went to buy this (later we learn his 'friends' wanted to be paid to go along - if he HAD taken someone who knew what they were doing like Gerry, he probably would have never bought it - it takes Gerry zero time to determine there's more to this thing not working than just a bad cable to the amp........ annnnnnndddddd that's about all I watched as rest of the case is a yawn-fest - it's sort of like someone buying a boat without putting it in the water or a car with a dead battery - without a warranty or admission from D case will go nowhere, but D is her own worst enemy when I start listening afain - she admits telling P all it needed was a cable (though she insists on calling it a 'wire') for the amp, and Gerry already confirmed there's a lot more wrong........ another 15 minutes of back and forth, but to me case is over once we hear Gerry say one side of accordion isn't working and D say she told P all he needed was the amp cable......... definitely doesn't help that there are texts telling P it works just fine (dude printed some but not all of their text exchange, and for some reason didn't print one where he says she says it's perfect except for the cable)........ back to editing question that has been raised with this latest batch of episodes, I think they could have cut 10 minutes out of the middle of this case and been fine - if you FF through middle portion of case and start watching around minute 23-24 you hear MM getting a frustrated with both litigants as they want to interrupt - anyway, MM rules D gave a limited warranty when she texted it just needed the cable to work - MM unwinds deal
• Shoddy car ac repair: p paid for ac repair, and it went out again day it picked it up from shop - wants back $1700 he paid for repair....... D says he replaced ac compressor - says ac worked fine when it left shop, and P has timeline all wrong - says it was actually a month before P called to complain - says when P brought it back, there was a new leak in the 20yo hoopty's ac system (actually ONLY 16yo)....... ah, but as we head for commercial MM is grilling mechanic dude on his timeline claim - seems that's what he hung his defense on, and he claims he has the evidence back at the office & just didn't think he'd need it in court....... yeah, we've never heard that before....... anyway, mechanic dude has no evidence and can't even remember what he put in answer to complaint (in answer he said it took P 4 weeks to complain, now he says it was 2-3 days) P comes across much more believable - I could buy D's story of how new compressor put out more pressure which caused o-rings and hoses to start leaking if he had anything to show besides floppy gums - also took him weeks to install compressor and additional weeks to 'look at it' trying to figure out why it didn't work after it was fixed............ ah - I zipped ahead, and ended up rewinding - seems there was big kerfuffle when P went to complain and it's kind of a hoot listening to P tell the story - he has to be the record holder for the most times a litigant says "VEEHICKLE" within 30 seconds - later had to laugh when he talks about pulling his 'blade' to convince D's worker to keep away from him and he holds up fingers to show blade maybe 2" long - seems once D pulled his 'blade,' D broke up the fight by pulling a gun and telling D to leave (D says he fired employee over incident)......... ok, rough justice, MM decides D did not do job he was paid to do, but that P did get a new compressor out of deal - she WANTS to deduct cost of compressor, but has to guessimate amount when D admits he isn't sure what one costs - she ends up refunding $1200.50

Edited May 11, 2020 by SRTouch

[Guest]

54 minutes ago, SRTouch said:

• lousy accordion:  annnnnnndddddd that's about all I watched as rest of the case is a yawn-fest - it's sort of like someone buying a boat without putting it in the water or a car with a dead battery

Very accurate description.  I fell asleep sitting in my rocking chair.  When I woke I was treated to a gun/knife fight over a hooptie repair gone wrong.

54 minutes ago, SRTouch said:

• Shoddy car ac repair:  seems there was big kerfuffle when P went to complain and it's kind of a hoot listening to P tell the story - he has to be the record holder for the most a litigant says "VEEHICKLE" within 30 seconds - later had to laugh when he talks about pulling his 'blade' to convince D's worker to keep away from him - seems once D pulled his 'blade' D broke up the fight by pulling a gun and telling D to leave (D says he fired employee over incident)

Pardon me....blade, not knife.  Please excuse me though.  When I get my 'veehickle' serviced I go to a reputable, licensed dealer that keeps accurate records via computer.  I am familiar with the employees and not once in 21.5 years has anyone ever pulled a blade on me.  By the same token, I've never had to pull a gun on the guy who's changing the oil in my jeep.  As I said, I lead a very quiet life.

Speaking of a quiet life...Harvey must have had a wild weekend....or, he's practicing for "No Shave November".  In May.

 

[NYGirl]

Wow...isn't May sweeps month??  OMG how boring were today's cases? 

[AngelaHunter]

3 hours ago, SRTouch said:

lousy accordion:

That was nice, light entertainment. Arrogant plaintiff wants his son, and his grandsontoo, to learn to play the wonderful accordian. How old is your son? "Thirty-two."  Def, dumb as a stump, just keeps repeating, "It needs a wire", when it's clear she has no idea what that means or even what a wire is. It's her go-to remedy. "I don't know nothing about it" she says again and again. I have a feeling that accordians aren't the only things about which she don't know nothing. She does know all about false eyelashes, makeup and and curling irons, so that's something. LOVED the audience member coming up to play a lively polka on the defective instrument. Oh, btw, in the hall Doug informs D she's getting the dud accordian back. "What do you want me to do with it?" she asks him, all snotty. Like it's Doug's problem. "The exit is that way", he says.

 

2 hours ago, PsychoKlown said:

 When I woke I was treated to a gun/knife fight over a hooptie repair gone wrong.

Okay, I never imagined this happening, but this is the second case we've seen here in which a disagreement over some old hoopty results in guns and knives being drawn and pulled. Who would have dreamed such a thing? Of course, a year or so ago I went to my mechanic to get my winter tires removed. When he presented the bill, there was a oil change on it. "I didn't ask for the oil change," I said. He "charged at" me, so naturally I had to draw my knife. Then he pulled his gun out.  I exaggerate. He just crossed the oil change off the bill. "Thank you," I said.

Plaintiff is like so many other litigants who think a Lexus, BMW, Mercedes or Caddy is a big-time Status Symbol even when those "veehickles" (do NOT drink every time P says that word. I tried it and I'm looped) are 12, 16 or even 21 years old, so ancient the seats actually crack. Def was like someone from Dukes of Hazzard - no, I never watched it but heard about it. No, he ain't got no evidence. Well, he HAS all of it, but didn't see no reason to bring it TODAY. Yes, P called him four weeks later. Or maybe it was two days. He has no clue and looks like someone just rolled out of bed.

2 hours ago, PsychoKlown said:

Speaking of a quiet life...Harvey must have had a wild weekend....or, he's practicing for "No Shave November".  In May.

Gee, I was wondering if he's been sleeping under a bridge, or maybe trying to cultivate a sexy, savage stubble? Actually he looks like a hobo or maybe he's moonlighting as a clown?

 

Edited May 11, 2020 by AngelaHunter

[AZChristian]

Dear fellow People's Court Peeps:

I have a confession to make.  I absolutely loved and enjoyed the accordion case (not the one on the plaintiff's table, the one that JM had to rule upon).

When Geri popped up out of the audience (and I don't believe she was a plant, I think it was one of those great cosmic coincidences) and put that accordion on and snapped those little snaps at the top and bottom so the bellows would move . . . I thought, "This lady knows about accordions."  (I played one for about 3 months during my teen years, but even I would have known that there was something wrong with the bass (left) side of the thing.)

When she looked at JM and said, "Would you like to hear a polka?" and JM almost jumped off the bench with excitement, I thought - "Yep, in the middle of covid this is EXACTLY the case we need to hear."  

Ruling was correct, but plaintiff was definitely a chauvinistic mansplainer.

And then, of course, we were back to hooptyville with "blades" and guns.  Did anyone else notice how long the defendant paused after Doug asked him whether he had ever pulled a gun on someone before?  Methinks he doth delay too long.

[Guest]

3 hours ago, AngelaHunter said:

Actually he looks like a hobo or maybe he's moonlighting as a clown?

Well, I just had to. 

[AngelaHunter]

1 hour ago, AZChristian said:

I have a confession to make.  I absolutely loved and enjoyed the accordion case (not the one on the plaintiff's table, the one that JM had to rule upon).

I loved it too! It was different and I wasn't bored at all. It was a welcome break from as-is hoopties, irresponsible baby breeders, bail, warrants, dingbat roommates fighting over rent/utility bills,  pathetic women showering money on repulsive losers, and weave wars. I won't include animal cases sinces I never watch them.

1 hour ago, AZChristian said:

Did anyone else notice how long the defendant paused after Doug asked him whether he had ever pulled a gun on someone before? 

I skipped that. By then I'd had way more than I could take of both litigants.

44 minutes ago, PsychoKlown said:

Well, I just had to. 

Oh, hell!! LOVE your new avatar!! 🤣😅😆

[SRTouch]

4 hours ago, AZChristian said:

Dear fellow People's Court Peeps:

I have a confession to make.  I absolutely loved and enjoyed the accordion case (not the one on the plaintiff's table, the one that JM had to rule upon).

When Geri popped up out of the audience (and I don't believe she was a plant, I think it was one of those great cosmic coincidences) and put that accordion on and snapped those little snaps at the top and bottom so the bellows would move . . . I thought, "This lady knows about accordions."  (I played one for about 3 months during my teen years, but even I would have known that there was something wrong with the bass (left) side of the thing.)

When she looked at JM and said, "Would you like to hear a polka?" and JM almost jumped off the bench with excitement, I thought - "Yep, in the middle of covid this is EXACTLY the case we need to hear."  

No doubt Gerry was a hit, and I enjoyed the last few minutes  - problem I had was those boring litigants. Had this been a normal length case it would have been great........ even with the slow middle, I enjoyed it more than any of the recent fare

Edited May 12, 2020 by SRTouch

[CrazyInAlabama]

They're showing the rerun of the failed adoption background check.  

The kid that the plaintiff wanted to adopt was so lucky that the woman was turned down.   And suing the adoption agency when you fail a background check for child abuse charges, and according to the adoption agency director, it was more than one charge.    I find it stunning that the plaintiff has been employed by a school system before, and after the abuse allegations.   

Her older son was actually hospitalized when he was 14 or so, because she whacked him with a sneaker, and she claims it was only a couple of swats.  How does a 14 year old end up in the hospital from two minor swats with a sneaker?   

 The plaintiff was totally lifeless, there was no emotion in her at all.   Her husband never even said a word in court or in the hall.   I wouldn't let either of the plaintiffs babysit a Gerbil, let alone a child.  

The adoption agency head was very wise to get the remark in about more than one abuse allegation against the plaintiff.    I'm hoping that no one will ever consider the plaintiff for fostering or adoption.    

Edited May 12, 2020 by CrazyInAlabama