The People's Court - General Discussion

[AngelaHunter]

1 hour ago, patty1h said:

It was "sucks to be you" in the case with the woman who bought a used lawnmower from a family friend.  

I kind of enjoyed that. P's family and D's family have been friends for 55 years, yet she chooses to ruin that with her purchase of a riding mower for 300$. She test drives it, it works fine and she buys the mower. She went there knowing she had no way to get it home, so Def delivers it for free. But snow was "swirling" the next day, and she gives a demonstration of this swirl with her hands. Swirling, it was! When she goes to look at mower there is a puddle of oil under it.  And no - she never thinks about having a mechanic look at it. Instead she calls some neighbour over. He has a riding mower too, so that means he's an expert, right?

The expert fires up the 300$ mower and smoke starts billowing from it. Does he turn it off? Nope. He keeps riding it til it dies. I am no mechanic and don't know much about motors, but I think if they are spewing smoke and have bled out their life fluids that continuing to drive them would seize the engine, no?

P insists that D's ad on FB states the mower is in good shape so that's a warranty he needs to honour. No, it's not and no he doesn't.

I couldn't be bothered with today's video/record producer and all that crap. It was too tedious.

I did watch the bride who wanted a mail-order wedding gown for 800$ and it didn't arrive in time for the nuptials so she had to go buy a gown for 167-odd dollars and it looked it.

What's wrong with just buying a dress from the get-go for wedding and high school graduations? Is there not a single dress in a bridal store for 800$? Do these brides feel a dress bought from a store has no status? Considering what they are willing to pay and the chances they take to actually get a dress in time it all seems wacky to me. When I was getting married I went to a bridal shop with extremely knowledgeable staff who took one look at me and unerringly went to the racks with hundreds of gowns and picked out one that suited me. It was fine. Done.

I'm also thinking of the birthday girl who wanted to throw a b-day party for herself and hired the Def chef. He didn't keep in constant communication with her so she fired him and wants her deposit back. I do agree that he could have responded with "Ok" or even a thumbs-up emoji when she texted him her address, but I guess taking literally two seconds to do that was beneath him so he just ignored all her frantic texts. She doesn't get her money back since she breached the contract, and JM asks her to invite her to any other galas she might throw for herself.

Back in days of yore other people would give you a B-day party, baby/bridal shower but now it seems you give yourself parties. I guess I need to bone up on new traditions.

23 minutes ago, PsychoKlown said:

Something tells me “family friend” is going to get a boatload of dirty magazines sent to his home as well as  dozens and dozens of pizzas arriving all hours of the day.

And for good measure a brick delivered by express.  Right through the front picture window.

Oh, I'm sure you're right. She was one nasty cow.

[CrazyInAlabama]

So today's new one is another Corona virus case "Livid About a Limo".   Case 1-Plaintiff hired limo for daughter and 16 to 18 of her closest friends to ride around, drinking sodas, and candy.    It was for daughter's Sweet 16 party.    Plaintiff hires limo for May, lock down happens (wherever Gov. Wolf or Wolfe is in charge, maybe Pennsylvania), and they postpone to July.     Then the rules in July the rules were that they could only have 4 or 5 people on the limo or party bus, they could bring their own food, but defendant couldn't serve food or drinks, and masks required.     

How many more times will Judge Marilyn talk about her two graduates who were robbed of graduations, and prom by Covid?     I suspect that defendant will get screwed over by the judge.    The defendant's company also said that the limo/party bus service can be postponed up to 18 months.   I wouldn't give plaintiff a penny back.   Yes, plaintiff gets $499 back.

Case #2-Plaintiff suing defendant former roommate because defendant moved home and left her with the lease.   Plaintiff is suing for $3800+.  Defendant says the plaintiff made a lot of stupid rules, that she broke regularly.    Plaintiff really didn't try to get another roommate either.   So, plaintiff gets $1080 for two months rent, and late fees.   Then, after the case plaintiff tells Doug she's never going to have another roommate, and didn't want one, so she shouldn't get a penny. 

Case #3-PLaintiff's car was hit by defendant, and defendant left the scene.   Defendant says plaintiff was parked over the line in the parking lot, and claims her insurance paid her claim.    The car passenger side has a big scrape all the way from the back door to the front wheel well of the car, and it's wide.    Estimate was over $3,000, and her insurance paid, but plaintiff had to pay her own deductible.   Plaintiff says defendant insurance company was intimidating, so she claimed through her insurance, and defendant's insurance paid her $475 of the $500 deductible.  Plaintiff gets the other $25, and $195 for rental car.     

 

 

 

[AngelaHunter]

35 minutes ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

So today's new one is another Corona virus case "Livid About a Limo"

We don't care, Levin, even though you rack your little brain to come up with these stupid, alliterative titles.  And yeah, I was bored hearing about JM's poor little rich girls and their depriviations again. That aside, how many people here had 18 "close friends" in high school? I had four and now I feel I missed out.

36 minutes ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

Case #2-Plaintiff suing defendant former roommate because defendant moved home and left her with the lease.

Once again we get such bizarre roomies I'm left scratching my head at how any of them really expect this to work out. Plaintiff, who could not stop sticking her grotesque glued-on, hooked talons right into the camera (how would one use a computer with those?) thought it would be peachy to live with barely-cooked boy. Who would have guessed he might  not be totally together and get his car "repoed" and then run home to Wisconsin into the loving bosom of his family?

OTOH, if I were sharing with someone and she invited some total stranger she hooked up with on a skeevy dating site to come and stay with us, I would have moved out that day. Oh, well - Romeo's car broke down so he stayed for THREE weeks. Who is this person? A druggie, a drunk, a felon? Who cares, as long he scratches P's itch. I thought JM went too easy on P when she asked her what she did to fill the room left by uncooked boy, and she said she asked some people at work. None of them wanted to live with her. JM sympathizes saying P couldn't be expected to use CL and get just anyone in there. Why not? That's what she did with her migratory booty call she'd never met. She wouldn't even have to have sex with someone from CL.

43 minutes ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

Case #3-PLaintiff's car was hit by defendant, and defendant left the scene.

Hated Def, that wormy little twat whose defense is that he can't maneuver his HUGE SUV into those "ridiculously small" parking spots so what choice did have but to hit P's parked car and scrape and dent the whole side of it? Another blobby snowflake who, as usual, feels nothing at all is his fault - "She was parked on the white line!" he squeaks -  even if he hits a parked car and went completely over the white line.  He's not paying a cent to P, so there!

Yes, parking spaces are getting smaller, so what I do when I see a spot between two cars that are parked very close to the white lines is look for a spot elsewhere and as JM said, "walk". Can't expect snowflake to tolerate such inconvenience. He needs his giant SUV and will park where he likes.

[CrazyInAlabama]

I knew I shouldn't watch a new episode called "A Doggone Shame".  Case #1---Plaintiffs pay $300 for some Bulldog mix puppy, and then puppy gets sick.   Vet clinic says Parvo, defendant who sold the rest of the puppies, and the dog's mother, claim no other animal was sick.    The ignorance by Judge Marilyn, the litigants, about Parvo, and everything else is ridiculous.   The show should have had a vet testify as an expert witness about Parvo, how it's caught, how it's transmitted.      Then, defendant admits the mother dog died, but claims it wasn't from Parvo.    Plaintiffs want the $300 back, and vet bills. 

Plaintiff says defendant had a Gofundme for her sick dog.  Defendant denies it was hers, then confirms the GFM was, then denies her dog died of Parvo.     

$1079 to plaintiffs for the puppy, vet bills, and cremation. 

Here's an article about Parvo from the AKC website:

https://www.akc.org/expert-advice/health/what-every-puppy-owner-needs-to-know-about-parvo-in-puppies/

Case #2---Plaintiff was renting from Barnett Brodie, defendant and landlord.    PLaintiff's mother was the guarantor/co-signer.   Another tenant had an emergency need for housing.   Defendant claims plaintiffs were moving out anyway, and he wanted the plaintiffs' place for the other tenant, and he claims plaintiffs were fine with moving out early.    Now they're suing defendant for $5,000 for Covid eviction violations.    (Just wait until the rent moratorium ends, and the courts open up, and the tidal wave of evictions start, the court shows will be all landlord/tenant cases).   

The plaintiffs' lease expired, in July 2020, but they weren't moving out until the end of this June.  Plaintiff refused to do any in person showings for the apartment, or prep for the next tenant.    Then the next shoe drops, in the lease there is a provision that if the tenants violate the lease provisions, there's a $300 fine.    The first showing had 24 hours notice, the second viewing was only 4 hours notice, and tenant refused to allow showings.    There was nothing in the lease about reasonable notice, but Judge Marilyn says 24 hours notice is reasonable.   

The defendant kept just over $300 from security deposit for damages.   One wall looks like Big Foot clawed it.  Defendant wins. 

[AngelaHunter]

Skipped disgusting puppy peddlers and the idiots who financially support them. Ugh.

Mr. Brodie was incredibly arrogant and obnoxious and could have easily put a box of disposable masks at the door of the place, but P was just out-and-out extra-greedy, claiming over 3,000 dollars to try and get her haul up to a 5K boe-nanza here for her and silent Momma. She wants the D to pay for her moving costs... why? She was moving anyway. I never get that. Even if a landlord throws somone out, they were going to move one day anyway and would have to pay to get their junk hauled somewhere else. 

Of course, there's also her terrible pain and suffering for moving. Yeah, moving is always a huge PITA, but I never tried to make someone pay for my mental anguish. If she thinks she's so special she's owed this she is in for a lifetime of disappointment when she learns the rest of the world does not see her specialness.

When these litigants do their complaints and answers, they need to be given a paper outlining exactly what constitutes pain and suffering, mental anguish, and coercion. It's not what they think or hope it is and you can't clean up if someone breaches  a contract or if you don't like the old beater car you chose to buy.

32 minutes ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

 One wall looks like Big Foot clawed it. 

Seriously, what's with that? I've lived in my house 26 years and I'm not the most careful person but never have I created the kind of damages we see here done by short-term tenants. Holes in walls from hanging pictures or a TV I understand and I know lots of renters don't give a shit about someone else's property, but how do they even do the kind of major destruction we see here all the time?

Edited June 10, 2021 by AngelaHunter

[rcc]

Greedy bunch today!

[AZChristian]

We should all get $5,000 for pain and suffering for this being the best the show can come up with these days.

[CrazyInAlabama]

Today's new cases are ridiculous so far.  "Pay Me Now"

Case #1-Plaintiff delivers baked goods, and bread to other companies.   Defendant does specialty sandwiches, and desserts (brownies at least), and claims the baked goods are substandard, bread is too small, brownies are cracked, etc.   Plaintiff says defendant kept saying defendant lied about paying him, and is a deadbeat.   

I can't believe this case is on national TV.  Judge Marilyn says this is a contract case, and defendant kept using the bread for quite a while.   So plaintiff wins $82.  Defendant switched bakeries. 

Case #2-Plaintiff rented two bedroom home to defendant, for four years, who trashed the place, for $3900 owed (plaintiff already kept the $3,000 security deposit).  Plaintiff says place was brand new, all new appliances, carpets were destroyed, stove was so bad it had to be replaced.   There are lovely move in pictures, and the after pictures are horrifying.  Defendants say they left the home clean.    There's a photo of the AC filter, and it's disgusting.  Defendant claims plaintiff took a picture of someone else's filter to frame them.   Defendant man blames everyone except himself for the filth, including blaming his daughter for screwing up the carpet cleaning.   The attempt to patch holes left by the multiple TV brackets are awful (the tenants had six big screen TVs, all wall mounted).  

Often, I can spot the bad tenants by their nasty smirk, and the two defendants certainly have that.    Plaintiff gets $2600 (Judge M deducted the pet deposit, usually that's non-refundable).

[rcc]

The two cases today are just as bad as yesterday. Bakers with their nominal award and two lazy defendents who like watching TV. 

[DoctorK]

35 minutes ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

There's a photo of the AC filter, and it's disgusting.  Defendant claims plaintiff took a picture of someone else's filter to frame them. 

What I noticed was the timing: JM showed him the filter and said it was dirty, defendant started out with "no it's not really very dirty", then we saw the back of it and it was caked with dirt, then defendant changed his defense to "that isn't our filter, he took a picture of someone else's filter" (quoted as best I remember). I believe that the plaintiff provided new filters every six months, and the defendant threw them in the trash because he was too lazy to change the filters, consistent with his overall slovenly approach to the property.

[AngelaHunter]

33 minutes ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

I can't believe this case is on national TV.

It was silly, but I didn't mind it. I think Mr. Speciale is what we used to call "The salt of the earth" type, but I think if he reduced the size of his sandwiches with smaller buns and maybe only 3 meatballs he'd be doing some people a favour. Seriously, could anyone here eat one of those gargantuan sandwiches? I'd make it through one meatball, but it seems customers like Mr. DiGerolimo(sp?) (who JM addressed as "DiGeronimo" which he corrected 😄)wants his whoppin' big sammies. Sandwiches looked damned good though. I have a friend from Italy and try as I might I just can't make meatballs that come anywhere near the perfection of hers.

37 minutes ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

Case #2-Plaintiff rented two bedroom home to defendant, for four years, who trashed the place

People want to be landlords because... I forget.  "How To Utterly Destroy a Brand New House in Four Years." This was truly outrageous and the lying, dirty piggie defs were simply awful, especially the hatched-faced, scary Mrs. That place was gorgeous when P gave it to them and they just trashed it because they are lazy and dirty. For the gross, filthy carpets, well, those are stairs and they go up and down stairs - obviously after they had walked through a mud puddle or a pigsty. Their daughter tried to clean them, but well she's a lazy idiot too and just ended up spreading the dirt around.

The patch job on the TV holes looked as though they took gobs of Polyfilla and just flung it at the walls, probably as they sat on their butts watching TV. Too lazy to even take a little square of sandpaper to it. No big deal to them. There's an easy fix. OMG, the laziness just goes on and on. With SIX big screen TV stuck up in every room - did they have one in the bathroom too? - there was just no time to do anything that might interfere with their tube-watching. Both of them protest that all these fixes are so easy to do and don't know what is the big deal? JM asks if they were so easy, did you do them? Well, no. "The walls wasn't dirty. The walls wasn't damaged, well - only where were the six TVs was". Yah, every room, including the frickin' garage! Husband, who is no Bob Vila, took steel wool to the stainless stove and ruined the exterior - duh! - and they ruined the interior with so much crusted on grease and dirt it couldn't be cleaned.

That disgusting A/C filter? Yes it takes way too much effort to put in a new one, and besides, that's someone else's disgusting filter, not theirs. They also didn't ruin the blinds. The landlord probably did that himself to pin on them.

The landlord was right that you can't just do touch-ups over 4-year old paint. I tried to do this recently and it was a failure. I had to do the whole wall. Luckily it's a small wall. DIrty, lazy, unrepentant tenants who simply do not give a shit for someone else's property, as per usual.

[rcc]

47 minutes ago, AngelaHunter said:

It was silly, but I didn't mind it. I think Mr. Speciale is what we used to call "The salt of the earth" type, but I think if he reduced the size of his sandwiches with smaller buns and maybe only 3 meatballs he'd be doing some people a favour. Seriously, could anyone here eat one of those gargantuan sandwiches? I'd make it through one meatball, but it seems customers like Mr. DiGerolimo(sp?) (who JM addressed as "DiGeronimo" which he corrected 😄)wants his whoppin' big sammies. Sandwiches looked damned good though. I have a friend from Italy and try as I might I just can't make meatballs that come anywhere near the perfection of hers.

People want to be landlords because... I forget.  "How To Utterly Destroy a Brand New House in Four Years." This was truly outrageous and the lying, dirty piggie defs were simply awful, especially the hatched-faced, scary Mrs. That place was gorgeous when P gave it to them and they just trashed it because they are lazy and dirty. For the gross, filthy carpets, well, those are stairs and they go up and down stairs - obviously after they had walked through a mud puddle or a pigsty. Their daughter tried to clean them, but well she's a lazy idiot too and just ended up spreading the dirt around.

The patch job on the TV holes looked as though they took gobs of Polyfilla and just flung it at the walls, probably as they sat on their butts watching TV. Too lazy to even take a little square of sandpaper to it. No big deal to them. There's an easy fix. OMG, the laziness just goes on and on. With SIX big screen TV stuck up in every room - did they have one in the bathroom too? - there was just no time to do anything that might interfere with their tube-watching. Both of them protest that all these fixes are so easy to do and don't know what is the big deal? JM asks if they were so easy, did you do them? Well, no. "The walls wasn't dirty. The walls wasn't damaged, well - only where were the six TVs was". Yah, every room, including the frickin' garage! Husband, who is no Bob Vila, took steel wool to the stainless stove and ruined the exterior - duh! - and they ruined the interior with so much crusted on grease and dirt it couldn't be cleaned.

That disgusting A/C filter? Yes it takes way too much effort to put in a new one, and besides, that's someone else's disgusting filter, not theirs. They also didn't ruin the blinds. The landlord probably did that himself to pin on them.

The landlord was right that you can't just do touch-ups over 4-year old paint. I tried to do this recently and it was a failure. I had to do the whole wall. Luckily it's a small wall. DIrty, lazy, unrepentant tenants who simply do not give a shit for someone else's property, as per usual.

Your last sentence said it all.

[AngelaHunter]

2 hours ago, DoctorK said:

defendant started out with "no it's not really very dirty", then we saw the back of it and it was caked with dirt, then defendant changed his defense to "that isn't our filter, he took a picture of someone else's filter"

Pretty much that's it. When they got the zoomed-in shot of the filth packed into that filter they decided it must another one, not theirs. The landlord said he would change the filters, but I bet defs told him not to bother and that they would it only because they didn't want him coming in every six months and seeing how the property was being wrecked and turned into an increasingly filthy sty. I bet they're another of these tenants who tell each other, "Don't bother with that. He's rich. He can take care of it." Yes, anyone who owns property must be stinkin' rich.

[AngelaHunter]

Silly woman suing her hard-rode friend for groceries from BJ's, cigarettes and a few coffees at 6.10/each. What kind of coffee costs that much? P jacks the bills up to 500$ even though it's only 100$ Def owes, including the coffees. 100$ for P. Def claims P bought her the coffees without her even asking for them! This show is really scraping the bottom of the barrel.

Much better was the Prophet Lorenzo, who wanted to have a "Tent Revival" I guess to score some $$ from the pious faithful who seem to believe Lorenzo is a prophet. Whatever.  Problem is that the Prophet doesn't have the 2500$ to rent the tent for this revival. If he can prophesize shouldn't he have known P would sue him? Maybe that's not the way it works. I have no idea, as evangelists are not on my "must watch" list. Okay, I lied. Once in awhile if I can't sleep, I catch one of them on TeeVee, just for laughs.

Plaintiff, in some gawdawful fake lashes, agrees to pay the tent provider the 2500$ if the Prophet will pay her back. Yeah, of course he will. He's a Man of God! You can trust him. Sadly, he pays her not one cent and tries to doubletalk JM (in a voice that had me hitting the "mute" button) to convince her that P made that as a donation. Lots of people give him money! He admits he took a prettty haul from the marks at his revival. How nice he is able to cash in on the naive and desperate. I notice JM takes pleasure in addressing him as "Prophet" as she reams him out for being a con artist and a liar who shafted someone who helped him. Plaintiff? Wise up, okay?

Then we had some pin-headed, squeaky asshole who ran into P's fence, knocking it over and a dog got in and killed her chickens, I think. I stopped watching when PinHead said he didn't hit the fence "head-on or nothing" and offered to fix the fence until he found out wood is expensive so decided not to pay anything at all. He barely tapped the fence and it just fell over!

Levin: "It's the case of "Love Me Chicken Tender." Are there any other words besides hate, despise, loathe, detest, or abhor I can use for my tender feelings towards this little sawed-off shitbag?

[rcc]

"Bottom of the barrel" is what we are getting lately. That first case was so stupid.

[Carolina Girl]

By the way - did Levin recently claim that Kardashian had passed the "baby bar"??

She didn't - she FLUNKED it.  TWICE.  If she flunks a third time, she's done.  

 

[CrazyInAlabama]

Today's rerun "Suing Your Sibling", case #1, a house is owned by 17 family members (this is the most confusing case ever) where an uncle had rented the house out for years, and was apparently only one getting rental income.     Then the brother/plaintiff offered $2,000 each to his sister/defendant, a step mother, and sister's daughter, to increase his stake in the house.     I guess the plaintiff/brother inherited when his father died?    

When the brother/plaintiff bought the sister and other two people's shares, they did no paperwork.    Then the house is sold, and each share is $750, but sister received a check, cashed it, and never gave the money to the brother that bought her share in the house.   So the sister owes $2,000 back for the share the brother paid her, and the $750 stays with defendant.    The house was bought by the uncle who was renting the house out, $32,000 at auction.   However, the house was worth at least 10 times that amount.  (I think the last time this was on, I turned it off when the ranting started).   

At the end the defendant loses, and keeps talking over the judge, and keeps saying "I'm not paying him anything!" meaning the brother, and the show pays it all anyway. 

Case #2-ANother ridiculous security deposit case.  Plaintiff lived in a room of the defendant's rental apartment, moved out and wants her security deposit back.    However, defendant won't give it back because the other roommates are still there.   Defendant loses, and plaintiff gets her security deposit back.   Case #3-Plaintiff bought a Range Rover from defendant for $3500.  Then plaintiff took car to dealer, who wanted $5,000 for suspension replacement.   What part of 'as is' doesn't plaintiff understand?   ANd Judge Marilyn saying the dealer is always trying to get you to do pricey repairs way too early is not good. 

Plaintiff claims she had to fix a major gas leak, there is no way that the tank was leaking that badly when she purchased it, and no one noticed it.   A leaking gas tank, or gas line puts out a smell that's very obvious.     Apparently, plaintiff sold the car cheap to a car buying company.   10 days after buying the car, she sold it to someone else. 

She gets $932 back on the car.  

Edited June 16, 2021 by CrazyInAlabama

[AngelaHunter]

55 minutes ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

 Case #3-Plaintiff bought a Range Rover from defendant for $3500.

All I can say is, do not try to drink every time you hear the word "Veehick-ul". And gee - for 16,500$ one could get a really nice car from a reputable dealer. It may not have the cachet of "I have a RANGE ROVER" but it might last longer than a week.

[patty1h]

"Stiffing a Dancer" - Those two plaintiffs were pretty terrible at dancing.  That audition tape was cringy and I can only guess that the defendant was desperate if she even let them perform.  I've been to pro, high school and college games and I'm used to seeing the cheerleaders in familiar uniforms.   I'm curious what kinds of basketball games have booty dancing and chicks in lilac thigh-high boots as entertainment.     I know the world is changing -- maybe basketball halftime strip shows are a thing that I missed.   

I was entertained by the defendants giant fake lashes, and I didn't even pay attention or care about the verdict.   
 

Edited June 22, 2021 by patty1h

[DoctorK]

Oh my, today’s first case showed me one of the most grotesque women I have seen on TV (outside of late night low budget horror movies). My only comment about the defendant’s eye lashes is a reference to my rule that your eye lashes should not weigh more than your eyeballs. Add in to that, she was wearing a black bra under a semi-transparent blouse which was barely controlling her monstrous boobs. Don’t forget her snake creature length fingernails, her silicone swelled lips, and her use of “agreeance” where anyone less illiterate would say “agreement”.  I somehow suspect that she is a “famous” Facebook influencer. I didn’t really listen to the actual case much because the defendant was too distracting. She finished up the hallterview with a statement that the plaintiffs didn't "know anyone from Adam's apple" - that hurt my brain.

Edited June 22, 2021 by DoctorK

[CrazyInAlabama]

The strip club Basketball half time performers lost.   There was no contract.   However, the defendant has a personal assistant?    

[AngelaHunter]

1 hour ago, DoctorK said:

and her use of “agreeance” where anyone less illiterate would say “agreement”.

My CC is fed up (I can picture it rolling its eyes and yelling, "Oh, FFS!!!") and on strike again, because it changed it to "agreement." The only one in the whole silly bunch who seemed to have a brain was the secondary P. She was well-spoken and it was easy to see she wrote the texts. My advice to her is to forget this nonsense and these low-rent nitwits and get a real job.

The "dancing" had me looking away in embarassment for them, as did the main plaintiff's 4" long hooks glued on her fingertips  and which she waved around as though they were symbols of her elegance.

While watching this I couldn't help wondering about young women like the main P. What on earth will they do when they can no longer skate on being some minor TikTok or IG personality and can't count on the 100$ fee for performances? She - like so many we see here - is uneducated, can't speak properly, can't dance (she's a little chunky to be a dancer) and she's covered in tacky tats. The future is not looking bright, but I guess after her star fades a later career in which knowing how to say, "Do you want fries with that?" is a possibility, but only if she ditches the raptor-like talons.

Def looked like some sort of caricature with all her features grotesquely exaggerated. Can you really buy eyelashes like that, or is this the result of wearing about 5 pairs of them? The biggest ones I saw with a quick Google were nowhere near this triple-tarantula dimensions.

The rent case was stupid and boring with a plaintiff who seemed to think it normal to screech, bust up doors, and throw plates around if there is a disagreement with your roommate, who I gathered was P's "hormonal" knocked-up sister's baby daddy. I turned it off. The only part that interested me was trying to figure out how any judge could make any sense at all of this idiotic, convoluted, stupid rambling.

[rcc]

Two stupid cases for JM again today.

[AZChristian]

30 minutes ago, AngelaHunter said:

Def looked like some sort of caricature with all her features grotesquely exaggerated. Can you really buy eyelashes like that, or is this the result of wearing about 5 pairs of them? The biggest ones I saw with a quick Google were nowhere near this triple-tarantula dimensions.

Seriously, you have to google something like "eyelashes for strippers" or "eyelashes for drag queens."  

[AngelaHunter]

1 hour ago, AZChristian said:

Seriously, you have to google something like "eyelashes for strippers" or "eyelashes for drag queens."  

I Googled "Thickest False Eyelashes." The results were alarming and some of them reminded me of a picture I once saw of a type of venomous caterpillar.

Edited June 23, 2021 by AngelaHunter

[DoctorK]

35 minutes ago, AngelaHunter said:

type of venomous caterpillar.

They could use the venom to plump up their lips before putting them on their eye lids, killing two birds with one stone.

 

[Bazinga]

Madtv parody mentioned by the Judges:

MADtv Yvoone Criddle People's Court

The second Yvoone Criddle sketch:

MADtv Yvoone Criddle Stolen Parking Spot

Edited June 23, 2021 by Bazinga

[Twiz44]

9 hours ago, Bazinga said:

Madtv parody mentioned by the Judges:

MADtv Yvoone Criddle People's Court

The second Yvoone Criddle sketch:

MADtv Yvoone Criddle Stolen Parking Spot

Did I watch this? “Yes, I did ya honah”! 🤣 And what a spot-on impression of Judge Marilyn!

[DoctorK]

16 hours ago, Bazinga said:

Madtv parody mentioned by the Judges:

I just watched both and laughed out loud. However, it is sad that for many of the litigants we have seen, this is barely parody.

[AngelaHunter]

38 minutes ago, DoctorK said:

I just watched both and laughed out loud. However, it is sad that for many of the litigants we have seen, this is barely parody.

It absolutely is not. Facsmilie JM: "You called child protective services and had her children taken away?" Yvoone: "Yes, I did, but them leaves..."

It does sound like it could be a real case. 😄

ETA: Today's case with Mr. Abrams suing Mr. Ketterer(?)for a patio set he bought from him online for 2K. Mr. Ketterer never sends the set, makes all kinds of excuses - Arrangements with the shipper, COVID, he needs big boxes, can't find boxes, blah blah - for TWO years. Mr. Abrams agrees to find and pay for the boxes, pay for the shipping or anything else necessary to get him the patio set. Nothing. Finally he tells D that if he can't get the furniture to him, that's okay, but just give him his money back.

Mr. Ketterer decides that this request means that Mr. Abrams has "forfeited his right to get a refund."

JM  wants to know on what planet would that be okay? Def has an email proving he is in the right, but can't find it right now. His cohort, Ms. Conehead, goes off to find it, I think, but never comes back.

Oh, shameless! Def declares he has a 5* rating on whatever site he uses. I wonder if showing himself up as a scammer here might affect that rating?

Do people really donate 30-year-old vehicles to be sent from the US to Belize? I guess so. Live and learn.

Edited June 23, 2021 by AngelaHunter

[Carolina Girl]

22 hours ago, AngelaHunter said:

Oh, shameless! Def declares he has a 5* rating on whatever site he uses.

I think it was Etsy.  

Interesting that the plaintiff's exhibit of the online ad for the furniture showed that the price was $3500 (he paid $2000 or something).  I think he also mentioned that the defendant still had the ad up on Etsy for the furniture.  I wish Judge Millian had explored that.  If he was still trying to sell it and had been for awhile he's a friggin swindler.

Oh, and I'm so SURE that Brad Pitt and Kim Kardashian do their own online ordering as well.  Dude, I hate to break it to you, but they couldn't pick you or your wife out of a police lineup, stop making yourself sound like you're the patio furniture supplier to the stars.  

He didn't look all that comfortable while Millian was lecturing him on what a louse he was.  I do notice that Connie Conehead beat a retreat as soon as she could.  

[Carolina Girl]

OMG - that defendant in the contractor case yesterday.  How many times did she say that her 10-year-old was TERRIFIED of the big bad mean man that only showed up because her looneytune deadbeat mother ghosted the guy rather than pay him and his only avenue was to go in person and ask for money?  SO TERRIFIED that Mommy says she had to hire an off-duty police officer for security.  Yeah, having a cop patrolling your house - THAT certainly isn't going to make a kid apprehensive.  

She seemed so off during the whole hearing that I believe the contractor when he said when he showed up to collect, she smelled of alcohol.  She sounded like she'd been sipping the cooking sherry before the Zoom call. 

And sorry, Judge Marilyn, considering what the guy had to go through to get paid, I'd have given him the whole $1,000.

 

[seacliffsal]

I don't care how many times in a row JM sneezes in a row!  These "ask the judges" segments are getting ridiculous/pathetic.  Bring back the "After the Verdict" segments or something else that is more than hearing about their privileged lives (resort in the Keys with construction going on [don't worry, Judge John was golfing so it was not a problem for him...]).

[Guest]

3 hours ago, Carolina Girl said:

OMG - that defendant in the contractor case yesterday.  How many times did she say that her 10-year-old was TERRIFIED of the big bad mean man that only showed up because her looneytune deadbeat mother ghosted the guy rather than pay him and his only avenue was to go in person and ask for money?  SO TERRIFIED that Mommy says she had to hire an off-duty police officer for security.  Yeah, having a cop patrolling your house - THAT certainly isn't going to make a kid apprehensive.  

She seemed so off during the whole hearing that I believe the contractor when he said when he showed up to collect, she smelled of alcohol.  She sounded like she'd been sipping the cooking sherry before the Zoom call. 

And sorry, Judge Marilyn, considering what the guy had to go through to get paid, I'd have given him the whole $1,000.

 

The defendant reminded me a of a poor-man’s Marsha Mason.  What theatrics!  What drama!  What lies!!!

Did you see her trying to figure out how much a security guard costs?  Her $240 answer doesn’t fly.  As someone who has recently hired security guards (family funerals - watching the home because there are some despicable animals that case the obituaries to see who died and when the funeral is happening) we paid over $700 for two days - viewing and funeral.   She’s a liar.  And a bad one at that.

And I’d be willing to bet that her 10 year old is perfectly fine.  She’s the one with issues.  

Her attempt at righteous indignation didn’t fly either…her cut rate Botox job stopped all ability to form an expression.

If she has money for botox and alcohol, she has money to pay her bills,

Pay the man.

[patty1h]

"Tenant Tussle"  - another case of "looks can be deceiving" with the defendant creepy Ms. Janney.   She looks so normal and put together in court, but then you watch the video tape of this nut walking naked through her tenants apartment.   Imagine living with this weirdo and finding out she's been pawing through your belongings with her bare butt hanging out, helping herself to batteries, taking food, checking your mail.    I don't even fault the plaintiff Ms Ripple for the kinda threatening statements to this fool... that's nicer than I would have been.   NASTY!

[Carolina Girl]

1 hour ago, PsychoKlown said:

The defendant reminded me a of a poor-man’s Marsha Mason.  What theatrics!  What drama!  What lies!!!

Did you see her trying to figure out how much a security guard costs?  Her $240 answer doesn’t fly.  As someone who has recently hired security guards (family funerals - watching the home because there are some despicable animals that case the obituaries to see who died and when the funeral is happening) we paid over $700 for two days - viewing and funeral.   She’s a liar.  And a bad one at that.

And I’d be willing to bet that her 10 year old is perfectly fine.  She’s the one with issues.  

Her attempt at righteous indignation didn’t fly either…her cut rate Botox job stopped all ability to form an expression.

If she has money for botox and alcohol, she has money to pay her bills,

Pay the man.

I was really hoping that Millian would read her the riot act.  The way she spoke about the worker that came and did all her stupid little tasks, like he was a filthy human being.   Oh and did you hear about her "life-threatening SURGERY?"  How many times did she mention that?  She was friggin' nuts.  Wished I'd caught her name - because I'd love to find her FB or Twitter accounts.  

[Guest]

2 hours ago, patty1h said:

"Tenant Tussle"  - another case of "looks can be deceiving" with the defendant creepy Ms. Janney.   She looks so normal and put together in court, but then you watch the video tape of this nut walking naked through her tenants apartment.   Imagine living with this weirdo and finding out she's been pawing through your belongings with her bare butt hanging out, helping herself to batteries, taking food, checking your mail.    I don't even fault the plaintiff Ms Ripple for the kinda threatening statements to this fool... that's nicer than I would have been.   NASTY!

I’d live in a box in an alley before I’d live under those conditions. 

She’s a thief.  Treated herself to several of the batteries.  She’s a liar.  Said she only did it to “help out” her roommate.   She’s a nut.  Walking naked around someone else’s apartment with her excuse being she was washing her clothes.

She’s also cuckoo!

[AngelaHunter]

I am majorly "pissed off", as our Levin said recently. Really, Levin, you little pig - we expect better from you, what with you being a prestigious lawyer and all. Yesterday instead of TPC I got "Hot Bench". Today I saw some people yakking about something or other, so I decided to go to Hot Bench, but "what happened was" I got a full-length infomercial with that mealy-mouthed, sleazy shill, Anthony Sullivan, peddling some kind of crap. 😡

[Guest]

1 hour ago, AngelaHunter said:

I am majorly "pissed off", as our Levin said recently. Really, Levin, you little pig - we expect better from you, what with you being a prestigious lawyer and all. Yesterday instead of TPC I got "Hot Bench". Today I saw some people yakking about something or other, so I decided to go to Hot Bench, but "what happened was" I got a full-length infomercial with that mealy-mouthed, sleazy shill, Anthony Sullivan, peddling some kind of crap. 😡

Yes.  Harvey Levin aka “the Great Legal Mind”.

I would really enjoy a website that has the grades/rankings of all the legal beagles on television.  Something tells me anyone perusing the site would quickly adhere to the adage “It’s not what you know, but who you know”.

And on a side note, Harvey is looking rough these days.  What’s the story?

[DoctorK]

18 minutes ago, PsychoKlown said:

And on a side note, Harvey is looking rough these days.  What’s the story?

My guess is a Cheetos and mountain dew addiction.

 

[AngelaHunter]

16 minutes ago, DoctorK said:

My guess is a Cheetos and mountain dew addiction.

 

 

38 minutes ago, PsychoKlown said:

And on a side note, Harvey is looking rough these days.  What’s the story?

What's wrong with Levin? Well,  he's a 70 year old trying to fit in with the young and hip and his posse of TMZ nitwits, and failing badly. As I mentioned some time ago, with the plague he's been unable to get the team from the Crayola people to plaster over the cracks and fix his face for him. He really needs to get some plastic surgery, if only for the lulz resulting.

 

 

[Guest]

On 6/25/2021 at 8:06 PM, AngelaHunter said:

 

What's wrong with Levin? Well,  he's a 70 year old trying to fit in with the young and hip and his posse of TMZ nitwits, and failing badly. As I mentioned some time ago, with the plague he's been unable to get the team from the Crayola people to plaster over the cracks and fix his face for him. He really needs to get some plastic surgery, if only for the lulz resulting.

 

 

He looks like he hasn’t seen the sun in decades.  Get that man some vitamin D.

Do I need to change my picture?

[AngelaHunter]

4 hours ago, PsychoKlown said:

Do I need to change my picture?

A dilemma. I do like smiley clown Levin, but if you want to stay au courant, then go for it. I made it a little clearer and more compact for you.

 

[CrazyInAlabama]

Today's rerun "Living in the Dark"   Defendant let plaintiffs rent part of her trailer (she's renting too), and the plaintiff's never paid rent, and it's now seven months later.    Defendant also has to pay utilities, and plaintiffs are whining because the utility company (they never paid them either) want their back payments.  Ridiculous case, and defendant wins. 

Case #2, dead brother's family, suing his former girlfriend. for not giving them his property, and car back.   The plaintiff's blame the brother's death from Covid on defendant.    Ridiculous case.  What does defendant's gambling habits have to do with the case?  Nothing.    Brother was 73,   Plaintiff sister wants the $360 for rent that defendant owed, and plaintiff paid.    My view, since the later brother/boyfriend had no will, then it depends on state law, so my guess is his kids split up the few things that are left.   

Plaintiff gets the $360 from defendant for the rent, and defendant gets her personal items back.   Plaintiff needs to go to probate court and be appointed executrix, but she will not be responsible for the debts, except what is in the estate, she won't be personally responsible for the debts.  

Edited June 30, 2021 by CrazyInAlabama

[AngelaHunter]

I never saw today's cases. The first one, involving two big, loud, lowdown, foul-mouthed bruisers was kind of entertaining. Bruiser plaintiff says Def hogged two parking spots and punched her in the face and that she had massive bruising because he dragged her with his car. Def holds up his very pudgy fist with a huge ring on one finger and says that if he'd had all his other rings on and punched her she would have been really injured. He insists he merely slapped her across the face and her own pic reveals this, with just a reddened patch under one eye.

I guess everyone else here saw this, but the best part was Def., Mr. Rossi, calling P "fat and ugly." Really? Pot, meet kettle. Maybe he has  some magic mirror that reflects Chris Hemsworth when he looks at himself in it. I mean, I get why so many repulsive men see themselves as sex gods due to the plethora of women who will settle for anything, but still. Sure, he says - he hogs two spaces because he doesn't want anyone "cramming" between the cars and scratching his ride, or something like that.

Seem P reached into D's car - there are pics showing her doing this -  and started hitting him over and over and went flying on the ground as she wouldn't let go of the car as he was pulling out. Instead of leaving, D gets out of his car - there is a pic of this too - and smacks P.

JM told D he should have called the police. He informs her, as he flicks his nasty tongue all over, that he and the cops don't have a very cordial relationship. He had no desire to have police come since he was sitting in his car sucking on a "blunt", and he has no driver's license.  We don't find out why. Maybe because of driving while high on his blunts? HIs ex-wife, a horribly desperate woman who quit this marriage made in heaven after 7 months, appears and tells JM how abusive the belligerent, "fat ugly" def. is. JM tries to explain to P how stupid her actions were - in spite of her fear, she texts him a expletive-laden message -  as I'm sure she's seen many a person shot for less, but just gets "You're right. You're right. Exactly," and blah blah but I don't think any of it penetrated her thick dumb skull.

P gets 500$ because when D slapped her it was not in self-defense as he was already leaving and it was over. Judge John says he doesn't believe in ever hitting a  woman, unless maybe to defend himself against someone like Rhonda Rousey. JM informs him that RR would "wipe the floor with you."

The 2nd case involved some mid-COVID party (I"m sure everyone took safety precautions 🙄) that lasted 11 hours and of course, ended in violence. I had enough of that with the first case, so skipped this one.

Edited July 7, 2021 by AngelaHunter
Not Ronda Rousey who beat up mugger, but Polyana Viana

[rcc]

11 minutes ago, AngelaHunter said:

I never saw today's cases. The first one, involving two big, loud, lowdown, foul-mouthed bruisers was kind of entertaining. Bruiser plaintiff says Def hogged two parking spots and punched her in the face and that she had massive bruising because he dragged her with his car. Def holds up his very pudgy fist with a huge ring on one finger and says that if he'd had all his other rings on and punched her she would have been really injured. He insists he merely slapped her across the face and her own pic reveals this, with just a reddened patch under one eye.

I guess everyone else here saw this, but the best part was Def., Mr. Rossi, calling P "fat and ugly." Really? Pot, meet kettle. Maybe he has  some magic mirror that reflects Chris Hemsworth when he looks at himself in it. I mean, I get why so many repulsive men see themselves as sex gods due to the plethora of women who will settle for anything, but still. Sure, he says - he hogs two spaces because he doesn't want anyone "cramming" between the cars and scratching his ride, or something like that.

Seem P reached into D's car - there are pics showing her doing this -  and started hitting him over and over and went flying on the ground as she wouldn't let go of the car as he was pulling out. Instead of leaving, D gets out of his car - there is a pic of this too - and smacks P.

JM told D he should have called the police. He informs her, as he flicks his nasty tongue all over, that he and the cops don't have a very cordial relationship. He had no desire to have police come since he was sitting in his car sucking on a "blunt", and he has no driver's license.  We don't find out why. Maybe because of driving while high on his blunts? HIs ex-wife, a horribly desperate woman who quit this marriage made in heaven after 7 months, appears and tells JM how abusive the belligerent, "fat ugly" def. is. JM tries to explain to P how stupid her actions were - in spite of her fear, she texts him a expletive-laden message -  as I'm sure she's seen many a person shot for less, but just gets "You're right. You're right. Exactly," and blah blah but I don't think any of it penetrated her thick dumb skull.

P gets 500$ because when D slapped her it was not in self-defense as he was already leaving and it was over. Judge John says he doesn't believe in ever hitting a  woman, unless maybe to defend himself against someone like Rhonda Rousey. JM informs him that RR would "wipe the floor with you."

The 2nd case involved some mid-COVID party (I"m sure everyone took safety precautions 🙄) that lasted 11 hours and of course, ended in violence. I had enough of that with the first case, so skipped this one.

When I saw the litigants in the first case I couldn't change the channel fast enough. Not gonna watch those two again. Lol

[AngelaHunter]

4 minutes ago, rcc said:

When I saw the litigants in the first case I couldn't change the channel fast enough. Not gonna watch those two again. Lol

Once was definitely enough! 😏

[CrazyInAlabama]

Friday's rerun was another rent deposit case, however it wasn't the usual type.   Defendant rents rooms month-to-month at his home, don't know if he actually lives there too.   Plaintiff put a deposit down on two rooms, but not for herself, she was renting them, for two of her clients in assisted living, and already has more rooms a couple of houses down.     The defendant actually gave a 30 day notice to two of his month-to-month tenants, and they left, but plaintiff changed her mind.   Apparently, plaintiff found a cheaper accommodation, and no longer wanted the rooms.   However, since defendant had already bounced two tenants, he lost income for that month, so keeps the despicable plaintiff's deposit.   

[aemom]

On 6/25/2021 at 6:20 PM, AngelaHunter said:

I am majorly "pissed off", as our Levin said recently. Really, Levin, you little pig - we expect better from you, what with you being a prestigious lawyer and all. Yesterday instead of TPC I got "Hot Bench". Today I saw some people yakking about something or other, so I decided to go to Hot Bench, but "what happened was" I got a full-length infomercial with that mealy-mouthed, sleazy shill, Anthony Sullivan, peddling some kind of crap. 😡

Me too!

I had two more episodes to watch before the summer re-runs kicked in and the first was not there because my taping contained a message that: "We are having trouble with this channel right now, sorry." WTF?

And then the next day was pre-empted with a special news bulletin.

So the last thing that I get to see for TPC for this season is to learn how many times she sneezes.  Wow, I'm disappointed.

I really enjoyed when the judges talked about the cases that we just heard and sometimes when they are asked to comment on a legal situation, that can be interesting as well.  But the "relationship questions" and stuff like the ridiculous sneezing thing, etc. are just boring and tiresome.  I really don't care.

[AngelaHunter]

3 hours ago, aemom said:

I had two more episodes to watch before the summer re-runs kicked in and the first was not there because my taping contained a message that: "We are having trouble with this channel right now, sorry." WTF?

That's about the only thing that hasn't happened to me. Yet.

What about the mini-infomercials DURING shows now? Plexaderm (or Dermaplex or whatever facial Polyfilla) every day. Thank goodness for the gifts of DVRs, Mute, and FF. Without them I would never, ever watch anything at all.  I admit it does give me some small "Ha ha! Take that!" satisfaction that no one is watching the interminable, blaring, vulgar, distasteful ads anymore because I'm petty like that.

It becoming as though only tiny portions of cases are squeezed in between the previews, the Hall Clown dumbass intro, Levin repeating the intro and "he hardly knew 'er", endless commercials/infomercials/weather reports/news previews, bulletins, more Levin Levin Levin - Levin and his outdoor pack of dimwits,  Levin and his "Hey, Harvey!" and Levin and his recaps ("Let's listen!" If only...) after every huge block of commercial vomit. Really, what are we getting of the cases? Fifteen, twenty minutes?