The People's Court - General Discussion

[AngelaHunter]

On the subject of giving birth, I was glad to hear that the P in the "doula" case was able to get what seemed to be more than adequate care and to successfully give birth in spite of her high-risk status and the discrimination and second-rate care she expected to receive at a hospital after her doula - to whom she paid 1800$ -  couldn't be bothered having a COVID test done so she could go to the hospital and make sure things were done right.

I think everyone, let alone those who regularly are in medical facilities in any capacity knows you could not enter any hospital, no matter what, unless you are the patient. Last February I had to have a minor surgery and no one other than patients could even enter the hospital, not even the waiting room let alone any recovery rooms, etc. Def seemed to think that because of her special Doula status, a hospital would just let some untested stranger who might infect all the patients/doctors/nurses waltz into the delivery room. She knew the P was due to give birth sometime within 4 weeks so it was hardly a last-minute thing, but never thought about it or didn't know about hospital procedures and never bothered to even call and ask because she always gets false information.

As JM said, she could have gone online to the hospital site and instantly found out requirements but she didn't know that or didn't feel like doing it. P was so long-winded and JM took so much time commiserating and relating her own birthing experiences and the uselessness of her husband and all that I nearly gave up. But anyway, 1200$ is returned to the new mama.

On 9/27/2021 at 4:34 PM, Zahdii said:

The new grandfather left the house and asked his wife to tell him about the baby when it was done.

Why? I'm sure MY father would want to watch a close-up video of my privates. Not even cats want an audience or cheering section when they give birth. Yes, these are just my opinions.

Edited September 28, 2021 by AngelaHunter
I'm losing brain cells. So what?

[Guest]

On 9/26/2021 at 11:35 PM, AngelaHunter said:

You've deleted him as your avatar and now (with any luck) you will eliminate the sight and sound of him. You are the Levin Terminator. He'll be crushed.

"Terminator? He hardly KNEW 'ER!"

This post has officially moved AngelaHunter to genius level in my book.

It’s sorta like the circle of life.  Notice how it all comes together!

And may I add that the Case of DebbieDownersDelivery was annoying.  The plaintiff looks like one of those women who is never satisfied with anything.

 “Yeah, I had to go get pregnant during COVID”  As someone who has never carried a child full term I would be dancing on the treetops to be in her situation.  

You can see she finds doom and gloom in everything.  “Can’t plant a tree now…oh well.”  For cripes sake - plant the damn tree.  Just plant it.  But then again, you’ll have nothing to bitch about for the next 30 years on your daughter’s birthday.  “We’ll, I was gonna plant a tree over the placenta but…”

One for the ages.

Note:  I think JM made the right decision in awarding some of the money back (of course not all that DebbieDowner requested) but part of me wonders if the person-hired-to-watch-her-give-birth had enough of the plaintiffs shenanigans and thought “screw this…I‘ll say I don’t have a COVID test”.  If in fact it was true that she didn’t bother to get one - she’s in the wrong business.

 

Edited September 28, 2021 by PsychoKlown

[AngelaHunter]

3 hours ago, PsychoKlown said:

This post has officially moved AngelaHunter to genius level in my book.

Awww, thanks but hardly! I had to learn to DVR or never watch anything again. It does my petty little heart good to help make someone else Levin-free.

3 hours ago, PsychoKlown said:

 As someone who has never carried a child full term I would be dancing on the treetops to be in her situation.  

I'm sure many people would feel this way. 😦

3 hours ago, PsychoKlown said:

part of me wonders if the person-hired-to-watch-her-give-birth had enough of the plaintiffs shenanigans and thought “screw this…I‘ll say I don’t have a COVID test”

Considering how extremely long-winded both of them are, those phone calls alone should have eaten up more than 800$. I notice the "doula" said "birthing people." We've recently been informed that not only women give birth, which came as something of a revelation to me.

She had a bunch of excuses for no test. It was midnight, she had to find a place that gives tests, you can't get them so quickly, she didn't think she needed one, etc. The birthing person was actually overdue, so D could have made an appointment for a test as the date got nearer.

[AZChristian]

2 hours ago, AngelaHunter said:

I notice the "doula" said "birthing people." We've recently been informed that not only women give birth, which came as something of a revelation to me.

On this season of Survivor, a gay male talked about having to leave his husband at home, whom he described as "a male transgender who was pregnant with their child." 

[AngelaHunter]

Quite a collection of looneytunes today, proudly announcing awful things they did.

1st: P orders a bunch of crappy furniture from defendant's store. He's another one who says, "Because we're both <insert race, religion or nationality) I trusted him completely".  To quote Dr. Phil the Quack: "How did that work out fer ya?"

In this case, they are both Hispanic, so a manly handshake seals the deal. P gets most of the junk he ordered but not the two, 50$ end tables. He starts calling D, being abusive on the phone and then going to the business to kick up a fuss. D tells him these tables are on order, but not shipped yet. He shows him on the computer that they are on order.

The last time P goes to D's business, he says D was outside overseeing products being loaded on a truck, and P got out of his car to confront D. "What happened then?" JM asks. "I slapped him in the face," P says, as though that's perfectly normal - over 50$ particle board-and-contact paper tables.  I had a couple of those once and they were 50$ an eon ago!

D, who armed himself with a pipe, says that P had a knife in his hand. JM is stunned. But it wasn't a huge butcher knife, just a butter knife, P protests. He changes it to a little pocket knife as though that makes it acceptable. P gets arrested. He's been arrested before, which is hardly surprising considering how he deals with business transactions. Delays in orders happen. It's happened to me.. Over a year ago I waited more than 6 weeks for a new bed. I should have gone to the store with a machine gun, I guess. Anyway, Def cancels the order but keeps the 100$. Since P never paid the 50$ delivery charge for the other junk, Def owes him 50$. I guess it was all worth it for P.

Then we had Brian, chubby chipmunk-cheeked, clueless Brian. Brian needs a big vehicle because his girlfriend has 3 kids. He sees on FB marketplace a 14-year-old Chrysler Pacifica minivan with 125,000 miles for 1250-odd$  and wants it. He contacts Def, who is a used-car salesman but is selling this sad bucket of bolts from his home and Brian goes to check out this vehicle. It won't start when he gets there, but D says it just needs to have the battery charged up so Brian is not deterred.

Brain the Brain takes his mommy with him, and mommy points out that the thing is titled to a place called "Clunker Junkers", an organization that buys old, broken down hoopties to be sold for parts only. That doesn't deter Brian either. He takes the junker but oh, no - it doesn't pass inspection. Did he demand his money back within 14 days, as he is entitled to do in NH? Nope. He takes it to a mechanic and says he was told the t***** was shot, among many other things. Does he have proof of this? Nope. He spouts hearsay. JM wants to know why he waited well over a month to ask for the money back? He's busy workin' and havin' a family. No, Brian. You do not have a family. You have a girlfriend (what the hell is her problem that she really wants Brian?) who has 3 kids.

JM really wants to help him, just because D is such a belligerent crook, but her hands are tied since he did absolutely zero to help himself. No money for poor little Bri, who by the way was suing for 7K. 

Then we had P, whose attitude shocks JM, (and whose extra-ratty, janky wig shocked me) suing for her security deposit. She informed her landlady she was moving from her place on Dec. 28 - moving date Jan 1. "You gave her 4 day's notice?" asks JM. "Yes", answers P with an air of noblesse oblige. She did look up the law about this afterward, but feels it shouldn't apply to her.

Then she doesn't get all her junk out until Jan 5. She patiently and condescendingly explains to JM that Jan 1 was a holiday, and then we had Saturday and Sunday and who would expect her to move on a weekend? It wasn't convenient. She kindly offered to pay D for the extra days. "It's not a hotel", JM informs her. Eye-rolling and duck-lipping throughout and even at the end she has no idea why she isn't getting her security back. Hey, she's special!

Doug in the Hall asks Def if she feels bad for P. "No", she says. I so get that.

[Guest]

4 hours ago, AngelaHunter said:

Quite a collection of looneytunes today, proudly announcing awful things they did.

1st: P orders a bunch of crappy furniture from defendant's store. He's another one who says, "Because we're both <insert race, religion or nationality) I trusted him completely".  To quote Dr. Phil the Quack: "How did that work out fer ya?"

In this case, they are both Hispanic, so a manly handshake seals the deal. P gets most of the junk he ordered but not the two, 50$ end tables. He starts calling D, being abusive on the phone and then going to the business to kick up a fuss. D tells him these tables are on order, but not shipped yet. He shows him on the computer that they are on order.

The last time P goes to D's business, he says D was outside overseeing products being loaded on a truck, and P got out of his car to confront D. "What happened then?" JM asks. "I slapped him in the face," P says, as though that's perfectly normal - over 50$ particle board-and-contact paper tables.  I had a couple of those once and they were 50$ an eon ago!

D, who armed himself with a pipe, says that P had a knife in his hand. JM is stunned. But it wasn't a huge butcher knife, just a butter knife, P protests. He changes it to a little pocket knife as though that makes it acceptable. P gets arrested. He's been arrested before, which is hardly surprising considering how he deals with business transactions. Delays in orders happen. It's happened to me.. Over a year ago I waited more than 6 weeks for a new bed. I should have gone to the store with a machine gun, I guess. Anyway, Def cancels the order but keeps the 100$. Since P never paid the 50$ delivery charge for the other junk, Def owes him 50$. I guess it was all worth it for P.

Then we had Brian, chubby chipmunk-cheeked, clueless Brian. Brian needs a big vehicle because his girlfriend has 3 kids. He sees on FB marketplace a 14-year-old Chrysler Pacifica minivan with 125,000 miles for 1250-odd$  and wants it. He contacts Def, who is a used-car salesman but is selling this sad bucket of bolts from his home and Brian goes to check out this vehicle. It won't start when he gets there, but D says it just needs to have the battery charged up so Brian is not deterred.

Brain the Brain takes his mommy with him, and mommy points out that the thing is titled to a place called "Clunker Junkers", an organization that buys old, broken down hoopties to be sold for parts only. That doesn't deter Brian either. He takes the junker but oh, no - it doesn't pass inspection. Did he demand his money back within 14 days, as he is entitled to do in NH? Nope. He takes it to a mechanic and says he was told the t***** was shot, among many other things. Does he have proof of this? Nope. He spouts hearsay. JM wants to know why he waited well over a month to ask for the money back? He's busy workin' and havin' a family. No, Brian. You do not have a family. You have a girlfriend (what the hell is her problem that she really wants Brian?) who has 3 kids.

JM really wants to help him, just because D is such a belligerent crook, but her hands are tied since he did absolutely zero to help himself. No money for poor little Bri, who by the way was suing for 7K. 

Then we had P, whose attitude shocks JM, (and whose extra-ratty, janky wig shocked me) suing for her security deposit. She informed her landlady she was moving from her place on Dec. 28 - moving date Jan 1. "You gave her 4 day's notice?" asks JM. "Yes", answers P with an air of noblesse oblige. She did look up the law about this afterward, but feels it shouldn't apply to her.

Then she doesn't get all her junk out until Jan 5. She patiently and condescendingly explains to JM that Jan 1 was a holiday, and then we had Saturday and Sunday and who would expect her to move on a weekend? It wasn't convenient. She kindly offered to pay D for the extra days. "It's not a hotel", JM informs her. Eye-rolling and duck-lipping throughout and even at the end she has no idea why she isn't getting her security back. Hey, she's special!

Doug in the Hall asks Def if she feels bad for P. "No", she says. I so get that.

Machine gun indeed!!

[AngelaHunter]

14 hours ago, PsychoKlown said:

Machine gun indeed!!

Yeah, the old-timey gangster kind.

But what is the protocol for dealing with merchants who don't deliver your goods/services when expected or you are not pleased with them?

I've been trying to figure out by watching our litigants. Should your reaction and choice of weapon depend on the size, make, or price of the item? That might make sense but when we see someone physically attacking and waving a knife over a $50 table, or others who pull a gun and a knife over the unsatisfactory repairs on a 16-year-old clunker (shouldn't throwing a rock through a window suffice in that case?) I'm just not sure.

I'm going to have to replace my 30-year-old fridge one of these days, so I need to be prepared for any bumps in the road.

[CrazyInAlabama]

3 hours ago, AngelaHunter said:

Yeah, the old-timey gangster kind.

But what is the protocol for dealing with merchants who don't deliver your goods/services when expected or you are not pleased with them?

I've been trying to figure out by watching our litigants. Should your reaction and choice of weapon depend on the size, make, or price of the item? That might make sense but when we see someone physically attacking and waving a knife over a $50 table, or others who pull a gun and a knife over the unsatisfactory repairs on a 16-year-old clunker (shouldn't throwing a rock through a window suffice in that case?) I'm just not sure.

I'm going to have to replace my 30-year-old fridge one of these days, so I need to be prepared for any bumps in the road.

One problem is if you get fixated on one particular brand, model and finish, and then find out it's a six month wait to get it.    Another shortage, blamed on the supply chains.

Today's new episode, "You Gave me the Wrong Puppy", case 1, woman sells defendant a Chocolate Lab puppy, for $2,000.   She left the papers at home, and will mail out Monday morning, so defendant only makes partial payment.    Then, defendant refuses to pay the other $600, because he claims it's not the same puppy he saw in the pictures she sent him, three weeks before the purchase.      Dogs change so much from four or five weeks to eight weeks, and defendant claims the puppy is much smaller, and not the AKC puppy he bought.     Defendant wants to keep the puppy, but for $300 less.   Defendant is full of it.    Then, defendant offered $300, not $600, and he demands the AKC papers too.  

Defendant claims it's not the original puppy in the pictures, the size is different, the age is wrong, all kinds of garbage.   Plaintiff gets $600, plus court costs, and interest. 

Case 2-Plaintiffs move out, and defendant, Salynn,  claims they trashed the place, and won't get their security deposit back, $600 (but they want double that back, $1200 under Pennsylvania law).   Landlord/defendant (she's the property manager, not the owner of the rental) claims they left rotten food behind, trash everywhere, lots of damages.    Plaintiff woman keeps yelling at Judge, and claiming the defendant is a liar.    Defendant says food in the cupboards, lots of wall holes to fix (decent sized divots, not pin holes), stove is disgusting, lots of writing on the walls, food smeared into the rug that plaintiff woman claims were there when they moved in.   

However, how does plaintiff woman know exactly what the carpet marks are from?   They're just smears of color in the rug, so how does she know they're gummy worms, and gummy bears?   Plaintiff woman has no proof of complaints she made to landlord about problems with the rental.   Defendant is property manager, not owner.       I guess the plaintiff's had a five-year-old, to account for the damages. 

Plaintiffs get $89.10 back, but no double payment.  (why do landlords/property managers come on this show?).

Case 3-Plaintiff wants $5k for his totaled car, but defendant claims the car wasn't totaled, and driveable after their 'fender bender".    $2500 lost wages, and $2500 value of the car.   Plaintiff claims defendant jumped the light and hit the back passenger door on the driver's side of his car.    Defendant was making a left turn, and nailed the back of plaintiff's car, and plaintiff had right of way because he was going straight.    Defendant claims the witnesses were plants, and plaintiff's tow truck showing up first is a conspiracy.  

Lost wages dismissed, but $2500 for the car to plaintiff.   Defendant has a conspiracy theory about the accident, dismissed. 

 

 

[rcc]

49 minutes ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

One problem is if you get fixated on one particular brand, model and finish, and then find out it's a six month wait to get it.    Another shortage, blamed on the supply chains.

Today's new episode, "You Gave me the Wrong Puppy", case 1, woman sells defendant a Chocolate Lab puppy, for $2,000.   She left the papers at home, and will mail out Monday morning, so defendant only makes partial payment.    Then, defendant refuses to pay the other $600, because he claims it's not the same puppy he saw in the pictures she sent him, three weeks before the purchase.      Dogs change so much from four or five weeks to eight weeks, and defendant claims the puppy is much smaller, and not the AKC puppy he bought.     Defendant wants to keep the puppy, but for $300 less.   Defendant is full of it.    Then, defendant offered $300, not $600, and he demands the AKC papers too.  

Defendant claims it's not the original puppy in the pictures, the size is different, the age is wrong, all kinds of garbage.   Plaintiff gets $600, plus court costs, and interest. 

Case 2-Plaintiffs move out, and defendant, Salynn,  claims they trashed the place, and won't get their security deposit back, $600 (but they want double that back, $1200 under Pennsylvania law).   Landlord/defendant (she's the property manager, not the owner of the rental) claims they left rotten food behind, trash everywhere, lots of damages.    Plaintiff woman keeps yelling at Judge, and claiming the defendant is a liar.    Defendant says food in the cupboards, lots of wall holes to fix (decent sized divots, not pin holes), stove is disgusting, lots of writing on the walls, food smeared into the rug that plaintiff woman claims were there when they moved in.   

However, how does plaintiff woman know exactly what the carpet marks are from?   They're just smears of color in the rug, so how does she know they're gummy worms, and gummy bears?   Plaintiff woman has no proof of complaints she made to landlord about problems with the rental.   Defendant is property manager, not owner.       I guess the plaintiff's had a five-year-old, to account for the damages. 

Plaintiffs get $89.10 back, but no double payment.  (why do landlords/property managers come on this show?).

Case 3-Plaintiff wants $5k for his totaled car, but defendant claims the car wasn't totaled, and driveable after their 'fender bender".    $2500 lost wages, and $2500 value of the car.   Plaintiff claims defendant jumped the light and hit the back passenger door on the driver's side of his car.    Defendant was making a left turn, and nailed the back of plaintiff's car, and plaintiff had right of way because he was going straight.    Defendant claims the witnesses were plants, and plaintiff's tow truck showing up first is a conspiracy.  

Lost wages dismissed, but $2500 for the car to plaintiff.   Defendant has a conspiracy theory about the accident, dismissed. 

 

 

When the second case plaintiff had a cross around her neck I knew she was trouble. Lol third case plaintiff said he had no proof of salary. Right!

Just now, rcc said:

That puppy was so cute in first case. When the second case plaintiff had a cross around her neck I knew she was trouble. Lol Third case plaintiff said he had no proof of salary. Right!

 

1 minute ago, rcc said:

 

 

 

[AngelaHunter]

56 minutes ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

Case 2-Plaintiffs move out, and defendant, Salynn,  claims they trashed the place

I was disoriented when this started. At first I thought  this was a split screen with boyfriend/"fiance" in another house or room, zoomed out since she looked over twice his size. Then I saw he and his lovely lady were sitting together. Oh. Anyway, for all the yapping from both sides and P bellowing over JM no one had much in the way of proof of damages or lack of such. Def is the property manager, not the owner, who says if JM will give her a minute she will show bills to fix the place up because it never occured to her she would need them here. Seems she and her husband did the work - not major work either - and she typed up some sort of inflated invoice.  89$ was enough to wipe out a stove drawer and scrape up gummybear fragments. The place needed painting anyway.  I was shocked to hear that one of JM's perfect girls used to draw on the walls. 

56 minutes ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

Case 3-Plaintiff wants $5k for his totaled car

That was something else! Middleaged Def Hillbilly Hag, driving her mommy's car states, as per usual after hitting someone, "There wasn't no cars comin'" and P "came out of nowhere". I guess cloaking devices have made it into the mainstream.

Anyway, it seems P is some sort of conspiracy mastermind and clairvoyant. He knew in advance that P was going to be on that road that day at that very time and engaged his cloaking device. He knew she would make a left turn while he had the right of way. He lined up a bunch of phony witnesses beforehand and told them to hide (D declares there "wasn't no one there") and had his AAA on standby, since they got there before HER towtruck did. How?? The P has some mad skills there.

"Laugh if you want", she tells JM. "But it jus' ain't right!" she states, not understanding why JM is laughing at her. Oh, and P smashed up his totaled car further, maybe with a sledgehammer, just to make her look bad.  It was dark but still, with her experienced and discerning eye based on her career doing body/mechanical work she could tell that car was NOT totalled. By the time she got done smashing it, I doubt even "Junker Clunkers" would take it.

JM smirks as she asks the Hag if Mommy still lets her drive the car. "Nope." JM never asked about insurance, did she?

It was a little disappointing that P, who was rightfully awarded money for the car tries for a bo-nanza and claims to have lost 2500$ because he couldn't get to this job and avoided answering JM's question as to why he couldn't rent a car, take a bus, get a ride - anything to not lose his job. JM, figuring she'd never get a straight answer, declined to try asking again and gave him 2500$ for the car.

Edited September 29, 2021 by AngelaHunter

[Guest]

Exhausting!

But I did have a good laugh at the moniker Middle-aged Hillbilly Hag.  

That description could apply to so many of the specimens on this show.  You should TM that AngelaHunter.  It’s a doozy.

[rcc]

11 minutes ago, AngelaHunter said:

I was disoriented when this started. At first I thought  this was a split screen with boyfriend/"fiance" in another house or room, zoomed out since she looked over twice his size. Then I saw he and his lovely lady were sitting together. Oh. Anyway, for all the yapping from both sides and P bellowing over JM no one had much in the way of proof of damages or lack of such. Def is the property manager, not the owner, who says if JM will give her a minute she will show bills to fix the place up because it never occured to her she would need them here. Seems she and her husband did the work - not major work either - and she typed up some sort of inflated invoice.  89$ was enough to wipe out a stove drawer and scrape up gummybear fragments. The place needed painting anyway.  I was shocked to hear that one of JM's perfect girls used to draw on the walls. 

That was something else! Middleaged Def Hillbilly Hag, driving her mommy's car states, as per usual after hitting someone, "There wasn't no cars comin'" and P "came out of nowhere". I guess cloaking devices have made it into the mainstream.

Anyway, it seems P is some sort of conspiracy mastermind and clairvoyant. He knew in advance that P was going to be on that road that day at that very time and engaged his cloaking device. He knew she would make a left turn while he had the right of way. He lined up a bunch of phony witnesses beforehand and told them to hide (D declares there "wasn't no one there") and had his AAA on standby, since they got there before HER towtruck did. How?? The P has some mad skills there.

"Laugh if you want", she tells JM. "But it jus' ain't right!" she states, not understanding why JM is laughing at her. Oh, and P smashed up his totaled car further, maybe with a sledgehammer, just to make her look bad.  It was dark but still, with her experienced and discerning eye based on her career doing body/mechanical work she could tell that car was NOT totalled. By the time she got done smashing it, I doubt even "Junker Clunkers" would take it.

JM smirks as she asks the Hag if Mommy still lets her drive the car. "Nope." JM never asked about insurance, did she?

It was a little disappointing that P, who was rightfully awarded money for the car tries for a bo-nanza and claims to have lost 2500$ because he couldn't get to this job and avoided answering JM's question as to why he couldn't rent a car, take a bus, get a ride - anything to not lose his job. JM, figuring she'd never get a straight answer, declined to try asking again and gave him 2500$ for the car.

JM's daughter writing on wall. Lol

[Guest]

42 minutes ago, rcc said:

JM's daughter writing on wall. Lol

Wanna bet she was writing….

I am the most fabulous person to ever grace this earth with my two wonderful, talented, beautiful, socially aware, did-I-say-talented?, beautiful sisters.

We are so much better than everyone else.  At least that’s what our Judge Mom says to us and since she’s a judge on a television show who in their right mind could argue with her?  

I’m also guessing she wrote this when she was seven years old.   

[AngelaHunter]

41 minutes ago, PsychoKlown said:

Wanna bet she was writing….

I am the most fabulous person to ever grace this earth with my two wonderful, talented, beautiful, socially aware, did-I-say-talented?, beautiful sisters.

We are so much better than everyone else.  At least that’s what our Judge Mom says to us and since she’s a judge on a television show who in their right mind could argue with her?  

I’m also guessing she wrote this when she was seven years old.   

She drew circles too, and we were informed those circles were "perfect." Would we expect otherwise?

1 hour ago, PsychoKlown said:

But I did have a good laugh at the moniker Middle-aged Hillbilly Hag.

Someone else here (sorry, I forget who) came up with something so wonderful I saved it for posterity: "Ivory tower asswipes."  The poetic simplicity and perfection of that made me weep with joy.

[CrazyInAlabama]

I missed most of today's case, but the gazebo flattened by neighbor's trampoline was hysterical.    The hall-terview with Doug and defendant wife was so funny.   Wife called plaintiff's current wife a gold digger, said she should buy her own house, and no one likes her. 

Note to Judge Marilyn, I've seen giant trampolines flying like a frisbee, skipping over things, and flattening one thing, but leaving another structure intact.  

Edited October 1, 2021 by CrazyInAlabama

[AngelaHunter]

30 minutes ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

the gazebo flattened by neighbor's trampoline was hysterical.

Yes, it was. The monumental Mrs. Hobbs (Def) and her dripping-in-sarcasm" speech about the wayward trampoline was pretty funny.

P's new wife starts oozing tears over this 327$ gazebo and wipes them very carefully so as to avoid stabbing her eyeball with her fake nails. Ms. Hobbs in the hall had to give Doug all the dirt on P's wife. She just moved in there! She's his second wife, therefore has no rights about anything to do with the house. Gold-digger? P's house hardly looked palatial and if one is reduced to tears over a broken gazebo (My CC hilariously called it "Ka-zebo") how much gold could she have dug up with her new hubby?

Aside from that, maybe it's true that our litigants really do only have skills when taking nasty pics or vids. Take a blurry picture of something 5" away from the object and expect someone to be able to make sense of it? Never happens. JM all but called them scammers. Maybe they are, or maybe not. Who knows? I guess Mrs. Hobbs summed it up well, with her, "She don't even have no respeck for nobody." I swear I could see my 5th grade English teacher, in her lovely flowered dress and her tasteful string of pearls, whirling in her grave.

In the first case, when I heard about "destroyed" ducks, I was hoping we were going to hear about some valuable decoys or yard ornaments, but my hopes were dashed. P starts with "Me and my girlfriend were vacated..." which I assume is a fancy way of saying "evicted" or "given the boot" and that these were live ducks, I started the FF in triple time. I'm much happier not knowing what happens to poor animals unfortunate enough to be in the care of the majority of our litigants.

My very brief view of the P - maybe unfair or hasty and I could be dead wrong - gave me the idea that the only kind of ducks he should have are these:

 

[Guest]

1 hour ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

I missed most of today's case, but the gazebo flattened by neighbor's trampoline was hysterical.    The hall-terview with Doug and defendant wife was so funny.   Wife called plaintiff's current wife a gold digger, said she should buy her own house, and no one likes her. 

You’re kiddin’ me!!

I was sitting in the Jeep dealership waiting for the diagnosis (bought a new one, didn’t plan on it or anything….but needed to) and don’t you know I’d miss a good case.

Oh, and before anyone asks…I bought the jeep through a reputable dealership, we’ve been with them for 20+ years, know all the employees and have no plans to sue them if the heated seats don’t work.

It’s also on the lot so there’s no waiting time, no “as is” (I’m buying an extended warranty) and no kerfuffle with the Service Department meaning I’d have to throw a brick through the main window.

This also means I have to work for ten friggin’ years extra but I’ll be able to drive to work in a jeep that has working sensors in the dashboard.

Sorry to disappoint.  I know y’all like a good saga with busted windows, police reports, tire irons, hinky registrations and bad “bewigged* salespeople. Our guy is bald.

Anyway, I’m sorry I missed a good case.

*tm AngelaHunter

Edited September 30, 2021 by PsychoKlown

[rcc]

19 minutes ago, AngelaHunter said:

Yes, it was. The monumental Mrs. Hobbs (Def) and her dripping-in-sarcasm" speech about the wayward trampoline was pretty funny.

P's new wife starts oozing tears over this 327$ gazebo and wipes them very carefully so as to avoid stabbing her eyeball with her fake nails. Ms. Hobbs in the hall had to give Doug all the dirt on P's wife. She just moved in there! She's his second wife, therefore has no rights about anything to do with the house. Gold-digger? P's house hardly looked palatial and if one is reduced to tears over a broken gazebo (My CC hilariously called it "Ka-zebo") how much gold could she have dug up with her new hubby?

Aside from that, maybe it's true that our litigants really do only have skills when taking nasty pics or vids. Take a blurry picture of something 5" away from the object and expect someone to be able to make sense of it? Never happens. JM all but called them scammers. Maybe they are, or maybe not. Who knows? I guess Mrs. Hobbs summed it up well, with her, "She don't even have no respeck for nobody." I swear I could see my 5th grade English teacher, in her lovely flowered dress and her tasteful string of pearls, whirling in her grave.

In the first case, when I heard about "destroyed" ducks, I was hoping we were going to hear about some valuable decoys or yard ornaments, but my hopes were dashed. P starts with "Me and my girlfriend were vacated..." which I assume is a fancy way of saying "evicted" or "given the boot" and that these were live ducks, I started the FF in triple time. I'm much happier not knowing what happens to poor animals unfortunate enough to be in the care of the majority of our litigants.

My very brief view of the P - maybe unfair or hasty and I could be dead wrong - gave me the idea that the only kind of ducks he should have are these:

 

Yup that is the only duck he deserves to have. If you can't take care of your animals then don't have any. He loves his ducks and also wanted an inflated $2,500 for his pain. Defendent obviously couldn't stand the guy.

[AngelaHunter]

1 hour ago, PsychoKlown said:

Oh, and before anyone asks…I bought the jeep through a reputable dealership, we’ve been with them for 20+ years, know all the employees and have no plans to sue them if the heated seats don’t work.

Kinda high and mighty, aren't ya? You'll never get your 15 minutes (8, if you deduct Levin, Hall Clown, Pillow Pimp, etc) at this rate.

If you didn't go to "Beaters 'r Us" please tell  me you needed your cousin's mother-in-law to co-sign for you, had to get the shady dealer to borrow you the down payment, had to tow your new vee-hickle home, or took a baseball bat, a gun, or at least a small switchblade with you to aid in the negotiations?

No? Well, congrats on your new ride anyway!🙂🎉

1 hour ago, rcc said:

If you can't take care of your animals then don't have any.

Same goes for babies. I've been watching this show so long I feel I can often sum up litigants in five seconds. Imagine how easy it is for judges?

[Guest]

3 hours ago, AngelaHunter said:

Kinda high and mighty, aren't ya? You'll never get your 15 minutes (8, if you deduct Levin, Hall Clown, Pillow Pimp, etc) at this rate.

If you didn't go to "Beaters 'r Us" please tell  me you needed your cousin's mother-in-law to co-sign for you, had to get the shady dealer to borrow you the down payment, had to tow your new vee-hickle home, or took a baseball bat, a gun, or at least a small switchblade with you to aid in the negotiations?

No? Well, congrats on your new ride anyway!🙂🎉

 

You know the expression “doubling over with laughter”?  It’s happening right now.  

[CrazyInAlabama]

Today's new show "Enraging Your Ex"  Case 1, Plaintiff suing for money ex stopped paying for her bills, after he dumped her for another woman he met online.    She claims his family jumped her last Christmas, and did all kinds of injuries to her.     Defendant / ex says he shouldn't have to pay rent or utilities, because he left.   As Judge Marilyn points out, landlords don't take "I don't feel like paying" for an excuse.   I don't even know how it came out, because I was laughing so hard.   I would not be surprised if this was another fake case. 

[rcc]

12 minutes ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

Today's new show "Enraging Your Ex"  Case 1, Plaintiff suing for money ex stopped paying for her bills, after he dumped her for another woman he met online.    She claims his family jumped her last Christmas, and did all kinds of injuries to her.     Defendant / ex says he shouldn't have to pay rent or utilities, because he left.   As Judge Marilyn points out, landlords don't take "I don't feel like paying" for an excuse.   I don't even know how it came out, because I was laughing so hard.   I would not be surprised if this was another fake case. 

He has been "disrespected" so he leaves her before the rent is due. He seems to be a jerk.

Second case is a realtor helping a bad housekeeper to sell her house. People can be messy. Lol

[AngelaHunter]

42 minutes ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

 I don't even know how it came out, because I was laughing so hard.

Between her "I'm an aspiring actress" and her telling us how her dopey husband packs up and leaves (where does he go? Who knows?) every time the rent is due, and is talking about his penis (ew) with some online skanks, that his loving family - his "brother wife" IIRC -  cut her up and put her in the hospital (he has no idea who, how, or why and she acts as though this is just per usual) my eyes were rolling nearly out of my head.

JM opines that if HER husband's family attacked her like wild animals and sliced her up, he might take an interest in that, but oh, well - we're all different.

Ms. Aspiring Actress refuses to go to Las Vegas, because it's full of lowlife people who will pick your pockets, but pickpockets might be the least of my worries if husband's family, according to her, are violent lowlife lunatics of the first order. They also think she's some "big city whore" because she's from Washington. Are there no small-town whores?

People, take note: According to the disappearing hubby, "God will pay her bills". Wow, I was thrilled to hear that. I'm forwarding my next internet/phone bill to the Heavens.

The real estate agent, Ms Amanda, drums up business on FB and conducts it with total strangers "on faith". Sure, why not? That always works out so well. She refused to tell Def, who asked many times, how much it would cost to clean up and paint her hoarded lair. She called JM "Honey" but it seems that's fine or even cute if the person is from the South. Northerners, you will get reamed for doing same.

Amanda's hubby, Michael, has to be one of the shittiest painters we've ever seen here. He looked exhausted and beaten down by his domineering, motor-mouthed wife.

[Guest]

The case of the AspiringActressesAgony did not disappoint because it was chock full of angst that had me drawn in from the start.

No one mentioned the prized hubby’s trip to Walmart to buy some suitcases.  I don’t know why but I laughed much harder than needed on that tidbit.  The aspiring actress (who, to me, looked like she could play someone’s geeky friend) had her soliloquy down pat.  I suppose she mentioned Walmart and suitcases because this shows his intent.  

I’m just baffled why he thought he was not responsible for paying his share of the rent.  I’m just as perplexed as to why she thought he would be responsible for her internet and heat long after he takes his Walmart suitcases and leaves.  

A divorce made in heaven.

And case two:  holy hats in hell.  I was scratching my arms.  I do that when I see a cluttered environment.  The defendant had a daycare?  Yikes.  Stacked boxes, piles of bags and plastic magnets assaulting the refrigerator just reinforced the hoarder mentality. 

And Ms. Amanda and Mr. Michael - what a pair.  His painting talent was lacking and her approach to Real Estate sales was unique, I’ll give her that.  I’ve never heard of a real estate agent - excuse me, manager - who did contractual work without a contract.

Did they say which town in Ohio?  Maybe best if they didn’t.

I will say this about real estate couple…I don’t see him running off to Walmart to purchase a few suitcases.  If he ever attempted that little trick I am sure Ms. Amanda would knock him senseless with the luggage.

 

[AngelaHunter]

45 minutes ago, PsychoKlown said:

I will say this about real estate couple…I don’t see him running off to Walmart to purchase a few suitcases.  If he ever attempted that little trick I am sure Ms. Amanda would knock him senseless with the luggage.

😆 What about if he meets some trollop online and then talks about Florida, Florida, FLORIDA and calls her as he's enroute, Walmart suitcases packed and penis at the ready, to FLORIDA to rendez-vous with said trollop?

48 minutes ago, PsychoKlown said:

 Stacked boxes, piles of bags and plastic magnets assaulting the refrigerator just reinforced the hoarder mentality. 

The refrigerator alone gave me anxiety. How long does it take to accumulate such a massive collection of fridge magnets, anyway? The boxes and bags, both here and piled into some storage locker surprised me not at all. She needed to feather her new nest with her priceless collections of useless junk. Even the cat looked askance at it all.

[Guest]

1 hour ago, AngelaHunter said:

😆 What about if he meets some trollop online and then talks about Florida, Florida, FLORIDA and calls her as he's enroute, Walmart suitcases packed and penis at the ready, to FLORIDA to rendez-vous with said trollop?

If this were to happen I can see Miss Amanda wildly following him down 1-95, honking and screaming at him to “get his ass back home”.  In a last resort she takes out her pink gun and shoots a round in his tires.  He cryptically texts his trollop while dutifully turning the car around so that AAA can have better access to changing the shredded tire.

1 hour ago, AngelaHunter said:

The refrigerator alone gave me anxiety. How long does it take to accumulate such a massive collection of fridge magnets, anyway? The boxes and bags, both here and piled into some storage locker surprised me not at all. She needed to feather her new nest with her priceless collections of useless junk. Even the cat looked askance at it all.

I imagine the fragrance wafting through her abode is a combination of a Big Daddy fryer,  cigarette smoke and bacon.

I’m not a real estate manager but just from my twenty minute exposure to this case, my suggestion to get a higher price for her home would include a bulldozer and a several large dumpsters.

[AngelaHunter]

2 hours ago, PsychoKlown said:

 The aspiring actress (who, to me, looked like she could play someone’s geeky friend) had her soliloquy down pat.

I hope the inlaws didn't slice her up in places where the scars show. That might put a kink in her future acting career.

 

8 minutes ago, PsychoKlown said:

I imagine the fragrance wafting through her abode is a combination of a Big Daddy fryer,  cigarette smoke and bacon.

Her house, before it was cleared out wasn't the worst I"ve seen - I used to watch Hoarders - , but the wall-to-wall boxes of junk and Home Shopping Channel crap, and those towering shelves crammed with shit? She's lucky Amanda was willing to work on faith and clear it out. It's not a job Def could ever get anyone else to tackle. Just looking at it made me claustrophobic.  You know everything was covered in 2" of dust and cat hair, since no one could possibly dust that disaster. A housekeeper would walk in, think "Oh, HELL no!" and do an about-face out the door.

[AngelaHunter]

22 hours ago, PsychoKlown said:

I’m not a real estate manager but just from my twenty minute exposure to this case, my suggestion to get a higher price for her home would include a bulldozer and a several large dumpsters.

Amanda faithfully cleans out the nest:

 

 

[Guest]

1 hour ago, AngelaHunter said:

Amanda faithfully cleans out the nest:

 

 

Miss Amanda is also prepared to use that on Mr. Michael if he misbehaves.

I’d sleep with one eye opened if I were in his shoes. 

[AZChristian]

On 10/1/2021 at 7:04 PM, PsychoKlown said:

I’m not a real estate manager but just from my twenty minute exposure to this case, my suggestion to get a higher price for her home would include a bulldozer and a several large dumpsters.

Her frequent texts about "cleared out some more stuff today" (written weeks after she was supposed to have completed that task) sounds like a description of Amy Roloff on Little People Big World.  It took her SIX MONTHS to clear her stuff out of the house her husband now had full ownership of.  That woman is NOT to be rushed.

[AngelaHunter]

On 10/3/2021 at 10:09 AM, AZChristian said:

Amy Roloff on Little People Big World.

That reminds me of when two of the Roloffs appeared here. Mother and daughter, maybe? I never watched that show so not sure but they seemed to think TPC was a joke, or a showcase for them and that they are stars of such magnitude they need not bother having car insurance.

[AZChristian]

11 minutes ago, AngelaHunter said:

That reminds me of when two of the Roloffs appeared here. Mother and daughter, maybe? I never watched that show so not sure but they seemed to think TPC was a joke, or a showcase for them and that they are stars of such magnitude they need not bother having car insurance.

Are you sure it was the Roloffs?  I watch TPC every day, and have never seen that episode, nor could I find it on Google.

If it were an issue of car insurance, I'd be more suspicious that it was the Browns of Sister Wives.  They have MULTIPLE tickets for insurance issues.  But I don't find anything on Google about them on TPC either.

[CrazyInAlabama]

This morning's rerun was the original episode of the season, where she was so happy to be back in person, with Doug.    

[AngelaHunter]

1 hour ago, AZChristian said:

Are you sure it was the Roloffs?  I watch TPC every day, and have never seen that episode, nor could I find it on Google.

If it were an issue of car insurance, I'd be more suspicious that it was the Browns of Sister Wives.  They have MULTIPLE tickets for insurance issues.  But I don't find anything on Google about them on TPC either.

Okay, people. Help me out here. I know the Roloffs were on this show. My memory is shot, but I distinctly recall one of them needing a stepstool to demonstrate what happened on the infamous White Board.

Maybe due to their  VIP status, all records of this have been expunged?

[Guest]

13 minutes ago, AngelaHunter said:

Okay, people. Help me out here. I know the Roloffs were on this show. My memory is shot, but I distinctly recall one of them needing a stepstool to demonstrate what happened on the infamous White Board.

Maybe due to their  VIP status, all records of this have been expunged?

I don’t remember it but that doesn’t mean a thing.  

I looked and couldn’t find anything.  I looked at Amy Roloff’s imdb and did not see it listed.  

Hmmm.  A mystery for sure.

ETA:  I’m watching case 2 right now.  I am scared witless of the defendant.  He threatened to break a dog’s neck?  Does this idiot understand that a threat to a dog is meaningless?  The dog (no matter how smart we believe them to be) does not comprehend the threat “I’m gonna break your neck”.   

Very scary defendant.  Miss “fiancé” better run and run fast.

Edited October 4, 2021 by PsychoKlown

[AngelaHunter]

1 minute ago, PsychoKlown said:

I don’t remember it but that doesn’t mean a thing.  

I looked and couldn’t find anything.  I looked at Amy Roloff’s imdb and did not see it listed.  

Hmmm.  A mystery for sure.

There was a certain litigant on JJ who got all references to him and his case removed. Could be what happened here. I can't seem to use the "Search" function here very well and couldn't find the Roloff comments if they still exist.  I recall us discussing the fact that for all the money they make, they couldn't be bothered paying for insurance.

Yes, it's a mystery, but I know I saw them here. JM was not impressed by their fame or by their "Aren't I cute?" attitudes.

[AZChristian]

With all the other legal issues the Roloffs have had, I'm not sure they'd bother having an episode removed from The People's Court.  I've tried googling everything, even a generic "dwarf on People's Court."  Nada.  

But if you find it, let us know!!!!

[rcc]

Today's show with the pit bull owners made me angry. They knew the dog had been a fighter before adopting him but still brought him to a dog park. He was such a jerk looking irritated and even said he had to pull his dog away because nobody else was. Dumbass, lazy and JM noted who else was supposed to. Plaintiff wins and the defendents couldn't care less about her injury.

[CrazyInAlabama]

Today's new case "Backup Battle", Case 1-woman was parked on her side of a residential street (she was delivering something to the owner of the house), and defendant backed out of his driveway, hitting her $400+ bike rack on her car.  Defendant is suing the victim/plaintiff for damages to his truck.      Defendant drives a Ford F-150, and backed across the street (across a two lane street) into the neighbor's driveway, where the plaintiff was delivering items.     

Defendant loses.   Plaintiff wins $417.   Doug calls despicable defendant a loser.  I hope the neighbor with the driveway tells defendant to stay off of his property, and out of his driveway.

Case 2-Plaintiff says defendant's Pit Bull bit her on the hand, and this all happened at a dog park.      Defendant woman claims plaintiff got between the dogs at the dog park, and getting bitten was plaintiff's own fault.   Defendants were both on their phones during the dog fight.   As always, defendant woman claims Pit Bull plays with little kids all of the time, and has never bitten another animal or human.   Plaintiff called the shelter that defendants adopted dog, and shelter told her dog was in a dog fight right before the adoption, they only had the dog for two weeks before the fight happened.    Defendants claim dog escaped from previous owner, who was using him as a bait dog for dog fighting.  Judge Marilyn tells the defendants their dog can no longer go to the dog park, judging from defendants' bored looks, they're going to be back at dog parks again.  Defendants take the Pit to a doggy day care, I hope the operators of that place saw this case.  

Plaintiff gets $1550 for medical bills. 

Case 3-Plaintiff, a long-haul truck driver claims defendant stiffed him for wages.  $2478, for plaintiff's last trip from Indiana to California.    Defendant claims plaintiff left the truck in California, instead of returning the truck to Arizona.    Both litigants are named Singh, not related to each other.   Plaintiff was turning off the electronic log book, which is totally illegal.   Plaintiff gets his pay, minus $550, so $1928 to plaintiff

Edited October 4, 2021 by CrazyInAlabama

[AngelaHunter]

Loved the def. in the broken bike rack case. Def is a HE-MAN. He sits on public transportation with his knees 3 feet part because that's how Real Men do it! He made sure to announce that after JM told Douglas how much that pissed her off. Screw the other passengers. His stupendous balls need room.

He has a massive, extended-cab truck to prove his testosterone levels. His truck is so huge - he might be overcompensating for some shortfall -  he can't pull out of his driveway the way normal people do, no sir. He backs right across the two-lane road and into his neighbour's driveway and then pulls out. How dare the plaintiff block his tresspassing with her bicycle rack on her legally parked car? Silly woman shouldn't have parked in front of the house where she had business. She should have known that this Man would need that space for his giant truck.  He's also a weeny, whining, "It's not my fault!"He owes her nothing!

I was wondering why Mr. Macho couldn't back into his own driveway which would make it so much easier to get out, but I guess using other people's property as his own is more convenient for him. Fuck everyone else. P gets full amount for her smashed rack, some 427$.

On rare occasions I have used someone's driveway to turn around, such as when I get lost (a common occurance), end up on a dead-end street and need to turn around. I swear, I maneuver my car so that only the edge of one tire might hit a person's driveway and even then I feel really guilty doing this, almost as though I expect a pitch-forked mob to come rushing out of the house.

I would never routinely use the property of others in the way this asshole did and does.

Singh vs. Singh (no relation) was deadly dull.

[AZChristian]

@AngelaHunter . . . Might this be what you saw???????

[Bazinga]

4 hours ago, AngelaHunter said:

Okay, people. Help me out here. I know the Roloffs were on this show. My memory is shot, but I distinctly recall one of them needing a stepstool to demonstrate what happened on the infamous White Board.

Not the Roloffs.  It was Christy McGinity of Little Women: LA. in 2016.  JM treated her like a celebrity.  I didn't (and still don't) know who she is.  The daughter was on also.  Judge Milan treated her like she was so precious and she acted like she was so cute not having insurance.  I recall she blamed the husband which, of course, JM loved. 

Here it is from TMZ:
'Little Women: LA' Gets a Little Justice in 'The People's Court'

Here is a commercial for the episode on YT:

“Little Women LA” star in court!

Or, what AZChristian posted while I was working on my post.  Sorry for the redundancy.

The episode aired May 9, 2016 and comments about it can be found on page 38.

 

Edited October 4, 2021 by Bazinga

[AngelaHunter]

24 minutes ago, AZChristian said:

@AngelaHunter . . . Might this be what you saw???????

 

9 minutes ago, Bazinga said:

Not the Roloffs.  It was Christy McGinity of Little Women: LA. in 2016.

Thank you both! This was driving me mad and had me wondering if I were hallucinating or really had lost the few brain cells I have left. Never having watched either show, I got confused.

At least I remembered the stepladder correctly.

You peeps are awesome!😃

I guess having no insurance is cute if you're  a snotty young woman or are under 4' tall. Or maybe if you are very elderly.

 

[Pepper the Cat]

19 hours ago, AngelaHunter said:

There was a certain litigant on JJ who got all references to him and his case removed. Could be what happened here. I can't seem to use the "Search" function here very well and couldn't find the Roloff comments if they still exist.  I recall us discussing the fact that for all the money they make, they couldn't be bothered paying for insurance.

Yes, it's a mystery, but I know I saw them here. JM was not impressed by their fame or by their "Aren't I cute?" attitudes.

It was someone from one of the Real Wives of whatever.

 

[Carolina Girl]

19 hours ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

Defendants take the Pit to a doggy day care, I hope the operators of that place saw this case.  

Yeah, I'm willing to bet that the next time they bring that dog to the day care, they're informed there's no room at the inn.  And how many times have we heard that the pitbull was a darling, and played with kids and other animals right before it attacked and killed someone's pet or even worse, a child?

That dog of theirs is a time bomb waiting to go off.

[Carolina Girl]

18 hours ago, AngelaHunter said:

I would never routinely use the property of others in the way this asshole did and does.

Hell, I came home one night to find someone PARKED in my driveway (I'd been away all day and I think my inconsiderate neighbors told them to go ahead and park thinking I wouldn't be home for awhile)!  I pulled my car across it and went inside.  Loved it when the inconsiderate clods had to ring my bell and ask me to move my car.  I told them if they ever did it again, I would again block the driveway and call the tow company and not move my car until they were hooked up.  

[rcc]

Another friggin' dog case today!

[CrazyInAlabama]

Today's show "Pooch Problems"   Case 1-Plaintiff says husband called defendant/dog owner names after defendant's dog attacked plaintiff's beagle/schnauzer.   Plaintiff is suing for $1320 in dog medical bills, from the infection the bites caused. 

 Defendant says plaintiff is looking for a bonanza, defendant doesn't believer vet bills, and says plaintiff lied to Animal Control about defendant's dog's bite history.  (My guess is plaintiff told Animal Control the truth, and defendant was lying). 

 Plaintiffs were walking leashed dog on the street, then defendant was out on her yard with Rottweiler, not on leash, and plaintiff's dog was bitten on the butt by Rottie, and plaintiff's husband was bitten by his own dog while trying to rescue her.  Plaintiff husband didn't need medical care, but the little dog needed care at the emergency vet. 

Initial vet bill was over $400, and defendant paid that.    But dog's wound became infected, and that resulted in $1100+ more in vet bills, and defendant refused to pay that.    Defendant also says she doesn't know why plaintiffs were walking their dog in a snow storm.  

(I think any dog case with an off-leash dog should result in $5,000 for the victim's bills, and pain and suffering, so the defendant doesn't get a penny.)

Later, plaintiff waw the defendant walking her other, smaller dog, in front of their house, off leash.  Plaintiff submits a photo of defendant breaking the leash laws, and I doubt it was a coincidence that defendant was walking the off-leash dog right by plaintiff's house.    Defendant says her small dog is harmless, she's still a jerk, and breaking the law.  Defendant says ignoring the leash law is a personal choice.   

Defendant says not leashing her dogs is a personal choice, and doesn't care about what anyone says.  Then Doug in the hall asks defendant if she'll walk her dogs on leash, and defendant says no.   I hope everyone in the neighborhood calls animal control every time defendant and her dogs are off leash.    I don't believe the Rottie isn't out off leash constantly.   

Harvey calls defendant a bad dog owner, and says animal control should take defendant's dog, and right now I like Harvey almost as much as I like Doug.  

$1380 to plaintiff.

Case 2-Another fool bought car for defendant, and defendant won't pay.    A dream vehicle for defendant is a Town and Country minvan.    As always, defendant says car was a gift, not a loan.   So, Judge Marilyn says van was a gift, not a loan, and defendant wins.   I saw nothing in the testimony that justified this being a gift, not a loan, especially since defendant signed a promissory note.    Unless, Judge Marilyn thought the defendant wasn't legally competent to sign the note. 

 

Edited October 6, 2021 by CrazyInAlabama

[patty1h]

32 minutes ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

Case 2-Another fool bought car for defendant, and defendant won't pay. 

I just came to snark on the defendants Christy Lee's horrible 80's hair.  Those struggle bangs and that perm have been out of style since Full House went off the air.

[AngelaHunter]

Just now, patty1h said:

I just came to snark on the defendants Christy Lee's horrible 80's hair.  Those struggle bangs and that perm have been out of style since Full House went off the air.

I thought I was being unfair for hating everything about Ms. Christy Lee, from her 80's long, stringy, horrible hair to her little-girl voice to her 80's velvet collar that merely showcased her large double chin.

Ms. Christy Lee's dopey boyfriend wanted her to have the 'car of her dreams', which turned out to be a very old minivan. As fate would have it P saw this dream vehicle for sale!  They go to the dealer and the van was 1500$, as the overly verbose P related in his unicorn-and-rainbow rehearsed recitation (which JM seemed to find riveting) until the dealer looked into Christy's eyes, and she in his and then he asked Christy if she really, REALLY wanted this special heap and Christy said "YES!" so the price was lowered to 1100$, which is all P had to make Christy Lee's dream a reality.

Ms. Christy is very family-oriented, you know, so needed this old hulk to transport her nieces, nephews, grandchildren(?) - did I mention that Ms. Christy is a SSMOF? - to and from the big, loving family get-togethers.

Hey, I have to hand it to Christy, who thinks she's such a prize that a man - controlling and foolish as he may be - should want to rain money and gifts on her. But P did all that so I guess he thought she was worth it too. Both of them mentioned going to church.

Christy signed a promissory note 2 weeks after the purchase, which JM voids and I didn't quite understand why. Christy signed it, agreeing she owed the money and I doubt her benefactor held a gun to her head. Maybe the fact that he gave her other monies, for her all-important gas and cigarettes, made everything a gift? I don't know.