The People's Court - General Discussion

[AngelaHunter]

On 5/22/2023 at 6:00 PM, seacliffsal said:

Second case was the defendant bought new Restoration Hardware furniture from the plaintiff and didn't send the agreed amount (she paid $4000 of the $5000 price).

I just caught this. That defendant was a grifting, shady, deadbeat hag who showed not an iota of shame for her despicable behavior. I see she tried The New Agenda's way of trying to weasel out of paying what she owed: "I had a bad feeling about the patio furniture  (do NOT drink every time she says that word)... "I was uncomfortable... I went there at night (maybe she thought ditzy little P was a serial killer?)the furniture was in the house...something wasn't right... had a bad feeling." All that to say "I  couldn't really afford this trendy furniture I wanted so I decided not to pay for what I saw, liked, and agreed to buy".  What's it to her why the P was selling it?

 

On 5/22/2023 at 6:00 PM, seacliffsal said:

Today's first case was a disgruntled plaintiff who bought a custom diamond necklace (it was a diamond "name" pendant).

I thought she was annoying until I saw the furniture witch.

[DoctorK]

I hate to sound like a broken record but today's case with Mr. Completely tattooed head with hipster glasses versus little miss innocent private school school girl (with net tats - huh?) really brings back memories. They were so memorable and striking in appearance, plus little miss using money borrowed from Mr. Tats to sneak off to Florida with another guy is just so familiar that I have trouble believing that I haven't seen this case before. One last thought before I put on my tin foil hat: on nominally new shows sometimes one of the cases has the litigants on remote as they did during covid. Maybe they are slipping in occasional repeat cases along with one actual new case as they are winding down the show?

Edited May 24, 2023 by DoctorK

[patty1h]

My cable schedule lists todays episode as NEW and I immediately(!) recognized Mr. Freak Show Face and the Gen Z Schoolmarm.  Gyp!

[CrazyInAlabama]

I have to laugh at the second case, where plaintiffs were moving to Louisiana, hired "Gentle Movers".   The movers were only hired to pack and load the U-Haul U-boxes, and then U-Hauls shippers moved the boxes to Louisiana.  When everything was finally unpacked in Louisiana, plaintiffs claims there was a lot of damages, and they want over $4,000 in damages.   

Plaintiffs were supposed to supply shipping blankets, padding, etc. and wife had to go get more packing materials, and blankets, but didn't get enough.   Contract states that plaintiffs will have the straps, moving blankets, the shrink wrap (that may not be the real name, it's the sticky rolls of stuff that you put around items to keep the drawers or doors closed), and packing materials.   

Contract states that movers only pack and load, plaintiffs supplied moving materials, and then some other company's van was loaded, and there were multiple shipments in the same moving trailer.    It tooks a long time to get to Louisiana too, because the shipper picked up other loads, and unloaded some.  Damages could have happened anywhere.   I'm guessing that the plaintiffs didn't get decent insurance either.   PLaintiff's already received over $500 back from defendant.   Judge M tells plaintiffs to stuff it.  

(As Angela Hunter says in the following post, the first case were a couple from Hot Bench "A Loan of Bull", aired on 28 March 2023, page 37 on the Hot Bench topic.  That's why they looked so familiar.   The kids sneaker case was also on JJ and TPC, and a man who sued his HOA president was on JJ, and suing another neighbor on TPC.  )

Edited May 26, 2023 by CrazyInAlabama

[AngelaHunter]

1 hour ago, patty1h said:

My cable schedule lists todays episode as NEW and I immediately(!) recognized Mr. Freak Show Face and the Gen Z Schoolmarm.  Gyp!

That's what I thought at first - "Oh, back to reruns",  but NO!

The Illustrated Man and his little accomplice were on Hot Bench on March 28, where he/they got awarded 2K. They didn't even bother changing their script but repeated it here nearly word for word. I wonder if they'll head to Judge Judy and try to up their winnings to 6K?

This is the second time I can recall that JM got snowed by scammers. The other time was the sister with the sob story that her deadbeat dad left her to support her three younger brothers and she had to buy them all 300$ sneakers. They were also on Judge Judy where she caught on immediately and gave her the boot, but JM fell for it hook, line, and sinker.

Does no one on the staff of these shows ever check out the other court shows to weed out scammers?

38 minutes ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

 I'm hoping Judge M tells plaintiffs to stuff it.  

She did. I was afraid the massive husband, who was highly excitable and yelling, might have an attack of some sort. When informed they get nothing, he says, "Man, that's whack!"

 

1 hour ago, DoctorK said:

plus little miss using money borrowed from Mr. Tats to sneak off to Florida with another guy is just so familiar that I have trouble believing that I haven't seen this case before.

See above.😄

Edited May 24, 2023 by AngelaHunter

[patty1h]

2 minutes ago, AngelaHunter said:

The Illustrated Man and his little accomplice were on Hot Bench on March 28, where he/they got awarded 2K.

What the hell...  so my cable thingy was correct after all and this IS a new episode?   I did not even consider they were on a different show and scamming for another payday.   Thanks for clearing that up.

[AngelaHunter]

Re: Tats and the Twit - CrazyInAlabama posted this on Hot Bench:

 

[AngelaHunter]

2 hours ago, patty1h said:

What the hell...  so my cable thingy was correct after all and this IS a new episode?   I did not even consider they were on a different show and scamming for another payday.   Thanks for clearing that up.

Not only that but now I think they were scamming with a fake story on Hot Bench as well. I almost admire their chutzpah to go for Round#2 on TPC. But they succeeded, so who am I to criticize?

More tats for everyone!

[aemom]

On 4/26/2023 at 4:03 PM, CrazyInAlabama said:

Just hearing the start of the composting case, I decided that plaintiff was trespassing, and having others on defendant's property is leading to liability for her.     I don't see how defendant should be required to allow community composting on her property, or allow him to store his tools on her property.  

I'm glad I watched long enough to see the vile text messages from plaintiff, and to hear about his years in the slammer for a Ponzi scheme.   I'm guessing that's federal prison.  

I'm not easily scared by anyone, but plaintiff scared me.  

I just saw this episode and I can't believe that none of you mentioned that Doug was IN THE HALLWAY.  For real!  Doing the Halterview in person!

This was an interesting case in that it wasn't about a woman trying to buy a man's love, a pet being attacked by another pet, or some slumlord/wretched tenant trying to keep/get back a security deposit.

As for the recent trend of one-case-only shows, perhaps when the show was cancelled, they didn't know yet if they would have any budget to film more episodes and were trying to make due.  But from what I saw on the schedule, I think that they are filming more, so hopefully we'll get more episodes with more than one case.

[DoctorK]

18 hours ago, AngelaHunter said:

Does no one on the staff of these shows ever check out the other court shows to weed out scammers?

It surprises me that apparently they don't. They have to be aware that many of their viewers also watch the other court shows so that we can pick up on these scams. At least I am reassured thanks to all of you who followed up on my initial post that I am not having delusions (at least not yet) and I can put the tin foil hat back in the closet.

[patty1h]

"Not Paying a Daughter Back":   23 year old Destiny Finn is suing her mother for the cost of cosmetic surgery - a Brazilian Butt Lift and lipo.  42YO mom Jeanette Finn had this procedure done and has not paid.   We learn that Jeanette and her husband are estranged since 2015 - even live in different states, but he still has feelings for Jeanette and wanted her to have the procedure.  Destiny says her dad makes six figures but is cheap, so instead of paying for the BBL himself, he convinced her to charge it so it will build her credit.  Why does that sound fishy?

We hear a lot of backstory:  Destiny gets a BBL done on herself and needs her 15 YO sister Madison to help her heal afterward.  Then when Mom got BBL, the family started a big fight about who is going to stay with Mom - Mom didn't want the 15YO traveling between states so young and is angry that Destiny has been letting Madison vape.  JM asks why Destiny is not suing her father, since he is the one who asked her to pay for Mom's BBL.  Destiny says because Mom got the benefit of having the surgery, so it makes her liable.

This is a giant mess - Dad is living with Destiny and her husband, but is refusing to repay his daughter, Destiny is a stay-at-home mom, so it's really her husband who paid for the BBLs, Jeanette doesn't feel that she owes her daughter since she didn't ask for it, there were nasty texts where Destiny threatened to beat her mothers ass, Jeanette has a boyfriend now, Jeanette has not seen her 2YO grandchild due to this family blowup.  All this over $2K remaining to be paid on this bill.    JM awards Destiny $2351 for this case.

Edited May 25, 2023 by patty1h

[CrazyInAlabama]

 

Case 2-Plaintiff suing defendant for repayment of a loan, $3500.  PLaintiff says defendant stole money from someone, and had to pay up or else.   Defendant says plaintiff gave him money, they were both in prison too. PLaintiff was in county jail, for felony vandalism.  Plaintiff was sent money by defendant when she was in the slammer, and when she gave him the money to pay off his debt, he claims it was returning the favor.  

 

I wouldn't give plaintiff a dime, and I don't think she had any expectation of repayment.   Defendant's text says he thinks plaintiff ratted him out to the cops, and reminds her that he didn't rat her out 10 years ago.   Where did she get $3500 from anyway?   

 

 Plaintiff looks so familiar, hope it's not another case that was on another show already.  

$3500 to plaintiff. 

Edited May 26, 2023 by CrazyInAlabama

[patty1h]

During the Butt Lift case, JM asked the defendant what is involved in this procedure.  Jeanette talks about redistributing fat in the body to the butt area, and says she couldn't sit for 3 months.   She had to get a special "donut" to sit on while the area healed.  That reminded me one time I was looking on the Walmart website for bedding and the results showed a BBL mattress -- mattress with a circle cut out of it where you rest your butt in.  My mind was blown that such things existed/were necessary for aftercare. 

I also saw various other items manufactured exclusively for people who had BBLs... chairs, chair cushions, a tube you put over the toilet seat so your butt doesn't make contact, this lumbar support thing, and a compression garment called a faja that is worn while the body heals.   Learn something new every day.

[AngelaHunter]

1 hour ago, patty1h said:

"Not Paying a Daughter Back":

What in tarnation? I thought was past being surprised by anything here.  I spent the whole afternoon at Toyota and then drove home in bumper-to-bumper traffic while looking forward to a relaxing watch, hoping for maybe a dumbass lawyer, crooked contractor, or even a pompous old fart.

I can't even... This family of youthful breeders (I'm shocked "Destiny" waited until she was past her teens to pop one out) have a peculiar sense of priorities.

Mama def, short, homely, obese, and cock-eyed really thought getting her buttocks cranked up higher was going to improve her life. HER mama, 59, thought the same thing and maybe got a discount if not an actual two-fer since she and her daughter got their asses done together. Destiny, at 23 and a stay-at-home Mom agreed and got HER ass cheeks hauled up for $4,900. Daddy the deadbeat lives with her and pays no rent, encouraged her to put Mom's arse on her credit card. WTF???

Destiny looks as though she got her lips inflated with a bicycle pump and I doubt her hubby is making a fortune yet he supports all this insanity, AND takes care of Destiny's 41-year-old daddy who is a wealthy truck driver but is "cheap". Daddy, who still lusts after Mom, tells his daughter it will help her credit rating to get an ass job for her mom instead of using the credit for things a young family might need.

Not sure if I got all that straight since I quit there. 🤢

2 hours ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

Case 2-Plaintiff suing defendant for repayment of a loan, $3500.

I was hoping for something better for the 2nd case. Alas, it was not to be . Ms. Miller, crazy bitch, gets HER (unlifted?) ass thrown in the slammer for some major nutty vandalism. The only person she could "talk to" was her abusive, vile, fugly ex-loverboy, the drug-dealing Mr. Martinez. She turned to him since it seems only he understands how hard is it to "turn your life around" but he still hasn't done that since he was a thief who got 'in trouble' on his job for stealing so Ms. Miller had no problem handing over $3,500 for Martinez to cover his ass. Where did Ms. Miller get that money? He says it was a gift. I heard something about children with these reprehensible cretins for parents and I've had it with the whole insane, ridiculous gang.

1 hour ago, patty1h said:

I also saw various other items manufactured exclusively for people who had BBLs... chairs, chair cushions, a tube you put over the toilet seat so your butt doesn't make contact, this lumbar support thing, and a compression garment called a faja that is worn while the body heals.

Damn.

[AngelaHunter]

7 hours ago, DoctorK said:

At least I am reassured thanks to all of you who followed up on my initial post that I am not having delusions (at least not yet) and I can put the tin foil hat back in the closet.

Don't worry! I can't remember anything and often happily watch a whole case not knowing I'd seen it before until reminded by one of the good people here.

The ONLY reason I did recall this one is because of the extreme way the P disfigured himself for life with a face filled with scribbles. Even I recalled that, although I sat confused and it took a few minutes for my muddled brain to realize he was on another court show.

RE: Today's show - JM seemed way too interested in the details of ass-lifting, IMO.

[DoctorK]

Another day, another litigant I despise. The transmission plaintiff is entitled, overbearing, dishonest, chiseling and in spite of all of her fast talking indignation I am not sure that she could tell a transmission from a spare tire. She got caught by JM in multiple lies. The defendant was better prepared and in a better position than most litigants in car disputes and was overall credible. The plaintiff talked over JM repeatedly and JM was a lot more patient than I would be. Of course, defendant wants a bunch for pain and suffering. The only thing she was correct on was that she did not get the $2000 back from Zell (although I absolutely believe she got the payment to the defendant reversed by claiming “fraud”). I have helped remove and rebuild a clutch (many years ago) and I agree with the defendant that if the pilot bearing had been broken when they looked at it, they would have seen the fragments and told her it needed replacement (more work, more money). I will ding the defendants for not recommending replacing the pilot bearing and maybe the pressure plate while the clutch was open because it is fast and cheap to do while the clutch is exposed. For once, I am glad that they used the whole hour for this episode, there were enough details to fill the time.

[CrazyInAlabama]

I watched the car case to the bitter end.  I had to laugh when plaintiff told Doug that she didn't have enough time to present her evidence, and enough time for her case.   I bet it wasn't really the 45 or so minutes we actually heard.   I'm glad defendants will get their $2000 back, and hope they have their Zelle accounts cleared for use.    

I'm surprised with all of the diseases out there, that Doug is really back in the hall.   I hope there's a ton of security standing very close to him, some of the litigants are very scary. 

[AngelaHunter]

1 hour ago, DoctorK said:

Another day, another litigant I despise. The transmission plaintiff is entitled, overbearing, dishonest, chiseling and in spite of all of her fast talking indignation I am not sure that she could tell a transmission from a spare tire.

Oh, mah gawd! The plaintiff speed-talking in a grating monotone, so fast and long she often used only fragments of words, i.e. "transmiss" had my head spinning.  I didn't know a human could speak for so long without drawing a breath.

Deceit, fraud, neglect, pain&suffering, stress, sleepless nights, fear, discomfort, no "curteousy", and shadiness caused Sharon "delimmas"! All this is worth 5K, I guess.

Def (for whom Sharon had the hots)seemed to be practicing his dramatic emoting for some local playhouse but I completely believe the insane Sharon - who to my blurred eyes seemed to be sporting a 5 o'clock shadow - told the Def to go hither and yon and take road trips to get parts and a transmiss for her 19-year-old vehicle. I don't know anything about engines or clutches and wasn't sure what "locked out of" her car meant.

I had to turn the sound off about 2/3rds of the way through this and just read the captions as I couldn't tolerate Sharon's endless, monotone yammering any longer.

In the hall, Sharon tells Doug, "They did all the talking." 🙄 Sharon is really not self-aware.

I'm feeling a little disrespected and marginalized here. I go to Toyota twice a year, spend a lot of money, and was there yesterday for hours. NOT ONCE has anyone there tried to bond with me or invited me to break bread with them. Am I not good enough? Instead, I nearly got accused by some narrow, millennial dweeb with douchebag facial hair of trying to jack an 80K Porsche, so I'm doubly bummed. What's your secret for promoting bonding, Sharon?

Hmph.

Edited May 26, 2023 by AngelaHunter
Rough day

[seacliffsal]

I could not take another minute of the double-talking, over-talking nonsense of the plaintiff in the transmission fraud case.  Wow were the defendants patient to keep dealing with her and the female defendant having to talk to her on the phone for hours on end.  I found it hard to believe that JM didn't reign in the plaintiff.  Anyway, once I realized this case was going to be the entire episode (about 40 minutes in), I just deleted it from my dvr.  I already knew the outcome as the plaintiff could not tell the truth or a straight-forward, coherent story because of the lies and misrepresentations along with the actual evidence that the defendants presented.

[AngelaHunter]

I just couldn't with the first case. I am so sick of seeing mature adults and parents - in this case with 3 kids although, of course, they're just boyfriend/girlfriend and never married - who have zero impulse control and bust up each other's shit like angry toddlers when they have disagreements. "He busted my TV!" Unreal. Both of them were fucking around, naturally. Great role models for the kids. Enough, and on to the next.

I didn't mind the car case since JM was screaming and nearly seething with a dislike of the plaintiff, Sir Lawrence Watson. She wanted to know if he'd been knighted. I was kind of wondering that as well. But no, his momma just named him "Sir Lawrence".

Sir Lawrence didn't even know his own car, which was rather interesting looking came from a kit, the kind that puts very fancy bodies on mundane engines, like Datsun, e.g. The def mechanic had to inform JM that this car came from a kit. He deals with rare, specialty, and/or antique cars. Sir Lawrence knew there were no manuals to which Def could refer and it would take some time and hours of work to find out what was wrong with this 1983(?) Frankenstein car. P wasn't happy with the results and wants his money back although he never once asked Def for an estimate on what the costs might be.

Def certainly seemed to know his business. JM finally lost all patience with the rambling, disgressing P and he left with nothing since there was no proof of any kind that Def did anything wrong. P throws shade on D after the verdict is given.

[DoctorK]

What a mess with the feuding neighbors and the fence battles. I was leaning towards both sides are equally annoying jerks for most of the case. Then we got two items to consider. First is the guy who did all of the fence work (for both litigants) who completely undercut the plaintiff’s claim about what happened on the fence relocating day. Even better was the great camera spying on the plaintiff’s bedroom window. She bragged about getting the police who (so she says) made the defendant take the camera down. Then the plaintiff proudly sent the proof of the camera spying on her with an actual picture and boy did she look smug about that. Then JM looked at the picture and pointed out to the plaintiff that what she was complaining about was not a camera, it was a yellow plastic sunflower in the daughter’s bedroom window. The plaintiff wasn’t fazed by this revelation at all, she was still wearing her self-satisfied smirk about the great proof she had provided of her evil neighbor’s nosy plastic flower in the window spying on her. Plaintiff has no self-awareness, but loads self-confidence and bile. I don’t know about the defendant, but at least he didn’t seem as nutty and memory challenged as the plaintiff. Also, the plaintiff clearly thought she should win because she is old (70, actually younger than me) and disabled and her husband died years ago.

[CrazyInAlabama]

That woman is everyone's nightmare neighbor.   It will never end either, unless the man and his family sell with full disclosure about the woman next door and her campaign of harassment.   

After the woman's hysterical complaint about security cameras in the daughter's plastic sunflower, I had to laugh.   Then, when Judge M sucked up to old harridan, by saying how young she looked, I was nauseous.      Plaintiff's claims about the defendant's wife assaulting her, in plaintiff's back yard is ludicrous.   Cogle (plaintiff) is giving old cranks a bad name.   I can't believe the officer cited both women, when defendant's wife was on her own property.     The local police and courts must be sick of the plaintiff.     

There is no way in hell I would sit in the same room with plaintiff, the way the Kumbaya Judge M suggests with a mediator.     

Plaintiff's lawsuit is dismissed, for a joint fence that was ripped out, but was in the wrong place anyway, and the survey costs are dismissed.  The plaintiff would never be on my property, ever, or near me or my family.   Judge M also dismisses defendant's fence moving costs.   No money for anyone, and Judge M asks if they both want peace.    This is not possible with someone like the plaintiff.  

In the hall, Doug is actually in the vicinity of plaintiff, which scares me.    Plaintiff says the defendants walk their vicious animals on her property, and unleashed.   She also says no way to the mediator idea.    Defendant says he and his wife walk their dogs, always on leash, and never go near plaintiff's property.  

Edited May 31, 2023 by CrazyInAlabama

[AngelaHunter]

21 minutes ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

That woman is everyone's nightmare neighbor.   It will never end either, unless the man and his family sell with full disclosure about the woman next door and her campaign of harassment. 

Horrible, and IMO, the def is no prize either in spite of the placid moon face and has a wife who was out there pushing or shoving with the hateful hag Plaintiff. Disgraceful. Def., who claims to have no problem with anything that went on, including being ordered to move his fence at a hefty cost, is more passive-aggressive in his petty reprisals.

 

31 minutes ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

In the hall, Doug is actually in the vicinity of plaintiff, which scares me. 

Yes. I was afraid she might start shoving him, in spite of her being "disabled".

23 minutes ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

Then, when Judge M sucked up to old harridan, by saying how young she looked, I was nauseous.

I kind of like it when she does things like that, lulling litigants into a false sense of security - "Oh, the judge loves me. I win!"  and then rips them a new one.

Calling the police over a fence dispute? Does the mayor have nothing better to do than visit warring idiot neighbours to tell them to move a fence? Is everyone there completely nuts?

The only person who made any sense was Rick on the phone. I bet he rues the day he met all these loony toons.

I think since P's husband died this is how she occupies her time, with 6", or 1.5 "foot" or whatever BS, and really enjoys it.

I am thrilled my neighbours live a respectable distance from me, with a thick buffer of trees between all our properties but even if closer I'm pretty sure I wouldn't dedicate my life to bitching and griping over everything they do, including squawking over their compost because it might "bring mice."

[CrazyInAlabama]

In a lot of smaller places, the mayor is a part-time position, or even volunteer.  They are often business people, who think resolving issues, will get people to like and vote for them.   

I had to laugh when the 'surveillance camera' plaintiff called the police about was a plastic sunflower.    

[callie lee 29]

That woman sounds like a fucking nightmare of a neighbor and I'd be willing to bet that she had problems with a lot more than the one neighbor. I'd also be willing to bet that, especially in a town that size, she is well known to people, and not in a good way. 

[AngelaHunter]

50 minutes ago, callie lee 29 said:

That woman sounds like a fucking nightmare of a neighbor and I'd be willing to bet that she had problems with a lot more than the one neighbor. I'd also be willing to bet that, especially in a town that size, she is well known to people, and not in a good way. 

She seems to be another in the mold of the infamous "Patricia Bean" from Judge Judy - contentious busy-bodies with nothing better to do than stick their noses in everyone's business, nitpick, and cause strife. I really think it gives them satisfaction of some weird sort.

[Pepper the Cat]

I gave up half way through and fast forwarded to the end. That Plantiff was just too much. 
I hate these hour long cases.

[CrazyInAlabama]

So, on today's ridiculous show, "Complaining Customer" a woman who vacuums butts is being sued by former client for breach of contract, and wants a refund.  Defendant claims she cancelled once for an emergency, and another time because of threats by plaintiff.  Plaintiff is wearing bizarre looking giant red and yellow lens glasses.  I don't care who wins any money.   

Edited June 1, 2023 by CrazyInAlabama

[patty1h]

I had to look up this "vacuum therapy" that the defendant is doing.  It is non-invasive and the websites I checked try to make it sound legitimate instead of nonsense:

At its core, vacuum therapy offers deep massaging effects. The procedure may work for buttock toning by:

Decreasing muscle tension, increasing lymphatic flow to remove toxins and water retention, exfoliating the skin, thereby making it smoother and more toned in appearance, stimulating the middle layers of skin for increased toning effects and decreasing the appearance of cellulite.

Another description I found had photos of people with giant suction cups on their buttocks, and explains that this procedure smooths out cellulite, lifts the skin(!) while also eliminating toxins.  Holy smokes, people are wacky.

Edited June 1, 2023 by patty1h

[AngelaHunter]

1 hour ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

So, on today's ridiculous show, "Complaining Customer" a woman who vacuums butts

I was trying to visualize this procedure. She actually sucks fat from, say, a big gut to the ass? But under the skin, right, with something like a super Shop Vac? I could be wrong since I was so distracted by the outlandish wigs, nails, eyelashes, and those glasses that made the P look as though she was perhaps going straight from this show to the ski slopes. The Def's attitude and excuses - "I had a baby so, sorry but I can't keep the fat-shifting appointments for which I was paid" were vaguely amusing. Hey, she's busy! The P's texts, containing foul language and threats weren't so funny. OTOH, the P may be used to threats considering how customer service is Job #30 for her. Who thinks the big, tall baby daddy was trying to peek at P's naked buttocks? I do.

In the second case, we got the P suing her ex-landlord for treble her $925 security deposit. I guess she must have moved in with her boyfriend since I cannot imagine anyone giving up her apartment with 4 months left on the lease (and for which she kept paying) merely for a change of scenery.

The Def landlord, "Adrian", a great big greedy, scamming money-grubber, tried to say that cleaning and repairing the P's one tiny room with bath cost over $1,000. Well, he pays some guy to do it and gives him cash, he says. He has an invoice! It turns out to be a piece of paper with writing on it. Of course, he never thought to take a single picture of all this devastation. Just trust him - it was trashed.

You'd think Adrian would be satisfied with the money he saves by never buying neckties, but no. He wants more. and his buddy, Shrek (Shrik, Shirt...?) is a witness that the room was destroyed. Adrian, who read the lease carefully and is totally unaware until informed by JM that is not the law, had no idea he had to send an itemized list of why he was keeping the money and do that before 6 or so months have passed.

JM is so disgusted with the fraudulent dingbat she gives P treble the deposit. A satisfying verdict.

 

Thanks pattyih!  I posted before reading what you wrote.

Edited June 1, 2023 by AngelaHunter

[DoctorK]

Today’s first case was pretty messy. To start off, the plaintiff was very naïve about getting married and setting up a household, and I suspect that her mother may be a difficult to live with mother-in-law. However, the defendant really bugged me. To me, she was clearly a manipulator and fast talking hustler. This showed clearly on the whole “yes I agreed that I would pay my share of the rent but because of blah, blah, blah I didn’t”. Then she did the same thing on utilities, in both cases blaming her own non-payment on mother-in-law’s attitude and lack of respect. And boy was she fast talking through this bit of dialog. JM let her slide on several dubious things like that, but finally got back to them for her verdict which I think was well done. I hope the plaintiff has learned something and grows up some more before she marries again. For the defendant, I hope her future potential spouses see this show before they commit.

Second case was a little strange. Showing the litigants before case started showed the plaintiff with his bet go-to-court t-shirt, but the defendant apparently sucked on a large lemon just before the camera started. She kept that sour and disdainful look throughout. As the case progressed (since it’s a court show should I say proceeded?) the defendant started looking really sketchy about shipping the wire and not responding to the multiple messages from the plaintiff. She guesses that the wire was stolen from his front door but has no tracking info (I use UPS often and they provide good tracking details (actually now also USPS does on most packages)). If she actually sent it, and it was delivered to the plaintiff all she had to do was go to UPS.com, enter the tracking number and get a copy of the delivery details. Plus, she sure kept that nasty disdainful sneer through the whole case, what a miserable person. How dare someone sue her! Unless she changes the way she does business, she should expect to spend a lot of time in court.

[AngelaHunter]

1 hour ago, DoctorK said:

Today’s first case was pretty messy.

It's just romance for the millennial era.  I'm eternally grateful I got hooked up before the advent of dating sites, or else I may have ended up asking MY mother to front my new online paramour - who I barely knew yet wanted to marry in a fantasy wedding - 4K. I don't think Mom could afford it either but Darling Daughter's dream must be financed somehow. I guess the daughter has no money and no credit. Let Mom pay Def's tax bill.

It seems the obnoxious Def doesn't or can't pay what she owes to the government but CAN spring for a 20K fairytale wedding. LIke, WTF? Of course, I know only the wedding itself really matters, with the bridesmaids and flowers and cake and Badio maids and all that shit, but still.

Plaintiff blushing bride, who I found very disingenuous and who looked about 35, is yet another "young thing who cannot leave her mother" and is so fragile that the "verbal abuse" from and eventual breakup with the Def left her in need of therapy and medication. Maybe Mom paid for all that too. Better stay permanently with your Mommy in what sounds like a packed household.

Def who was exceedingly churlish and belligerent to the point of informing JM what is relevant or not, also suffers from "issues" and needed to enter a psychiatric hospital after all these zany, ridiculous antics.

1 hour ago, DoctorK said:

but the defendant apparently sucked on a large lemon just before the camera started.

😄 Lots of lemon-suckers on this show.

I thought she had her jaw gaping and face screwed up in utter fake confusion (i.e. "What did I do wrong?) over being sued. Or maybe she really is just that dumb.

The silly, petty little scammer is barely able to answer a simple question;

JM: "Why didn't you respond to any of (Plainitff's) texts?"

Def Idiot with screwed up face: "Ahh... duh...I lost my phone...?" and "Uh, I dunno..?"

I wish we could have seen the boyfriend, who stole these wires and thought the Def was a good catch. That is if he even exists, which I doubt.

That someone would agree to appear here and be made an utter fool of over 200$ is both amusing and pathetic.

[callie lee 29]

Yeah that defendant in the first case..... Every single radar in me was going off with her. Her while demeanor just screamed abuser/manipulator (at least to me).

[Mrs Shibbles]

This show is growing more and more unwatchable.

[rcc]

Wonder if the new show will be an improvement. 

[CrazyInAlabama]

I'm guessing that when the cancellation was announced, that they stopped filming, and just edited cases that were already filmed.   So, we're getting long, boring cases just because the producers want to fill air time.   

[rcc]

Just now, CrazyInAlabama said:

I'm guessing that when the cancellation was announced, that they stopped filming, and just edited cases that were already filmed.   So, we're getting long, boring cases just because the producers want to fill air time.   

Could be. These last cases are horrible.

[AngelaHunter]

Personally? I'll watch cases that don't feature child/animal abuse, sickening vicious assaults, hypersexuality, or even out-of-control vandalism tantrums from mature adults. I'm okay with everything else.

[DoctorK]

47 minutes ago, AngelaHunter said:

I'm okay with everything else.

I think that "everything else" is going to be a short list.

[AngelaHunter]

20 hours ago, DoctorK said:

I think that "everything else" is going to be a short list.

Quite true. This show has steadily been sinking to appeal to the lowest common denominator, probably thanks to the King of Sleaze, ol' Droopy Dawg Levin.  And maybe he's right. Maybe the majority of audiences do just want garbage TV.

What people want has changed and I guess no one would be interested in the types of cases we saw with Judge Wapner - civilized litigants (mostly) having disputes that didn't include the kind of trashy, vulgar behavior we see from litigants now that would be better suited to Maury or Springer. 

I quite enjoy some of the wild 'n wacky (some of my favorite cases were Jen, Jan, and Jane, Mr.Kinghorn and his Balls, and even the Wedding Spectacular with the PowerPoint Presentation and the Badio maid) but do draw the line at "feral" especially when kids or animals are involved. I can no longer watch these debacles. They make me depressed and angry.

[DoctorK]

7 minutes ago, AngelaHunter said:

Maybe the majority of audiences do just want garbage TV.

I think that the "quality" of the ads that are presented during these shows indicates the type of audience the producers aim for. I could happily go through the rest of my life without hearing the phrase "pee proof AND leak proof" .Maybe it reflects on me badly that I watch the shows, but I'm old and don't really care. However my watching has fallen off the last several years.  More entertainment in less time here at primetimer.

[AngelaHunter]

I know this guy. He's kind of a dweeby little loser. He can't keep a job of any kind, can't pay his rent, and gets evicted. Sure, I'll invite him to come live with me. I trust that he'll get a job and will pay rent and utilities. 🙄

I couldn't with the next case. The poor grammar of the blabbering P was grating and JM's diplomatic, "You're a big boy" to a man who is 6' tall, weighs a whopping 270lbs, and jumps up and down on a chair until it breaks held no interest for me.

[AngelaHunter]

Just a word of advice for Marquita: You seem like a very bright and articulate person. Please teach Leon how to communicate better in basic English so if any other court cases come up (maybe from Leon getting caught while climbing through windows) it won't take 5 hours as this one seemed to, even though I gave up halfway through.

JM asks Def, "Leoniece" if she had been evicted. Of course not! She just had a 3-day notice...oops. Not sure why the baby daddy(s) didn't help her. That was some wig!

[DoctorK]

I actually enjoyed one of the cases on today's show. I don't even remember the first case but the second was a doozy. Not that the litigants were not the run of the mill dullards and chiselers as usual but the defendant was so awful that JM was genuinely really angry with her by the end. The defendant was lying in almost everything she said, and directly contradicted things she had just said to the judge minutes before. My first thought was maybe she is a pathological liar but I now think she is really stupid and her mouth is not connected to her brain so she just prattles on about whatever stray thoughts rattle around in her empty head. Incidentally, I absolutely believe JM was right that the defendant had to move her junk in a hurry because she had been evicted and was squatting until the landlord managed to get her tossed out, no matter how many times the defendant clumsily denied it..

[AngelaHunter]

24 minutes ago, DoctorK said:

. I don't even remember the first case but the second was a doozy.

This was the only case. Maybe your eyes glazed as mine did for much of it. 😄

Listening to Leon struggling to convey any explanation had JM saying: "I see why your wife takes care of the client business. You can't."

Edited June 6, 2023 by AngelaHunter

[Pepper the Cat]

That seemed to go on forever! 

[CrazyInAlabama]

That case was bizarre.   I did enjoy the defendant getting caught lying about everything though.    

[patty1h]

"You Ruined My Birthday" -- The plaintiff Lashea Vance was a little much from the first word out of her mouth, kissing up to the judge as the case started.  She is cute and vivacious, but she seems to have "pretty girl syndrome" and thinks that everyone will just be enchanted with her.   At one point, she actually tried a tearful voice to drill in that this outfit ordeal was the ruination of her birthday.  She wants $1000.

She wanted a custom outfit for her 27th BD party and contacted "designer" Matthew Harris, who she heard about from acquaintances.  She tells how she was less than thrilled when their first meeting was in a White Castle full of homeless and crackheads instead of an actual design studio.  Lashea told Matthew she wanted a pink Louis Vuitton inspired outfit,  but all she saw were pictures of some pink and brown thing she said looked like something from Party City.  Red flag, sis.

After JM got a little background from Matthew, she asked if he ever measured Lashea for her ensemble.  He tells JM that he doesn't measure his clients, instead, he asks the person if they are small/medium/large and alters the garment from there, adding fabric or taking in.  I think I heard he buys a garment from a supplier and then makes changes to that to fit the clients specifications.  Huh?  That doesn't make him a designer, it's more a glorified tailor. Then there a texts back and forth with Matthew saying he will be shipping the finished garment and Lashea following up when it doesn't arrive.  Then Matthew promises to send a refund, which never arrives either.  Seems like Matthew is a big bullshit artist and will be lucky if he ever gets anyone hitting him up.

Turns out half of the money Lashea is requesting was for a photoshoot she supposedly paid for but got cancelled because of this outfit debacle.   She also says the big Barbie Pink party she had planned was also cancelled when the garment went MIA.   She tries to tell JM that she had to cancel as the whole party was planned around the outfit.  JM gives her a side-eye and says the party was about YOU, not what you were wearing.  Since Lashea can't prove the $500 for this shoot and is only awarded $500 for the outfit.  As JM stands to leave the courtroom, she asks Matthew if he brought the outfit so she could see it - after he says "no", JM snidely says "... if there ever was a garment!".  Boom!

Edited June 7, 2023 by patty1h

[AngelaHunter]

11 minutes ago, patty1h said:

The plaintiff Lashea Vance was a little much from the first word out of her mouth, kissing up to the judge as the case started. 

I swear in all the years I've watched this show I've never opted out as much as I have in the last few weeks.

Lashea is a 27-year-old woman who acts like she's 13, rehearsed her BS, and at her age still needs to importune her daddy (who impersonates her lawyer) to intervene in her dispute with the dumbass "designer" ("he thinks he's Liberace" - did Liberace, who was an artiste, pretend he was a designer?)who buys clothes from manufacturers and sews a few doo-dads on "by hand"!! Wow. He's a designer who, unlike all the really top designers, has no need to measure clients and do fittings but merely asks "Are you small, medium, or large?" I guess that's how the clothes come off the rack at this manufacturer. Lashea, who is also a dumbass, has no problem with this.

IMO, Lashea (who I am sure is an "influencer") thinks this is all a joke and was just here to get new material to impress the gaggle of brainless "followers" on some moronic blog. So upscale is Lashea that she throws shade on meeting this so-called designer at a White Castle. JM wants to know why she continued this meeting with him if the battling crackheads in there so offended her. "The hamburger fumes" addled what she calls her brain, she says. Oh, she's just too cutesy although I doubt any normal woman her age would opt for a Barbie doll party.

I was done by then.

[AngelaHunter]

Today's plaintiff is suing his ex-wife (who is here with her new boyfriend) over an old washer and dryer, and 500$.

He and the def., his ex-wife, were married for 17 years and after listening to him I'm not sure how. That he is 64 years old and has no idea how to do his own banking is bad enough. That he's sporting a very long "Achy Breaky Heart" era gray mullet makes me wonder how the wife put up with him that long. He is also snarky and snotty to JM - rolling his eyes and questioning the relevance of her need for information.

We have a video of him charging over to the ex's new residence and pounding on the door like a lunatic. Def's b/f says he was also trying to turn the doorknob. The landlord, who is also the neighbour comes over wanting to know what the hell the commotion is all about. P starts cursing and yelling about the "washer and dryer", some dresser he left in his stepdaughter's storage unit for two years, and $500. He sounds utterly demented. He also wants visitation with the couple's two dogs who now reside with Def. he had to give up since his roommate situation with someone who is a total "slob" doesn't allow for animals.  JM is unable to order dog visitation.

Def's new boyfriend, who is mullet-free and looks like he could squash the little feisty P like a bug wisely stays out of this mess. P says the boyfriend is afraid of him.

Def says P told her to keep the money to pay for one of the dog's medications and special diet. She doesn't want to see or hear from him anymore. I get it.

The def. wants a few thousand dollars for harassment, missed work, and all that. Neither of them gets anything since they should have settled all this when they got divorced.

It was all ridiculous, but since there was no violence or minor children involved, I was mildly entertained. Douglas was quite amused.