The People's Court - General Discussion

[momtoall]

P.S. Any bets on whether the bag was a fake?

 

 

Of course it was fake!!!  Bought on the street or out of the trunk of a car.

[BubblingKettle]

I've been at a three-day event for work and without my beloved TPC and JJ. I came home just in time to catch today's episodes, and TPC did not disappoint!!!  The play-cousins/God-cousins who ended their friendship over a cell phone --- they were so entertaining, especially, the defendant's reenactment of walking on the street in NY.

 

Then, the dudes with the Towncar from the '80s! The plaintiff was the epitome of "smooth cat," with his gold medallion and collar-ends pointing to 9 and 3. I wonder what the hell really happened to that gear shift.

 

Diana, from the third case, needs to lose the blond streaks. 

[AngelaHunter]

The play-cousins/God-cousins who ended their friendship over a cell phone

 

The histrionic Cab Calloway can't get a phone in his name, yet feels he deserves a 700$ phone and plaintiff ("Yes, I'm suing for the phone bills, but no - I didn't bring those with me today") agrees.

 

Then, the dudes with the Towncar from the '80s!

 

What could go wrong with a 1988 car, although for sure the def. broke the gear shift. Is this the first time JM needed an interpreter because a litigant was incoherent? I wonder how people who can't form a simple declarative sentence conduct their daily business.

 

Cat lady: I did cat rescue for a number of years and met a lot of looneytunes people. 2K for cat food for a year for 4 cats? I'm sorry, but Friskies (canned) is perfectly good food. I wasn't crazy about the def either. This momma cat "touched her heart" so much that she couldn't be bothered to get her spayed? Feeding stray/feral cats without neutering them is the worst thing anyone can do. The food just allows them to keep having litters and continue the suffering.

[break21]

Did anyone else notice Santa Claus sitting in the back row of the second case.  He even had the rosy red cheeks!

[rcc]

Another dog bite case starts off today's cases. The defendent with a huge cross hanging around his neck says Mama the dog is a creampuff. Okay! The raccoons made a hole in the fence, Mama and her puppies got loose and attacked the plaintiff and her dog. Mama is a pitbull, the religious defendent says she is an American bulldog.

 

Next case is a guy needing a room and rents from his friend and girlfriend. He lets them borrow his car. Sues them. 

 

Last but not least the plaintiffs left their washer and dryer in the plaintiff's apartment for two years and now want her to pay them because she moved with her kids and left them there. Instead of selling the washer and dryer they didn't need anymore because senior housing furnishes them makes too much sense I guess.

[AKA...CJ86]

rcc, I enjoy waking up to your musings every morning, it just whets my appetite for when the shows on in my area.

Edited January 14, 2016 by CyberJawa1986

[teebax]

rcc, I enjoy waking up to your musings every morning, it just whets my appetite for when the shows on in my area.

I wish TPC came on that early in my area. I think it comes on at 1 pm here, but I don't normally see it until dinner time.

[SRTouch]

Another dog bite case starts off today's cases. The defendent with a huge cross hanging around his neck says Mama the dog is a creampuff. Okay! The raccoons made a hole in the fence, Mama and her puppies got loose and attacked the plaintiff and her dog. Mama is a pitbull, the religious defendent says she is an American bulldog.

I guess it doesn't matter whether the kid has 2 legs or 4, people just don't their precious boy/girl/dog/or whatever could possibly hurt anyone. In today's case, Momma -who is NOT a pitbull - is a creampuff who would never attack someone or their dog.

And did you see the pictures, both of the plaintiff and her dog? The defendant even said the plaintiff was covered by blood, but still didn't accept responsibilty. He didn't see the attack, so the plaintiff or her dog must have started it. And even if his 4 dogs got out - it wasn't his responsibilty, but the raccoon who chewed a hole in the fence.

The judge finally gave up on trying to get the man to accept any blame and just ruled.

[cattykit]

First case I thought I was listening to a woman who'd had her jaw wired shut suing Gilbert Gottfried.  And then he lied about his dogs ever getting out until the plaintiff showed proof that they get out.  How much harder was it for him to put garbage cans, etc., in front of the gate every time he opened it, than to spend a couple of bucks and a few minutes replacing the chintzy plastic gate extensions.

[WhitneyWhit]

The first defendant definitely wanted everyone to know that he did not own a pit bull, as if that makes the fact that his dogs tried to eat a dog and its owner somehow less horrible.

 

A word of wisdom to the second defendant, saying "He can't prove it" is the same as saying "I did it".

[rcc]

Interesting cases today IMO. We get to see the parking lot with JM and Douglas looking at curio cabinet glass in the defendent's truck. The defendent owned the moving company that damaged the glass, buys the glass, it breaks again, he doesn't even take care to cover it. Not only that he doesn't even make arrangements to have the glass installed. This guy was an arrogant SOB and I wouldn't hire him to move me. Funny how he brags he does "very well" and JM responds with "you do well, your customers don't." He kept on saying "I'm not lying to ya." He also had the name of his company printed on his shirt. LOL

 

Next case was a deadbeat renter who refuses to pay rent even after going to court and a judgement was ruled against her. The landlord plaintiff wants monetary damages for the floor. It looks like the defendent dragged her furniture across the hardwood floors. Extensive damage done and she acts like it's nothing.

 

Then we have the stubborn woman who hits the plaintiff's car in a parking garage, refuses to show him her insurance, then blames him for asking for damages to the car that were already there. The parking lot attendant was there as a witness. 

[AKA...CJ86]

Another dog bite case starts off today's cases. The defendent with a huge cross hanging around his neck says Mama the dog is a creampuff. Okay! The raccoons made a hole in the fence, Mama and her puppies got loose and attacked the plaintiff and her dog. Mama is a pitbull, the religious defendent says she is an American bulldog.

 

Next case is a guy needing a room and rents from his friend and girlfriend. He lets them borrow his car. Sues them. 

 

Last but not least the plaintiffs left their washer and dryer in the plaintiff's apartment for two years and now want her to pay them because she moved with her kids and left them there. Instead of selling the washer and dryer they didn't need anymore because senior housing furnishes them makes too much sense I guess.

 

 

Interesting cases today IMO. We get to see the parking lot with JM and Douglas looking at curio cabinet glass in the defendent's truck. The defendent owned the moving company that damaged the glass, buys the glass, it breaks again, he doesn't even take care to cover it. Not only that he doesn't even make arrangements to have the glass installed. This guy was an arrogant SOB and I wouldn't hire him to move me. Funny how he brags he does "very well" and JM responds with "you do well, your customers don't." He kept on saying "I'm not lying to ya." He also had the name of his company printed on his shirt. LOL

 

Next case was a deadbeat renter who refuses to pay rent even after going to court and a judgement was ruled against her. The landlord plaintiff wants monetary damages for the floor. It looks like the defendent dragged her furniture across the hardwood floors. Extensive damage done and she acts like it's nothing.

 

Then we have the stubborn woman who hits the plaintiff's car in a parking garage, refuses to show him her insurance, then blames him for asking for damages to the car that were already there. The parking lot attendant was there as a witness. 

 

Just realized I got the cases you identify as today's episode... yesterday...and again today.  

 

I see the guys with the damaged glass case today and was like...this is awfully familiar...

[rcc]

Just realized I got the cases you identify as today's episode... yesterday...and again today.  

 

I see the guys with the damaged glass case today and was like...this is awfully familiar...

That's happened to me too, not for a while though. The same episode for two days. LOL Once is enough thank you very much.

[AngelaHunter]

What's going on here? All of a sudden there are no options for Quote, Bold, etc.?

Anyway:

"We get to see the parking lot with JM and Douglas looking at curio cabinet glass in the defendent's truck."

Judge Wapner used to do that. The mover was an obnoxious, skeevy little shit and I can't believe he'd advertise himself here. Everyone within a hundred miles of him will be crossing his name off their list for their moves.

"Next case was a deadbeat renter "

Even before JM asked I was wondering how someone who can't afford $600 a month in rent could hire a lawyer. I hope the plaintiff has learned to screen renters a little more carefully and doesn't get stuck with squatting slobs in the future.

"I just couldn't stand living there anymore!"which means, "I squatted my ass - and my brother's ass - there for months, but declined to pay any rent."

"Then we have the stubborn woman who hits the plaintiff's car in a parking garage"

I kind of enjoyed that for the novelty value. People fighting over a car that's less than 15 years old, and a plaintiff and def. who could actually speak English properly? That's all as rare as hen's teeth, as my mother used to say.

[Rick Kitchen]

What's going on here? All of a sudden there are no options for Quote, Bold, etc.?

That happened the other day. I reported it in Bugs but it never got approved.

[WhitneyWhit]

Even before JM asked I was wondering how someone who can't afford $600 a month in rent could hire a lawyer. I hope the plaintiff has learned to screen renters a little more carefully and doesn't get stuck with squatting slobs in the future.

"I just couldn't stand living there anymore!"which means, "I squatted my ass - and my brother's ass - there for months, but declined to pay any rent."

I love that whenever someone is being sued for non-payment of rent, their excuse for not paying is always "I just couldn't stand living there anymore" even though they continued to live there, sans rent, for months on end. And who knew that telling someone you will have a trespasser arrested is considered a threat?

[AngelaHunter]

And who knew that telling someone you will have a trespasser arrested is considered a threat?

 

Telling someone you're going to sue them is also considered a threat by so many of these bozos.

 

They should watch this show before agreeing to appear on it and they'd see that "Squatters who don't pay rent" are near the top of JM's hit list, just a few lines down from "Desperate pathetic women who try to buy the love of losers."

[rcc]

Rerun again today!

 

Remember the long haired blonde woman who sued for $6,000 for all her stuff. She left the house without taking the dog and $450 worth of jewelry. She and her fiance couldn't pay the back taxes. The neighbor paid the taxes while the two of them abandoned the property. He also had to feed and water the dog. I couldn't stand that woman once nevermind a second time.

[SRTouch]

Rerun again today!

 

First case is a dead dog case. Defendant comes to town and stays with friend of 30 years, the plaintiff, for a few days. Plaintiff's dog gets out and is hit by car. Both sides agrue the responsibilty belongs to the other side, with two completely different versions on how the dog got out. Judge ruled defendant at vault, because of text messages.

Remember the long haired blonde woman who sued for $6,000 for all her stuff. ... I couldn't stand that woman once nevermind a second time.

Nothing much too add. Didn't believe a word she said, and I have absolutely no good feelings for anyone who abandons a pet.

Third and final case is about car damage, and actually pretty amusing. Defendant hit parked car. No real defense, says he spun on black ice and hit the car. Of course ruling for the plaintiff.

Amusing part was defendant. First laugh was as he is describing what happened. When questioned, he says if his car hadn't died he would have lef the the scene - because the insurance would have to paid for a hit and run. Another laugh is that defendand has countersuit because he wants his damage, caused when he hit the parked car, fixed. Finally, after losing the case, the defendant can't believe the plaintiff sued. Never mind the fact that he caused thousands of dollars damage to the plaintiff's vehicle.

[AngelaHunter]

Reruns? Well, here's one you may enjoy more. (No forum for vids, so I hope it's okay to put it here?)

 

Judge Wapner loses his cool - in his understated way - with a litigant who I believe to be one of the most obnoxious and irritating A-holes ever seen on this show to this very day. I can imagine what JM would have done with him.

 

[WhitneyWhit]

Why in the world would anyone bring a baby into the courtroom? That alone would probably have pissed JM off.

[cattykit]

Reruns? Well, here's one you may enjoy more. (No forum for vids, so I hope it's okay to put it here?)

 

Judge Wapner loses his cool - in his understated way - with a litigant who I believe to be one of the most obnoxious and irritating A-holes ever seen on this show to this very day. I can imagine what JM would have done with him.

I was just coming here to bitch that we went weeks with reruns, back to new episodes for a whole week and then back into reruns.  And then AngelaHunter posts this to make my day.  (I don't even know how you get an old VHS recording embedded into your post, but all the more awesome.)  It was just a damn shame that the asshole plaintiff had to win by force of law.  I think Judge Judy would have thrown him out just for being an asshole, but Judge Wapner and MM always try to follow the law.  Thanks for posting it  Do you have more?

[AngelaHunter]

Judge Wapner and MM always try to follow the law.

 

MM has thrown more than one person out. Judge Wapner came close to doing so here.

 

I found this on YT, and there are more as well.:)

[rcc]

I guess it's rerun week again.

 

Today's cases were a puppy that died a few days after purchase. Next case is the "fecal" position case of the son not paying his mother for the car because the state of NY doesn't let mothers sell cars to their son. LOL Then he wants emotional distress money from his mother. A real jerk and JM tells the girlfriend that the way a man treats his mother is usually the way he will treat his girlfriend/wife. I agree with that and I hope that the likeable girlfriend finds a real man. Next case was the plaintiffs who smoked so much the defendent had to have it professionally cleaned.

[DoctorK]

Angelahunter, I finally saw the old Peoples Court case (I couldn't see the video until this morning for some reason). Just Wow!. That smarmy, smirking plaintiff was unbelievable. As was his son - "I saw him pay by check last month... or maybe two months ago" [approx quote]. We all suspect that Mr. Porsche never got the top fixed and just got some duct tape that (hopefully) match the color of the top. I think our current JM would have come to the same result, but made the award contingent on the plaintiff providing a cancelled check showing that he paid for the repair prior to the court date, otherwise no award for lying to the court. Maybe I am mean, but I hope that asshat subsequently went into criminal court and behaved the same way, I would watch that on pay per view.

Edited January 19, 2016 by DoctorK

[SRTouch]

I guess it's rerun week again.

 

Today's cases were a puppy that died a few days after purchase.

First kudos to the judge for making the statement after ruling about getting a rescue dog.

The case itself was simple. Plaintiff had a strike against her before testimony began. All the tv judges frown how people who jack up the amount being asked to the max allowed. In the eyes of the law, you don't get pain and suffering because of grief caused by loss of a pet. It's rare to see someone get money for vet bills and price of a pet. Only two ways to win these cases. Have testimony from a vet that the animal was "unfit for sell", unlikely without a necropsy (for which the vet is going to expect to be paid). The other way would be if the seller gives a warranty that satisfaction is guaranteed - and that needs to be in writing, or in the words of JJ it's puffing.

Next case is the "fecal" position case of the son not paying his mother for the car because the state of NY doesn't let mothers sell cars to their son. LOL Then he wants emotional distress money from his mother. A real jerk and JM tells the girlfriend that the way a man treats his mother is usually the way he will treat his girlfriend/wife. I agree with that and I hope that the likeable girlfriend finds a real man.

This was just the son and girlfriend making fools of themselves to get on TV, get the appearance fee and the production company to pay for the car.

Next case was the plaintiffs who smoked so much the defendent had to have it professionally cleaned.

Seemed pretty obvious the landlord is not a viewer (you can always tell when they don't know where to stand at the lectern and try to go the wrong way in the hall on the way out). The landlord gives the judge suspect documents as evidence - a letter supposed to be from a lawyer which supports the landlord, but is contrary to the law; and the landlord's copy of the lease has a handwritten fee not on the tenant's copy. Final reason landlord gives to keeping money is that she had to paint and clean/deodorize carpet because tentants were smokers. Tenants deny smoking inside, but to me it doesn't matter - they lived there 20 months, the landlord should be doing that anyway.

Tenants/plaintiffs pretty sharp in this case. They provided all the documents needed to prove their case and did a walk through with landlord before turning in keys. Only thing we don't know is whether they took before and after pictures, since the judge ruled without asking for them.

[cattykit]

MM has thrown more than one person out. Judge Wapner came close to doing so here.

 

I found this on YT, and there are more as well.:)

I meant that JJ would have thrown him and his case out just because she didn't like him.  Judge Wapner and MM might kick the litigant out of the room but still decide the merits of the case based on the evidence.

[AngelaHunter]

This was just the son and girlfriend making fools of themselves to get on TV, get the appearance fee and the production company to pay for the car.

 

I hope you're right because the thought of anyone being so incredibly dumb and stupid as to stand there and tell JM that a person is not allowed to sell a car to a child or spouse is too depressing, especially when he admits that's a dumb, stupid lie. I guess the only criteria his girlfriend has in her choice of a mate is that he have a pulse.

[rcc]

The tenant from hell and the first time landlord this morning. Goes to show that checking on one's background is very important. The plaintiff goes on to take her bed bug infestation over to the next apartment. Yuck!

 

I felt bad for the woman who bought that car without a clean title and some funny business with fixing the car just enough to get it sold. The defendent looked shifty to me.

 

The other case involved a trip and money.

 

I wonder if JM took an extended vacation over the holidays and that's why we are getting all the reruns lately.

[AngelaHunter]

The tenant from hell and the first time landlord this morning.

 

The fact that this is a rerun doesn't lessen the impact of that nasty, vile hambeast. She lives with her sister, gets knocked up, doesn't pay her rent, can't pay to register her car but what is main problem? She really needs a dog.

 

Judge M said something that usually really bothers me: "You got YOURSELF pregnant!" because I doubt that self-impregnation is a real thing, in humans at least. In this case, however, I think it may be apt since I simply cannot imagine the individual who wanted to have sex with her, and unprotected sex at that. Anyway, JM really hated her, so much so that she didn't even give the def. shit for not bothering to find out about landlord/tenant laws or figuring out how to pay for repairs on his property.

 

The repeat of the Miami birthday trip fiasco: It just got me wondering again if most people on this show work at McDonald's because I can't imagine anyone who speaks so badly ("Me and her wuz") could have any other kind of job. I swear my second grade class spoke better English.

[rcc]

This morning had the loser defendent who has no money, is disabled, tells JM that "I'm not here for child support" and she tells Douglas "to get him out of here." The jerk doesn't want to pay for his son's support but thinks it's alright to beat on him. The mother coddles the son. JM tells the kid to leave the courtroom because the two parents are fighting and he shouldn't have to listen to all that. All this because of a Nintendo game and a tablet.

 

Second case is over a home inspection fee.

 

The next case "sisters in Christ" and a barter for hair styling.

[SRTouch]

This morning had the loser defendent who has no money, is disabled, tells JM that "I'm not here for child support" and she tells Douglas "to get him out of here." The jerk doesn't want to pay for his son's support but thinks it's alright to beat on him. The mother coddles the son. JM tells the kid to leave the courtroom because the two parents are fighting and he shouldn't have to listen to all that. All this because of a Nintendo game and a tablet.

Defendant Dad is a bully, who starts proceedings leaning on lectern glaring at Mom (plaintiff). MM tells him to stop looking at plaintiff and stand up. He has to be warned repeatedly to stop interrupting plaintiff and saying she's lieing. Douglas steps closer in case he needs to restrain Dad. Dead beat dad doesn't pay court ordered child support and hasn't seen son for two years. A month after visitation starts up (voluntary after parents bump into each other at walmart) Dad has a "grown man tantrum" and smashes kid's nintendo against the wall. Dad admits that two years ago he snuck over while Mom was out and spanked kid because of a broken tablet. MM tries to point out his poor parenting skills, he storms out of courtroom.

Who was watching son when Dad snuck over and spanked the then 9yo? Btw, according to Mom it was a beating with a belt which left cut on boy's back. If that's true, did she go through the steps of getting a restraining order. She said Dad doesn't pay the court ordered child support. Was visitation brought up when support was ordered? If Dad had visitation two years ago and he beat son with a belt, visitation should have been revoked or changed to supervised - which didn't happen. I suspect visitation was not settled in court.

Loser here is the boy. While he was sitting in court his body language, tomy untrained eye, suggested this was a kid who needs help. He had strong stutter when testifying. According to both parents, poor grades in school. If Dad is to be believed, there's also school suspensions and trouble with police.

Overall, Dad has anger/control problems (remember Douglas edging closer in case he needs to step in ), and any visitation should be supervised. Mom should save money spent on expensive toys and get the boy professional help.

Edited January 21, 2016 by SRTouch

[AZChristian]

OT comment:  I was in Santa Monica on Friday and stood on "Harvey's Corner."  Sadly, he was not there.  Not a filming day.  But fun to see, nonetheless.

[rcc]

 

Would you have joined the audience with Harvey if he were there?

Edited January 25, 2016 by rcc

[rcc]

First case was the colorist who was suing for a computer but kept complaining that she owes him money for a car. He missed payments and she ended up selling the BMW. He has sued her six times and put a tracking device on her car. He was weird as hell.

 

The second case was non payment for selling tickets for an event. Third case was about landscaping.

[AZChristian]

Would you have joined the audience with Harvey if he were there?

 

Sure.  It would have been fun to see how things go on "behind the scenes."  And if I'd actually had a chance to give an answer to one of his inane questions, I'd have told you all here so you'd know what I look like.

 

I'm tall, thin, young, and incredibly beautiful.  (Not.)

[momtoall]

I'm tall, thin, young, and incredibly beautiful.

 

 

Me too, which is why I don't understand why when people take pictures of me this fluffy, older, African-American woman appears in my place.

Edited January 25, 2016 by momtoall

[AngelaHunter]

Sure.  It would have been fun to see how things go on "behind the scenes."

 

Wouldn't you be afraid someone you know would see you mingling with that idiotic peanut gallery and "conversating" with the screeching shyster? I suppose you could have just called him names and stuff like that.

[SRTouch]

First case was the colorist who was suing for a computer but kept complaining that she owes him money for a car. He missed payments and she ended up selling the BMW. He has sued her six times and put a tracking device on her car. He was weird as hell.

I'm not sure why MM spent 20 minutes on him before finally telling him he had no case. Her advice to the defendant was right on. Unfortunately, the plaintiff is nuttier than a fruitcake. Right now he's focused on the car - MM had to keep telling today's case was not about the car. If the defendant gave him everything he claims she owes him, I suspect he'd just come up with something else.

In medical terms I'd says he's got LTS...

Looney Tunes Syndrome

[cattykit]

So today in the street view, we had a guy dressed in bright colors with white paint on his face and a fright wig, and a clown. 

 

Ba-dunk.

 

Defendant in the first case, unfortunately, should be glad she's only being sued and not shot, because the plaintiff was bringing the cray-cray for sure.  He's never going to let her go if there's any way to keep reeling her into his view. 

[AngelaHunter]

Quote

the plaintiff was bringing the cray-cray for sure.

 

Yes, and wow! The little hairdresser is a total fruitcake of the type who very well could murder someone. I don't give the def points for latching unto him. A mature man who has no credit, no credit cards and no money (but a great dye job) would set off alarms in my head,. The def's husband "forced" her to get a job - truly cruel and unusual punishment for a young woman,  in the plaintiff's eyes. Was this brokeass hair-dyer going to support her if they got married?

 

I've been with a few guys, boyfriends and husband, and none of them ever asked me to put a car in my name,  suggested I take a lie detector test or put a trackling device in my car. I was just lucky, I guess. Def. better be very careful in the future, or move and change her name. Seriously.  Maybe she IS a sociopathic liar, but plaintiff seems to be a sociopath, period.  

 

DJ case was boring. Lawn care case was boring, with the only mildly interesting part being that the def was such an irritating little twerp. Yes, plaintiff was a great tenant for years, but OH - weeds! Oh, noes.  I was kind of surprised that JM let him keep the $500. For weeds.

Edited January 25, 2016 by AngelaHunter

[VartanFan]

I sure would love to know what happened in the car case that happened two weeks from this tape date.  Yikes.  

[teebax]

So today in the street view, we had a guy dressed in bright colors with white paint on his face and a fright wig, and a clown. 

 

Ba-dunk.

 

Defendant in the first case, unfortunately, should be glad she's only being sued and not shot, because the plaintiff was bringing the cray-cray for sure.  He's never going to let her go if there's any way to keep reeling her into his view.

I am ridiculously afraid of clowns, so I almost jumped out of my seat when I saw that real clown behind the regular clown I'm used to (Harvey.)

The plaintiff in the first case doesn't need a restraining order; she needs a gun. That dude is not the type who is going to respect or obey a restraining order. He'd have been in the hospital the first time he put a tracking device on my car.

[WhitneyWhit]

I'm just getting around to watching yesterday's episode and holy hell at that first defendant, he actually scared me. He also looked creepy, like a composite sketch come to life.

[zillabreeze]

 

He'd have been in the hospital the first time he put a tracking device on my car.

Yep, he'd have been on his tummy in the ER while said tracking device was fished out of his a-hole.

[SRTouch]

Plaintiff in the first case is suing landlord because of damage to her property caused by fire. She expects the landlord to pay for her things, instead of getting renters insurance. She's not alone in her belief that the landlord should be resonsible. The clowns on the street, not in costume today, share her belief that landowner should be held responsible.

Hey, newsflash people, the landowner's insurance covers the landowner's property, ie the structure, not the tenant's property. MM explains this to the plaintiff, and tells her the owner is not responsible unless plaintiff can point to something to owner did which caused the fire. Even after the explanation, plaintiff cries about how unfair the ruling is.

NOTE: if you're a renter and have some furniture, electronics, whatever, you might need renters insurance - it isn't all that expensive. But, and it's a big but, just like the TV judges want to see proof of your property, the insurance adjuster isn't going to just take your word for your losses.

Edited January 26, 2016 by SRTouch

[AngelaHunter]

Plaintiff in the first case is suing landlord because of damage to her property caused by fire.

 

I believed every word def. said, including that plaintiff went on vacation (so she said) but couldn't pay her rent on time. She not only wanted him to pay for all her stuff, but "pain and suffering"? No lottery winners in JM's court.  Renters' insurance is, I think, one of the cheapest ins. to buy, yet  no one wants to pay the few dollars a month it costs.

 

Giant daughter who got her daddy to come and fight her battle after she rammed a curb and got her tire ripped up: As JM says, sometimes things that are irritating happen and you can't blame or sue someone else. Since when is a homeowner responsible for city property? Even in the hall, Daddy continued to insist that def should have paid for the stinkin' tire. Cue the wahhmbulance.

 

Furniture case: Perhaps the plaintiff learned by this to at least quickly read over something before he signs it, but I'm not hopeful.

[WhitneyWhit]

Giant daughter who got her daddy to come and fight her battle after she rammed a curb and got her tire ripped up: As JM says, sometimes things that are irritating happen and you can't blame or sue someone else. Since when is a homeowner responsible for city property? Even in the hall, Daddy continued to insist that def should have paid for the stinkin' tire. Cue the wahhmbulance.

 

 

Those people got on my last nerve. She seemed like the type who would file a lawsuit over a dirty look, with daddy backing her all the way.  I was happy that JM seemed every bit as exasperated with them as I was. I'm only shocked she didn't claim pain and suffering as the result of the noise scaring her and humiliation after a neighbor came out to see what had happened.

[cattykit]

I wanted to high five MM when she told the fire plaintiff to cut back on the drama.  And then when she told her she didn't have a legal leg to stand on.  Also loved the smackdown of the smug plaintiffs in the curb case.  Daddy was so, so sure bringing the permits and the current town statutes was going to impress MM.  Didn't you know that when you buy your house you have to go review the current standards for curb construction and then tear up the curb if it's not in line with current construction?  And then of course have the town arrest you for fucking with their property.

 

I felt bad for the furniture plaintiff, and I could tell MM did too, but her hands were tied.  I was hoping assclown would tell us at the end that he worked out at least some kind of arrangement with the store, but it was not to be.

[rcc]

"He's a crookster"! LOL That's what the plaintiff for the third case says to Curt in the hallway when she says the defendent sold her a car with faulty brakes and that's why she had an accident.

 

The second case was the furniture store owner who tried to get over on the plaintiff after delivering furniture.

 

The first case was the plaintiff suing the defendent because her pit bull bit him. The father was there with him but did not show up to court because "he didn't want to get involved." Mama wasn't even there but did all the talking for the plaintiff who either had a speaking disability or was a mama's boy. JM asked why she is suing since she wasn't there and he is an adult. Apparently he leaned over the fence and that's when the dog bit him. The house was completely fenced in. He had a bite and stitches and instead of wanting the doctor's bills taken care of mama wants the maximum $5,000. 

 

The defendent wasn't the nicest person though because in the hallway with Curt she proclaims, "I won" with a big smile on her face.

Edited January 27, 2016 by rcc