The People's Court - General Discussion

[teebax]

On September 7, 2016 at 1:29 PM, AngelaHunter said:

Quentin, be still my heart! I haven't finished watching but just had to comment on the highly desirable, fugly, slack-jawed Missing Link who looks as though he would smell really bad. He's 26, looks 50, and just gave up his lucratrive career at the carwash. I guess they weren't paying him what he's worth. Plaintiff, 45, thought he was a real prize (enough of a prize to expose her children to this cretin) since she was with him for two years and would still be with him if he hadn't been "messin'" with her sister. "Low life", "degenerate", "jerk" and "amoral" were some of JM's words for him. He probably couldn't understand most of them so didn't seem overly insulted. But I really don't think he has the necessary functioning brain cells for that emotion. Wow, women these days (at least the ones we see here) are all too willing to debase and degrade themselves for anything that happens to be still breathing. A more disgusting specimen - physically, mentally, and morally -  I cannot recall.

I'm catching up now that I realized there are new episodes. First of all, I'm glad Curt is gone. Secondly, I had to comment on this piece of shit. Oh, I know he doesn't care about my opinion of him because I'm "just a female."  This guy is a product of way too many desperate women out there. If these women had an nice of self-confidence, the only action that loser would get would be from his right hand. What a vile piece of crap. And the women hooking up with him are, in my opinion, even worse.

[califred]

That woman needed a bra or a better bra.  I want to know was that a business or politician she was working for?

[Pepper the Cat]

I love having Doug back, but he really needs a better fitting jacket!

The jacket he is currently wearing is way too big  for him!

[Brattinella]

There is a certain point past which, as breasts get larger, the woman REALLY needs a bra.  A GOOD one.  The braless look is only cute when you have tiny cute little titties.

[DoctorK]

Quote

REALLY needs a bra

She doesn't need a clothing designer, she needs a civil engineer for this project.

[SRTouch]

FIRST CASE: Yet another example of doing business with friends where they not only don't have a written contract, they don't really even have a verbal one. One of those "Do it up right and we'll settle up afterwards." This time plaintiff provided flowers for defendant's wedding, not only not agreeing on a price, but not knowing what the bride wanted. Now three years later plaintiff is in court trying to enforce the nonexistent contract. Even in court while MM is worked up telling plaintiff she needs a big "S" for stupid on her forehead the plaintiff tries to answer with "But we were friends." According to plaintiff they never talked budget, and the first time she talked to defendant about getting paid was the wedding day. Couldn't help but notice that as plaintiff was talking about amounts, and saying it took two years for defendant to pay half of the $600 she claims was owed, defendant is over shaking her head and mouthing "no!". When MM finishes with plaintiff she turns to defendant. Defendant can't WAIT to put the correct story out and starts talking, interrupting MM as she turns to her and to ask for her side of the story. As she tells her story MM quickly tells her her story makes no sense. She and co-defendant hubby start throwing out dates and amount of supposed payments, all in cash and no receipts, which total more than the bill. Her answer when MM points out the discrepancy of paying over $700 for a $600 bill is that she never knew how much it was, and would just fork over money whenever plaintiff asked for it. Ugh, sure, and this lady work in management? As MM gets worked up and tells her her story makes no sense the camera cuts to hubby, who is looking down biting his lip to keep from busting out laughing. In the end, MM gives up on the nonsense and decides no one proved anything, in fact isn't sure the litigants know what is owed or has been paid... case dismissed. Oh, and as she's dismissing the case I learn that a possible reason the suit was brought was that plaintiff was a disgruntled former employee. As an aside, I'm enjoying hallterview a lot more now for some reason....Wonder why?

SECOND CASE: 'Nother driver suing over towed car. At least this time the charge is only $180, guess guy didn't leave car in impound forever. His story is that he and a cousin both had business downtown, but in different stores. He dropped off the cousin, parked and walked across the street to conduct his business. Cousin did business in two stores, second one being the store where car was parked. Problem is business management where car was parked sees 1 guy in car, who parks in lot and leaves premises. When he leaves, they call tow truck and when everyone's business is done the car is gone. Timeline of story doesn't jibe with written tow records. Plaintiffs not the best TV litigants. First guy, car driver, falters as he speaks because he's mentally handicapped. MM let's him sit and brings up witness. Witness does a lot better speaking, but not really dressed for court in black sweater and scruffy beard. That brings up #3, mother of witness and aunt of driver, also the one who bailed the car out. She can talk, and is dressed well enough, but her eyes look everywhere but at the person, or camera, she's speaking to. Oh, she looks at JM when asked a question, but when answering she looks up, down, to the side, pretty much everywhere but at the person. I can just hear JJ saying "look at me! Up here (and pointing at her eyes)" She's the one arguing with the written tow records. When defendant, tow company owner, testifies we learn there was a dispute about the bill, and they discounted it from $210 to $180. As expected, tow company wins.

THIRD CASE (skipped - Dog attack) my new practice for dog attacks is to skip, but go back to watch if someone posts that it's an interesting case. This time I heard chihuahua got mauled, switched to Hot Bench ... and find another dog case!!!

[AngelaHunter]

Quote

As an aside, I'm enjoying hallterview a lot more now for some reason....Wonder why?

I actually watch them now. Funny how things are relative. I was never a big fan of Doug either, but in comparison to No-Neck? I'm in luuurve!

Quote

THIRD CASE (skipped - Dog attack) my new practice for dog attacks is to skip

I usually never watch even a second of those, as my hatred for stupid dog owners is monumental. In this case, the Chi survived, but the ghastly, beastly def., looking for all the world like the Major in Animal Farm (if the Major draped a blue scarf around his neck) was not to be resisted. Bonus: JM gave her a lambasting and made her pay the plaintiff's 1,800$ vet bill.

Quote

'Nother driver suing over towed car.

I just don't understand these people, who seem to be legion, thinking they can just park on private property and just walk away if it's convenient for them,  take their business outside those premises and have the nerve to be outraged when their cars get towed. Oh, but they were all doing business at that location! Receipts to prove it? Well, no, but just take our word for it.

The Flower People: All three were so clueless - who knows what it will cost? Who writes contracts? Who discusses price? Who keeps track? Why should we, when we're friends? Plaintiff's rehearsed testimony wasn't anywhere near as cute as she thought.

JM summed them up very succinctly: "Stupid."

[DoctorK]

Quote

Cousin did business in two stores, second one being the store where car was parked.

Actually, I think everybody on the plaintiff's side was confused. I seem to remember that not only was the plaintiff's passenger dropped off several blocks away from the towing parking lot but after he did his business in the store at the towing lot, he didn't ride home with the plaintiff, he walked home. So, unless I am having a senior moment, the plaintiff's witness who would have been justified in parking in the lot never was in the car in the lot. Either way, the entire plaintiff plus family story smelled to me like an ex post facto conglomeration, why didn't the plaintiff's witness have the receipts from the store he went into at the tow lot, given the towing issue? That at least would have given him some credibility.

[Guest]

20 hours ago, Brattinella said:

There is a certain point past which, as breasts get larger, the woman REALLY needs a bra.  A GOOD one.  The braless look is only cute when you have tiny cute little titties.

Actually, I think she needs two bras.  No, not one for "each"......rather, one that holds her ample breasts in place then the second to make sure the puppies don't jump ship.

[SRTouch]

1 hour ago, DoctorK said:

Actually, I think everybody on the plaintiff's side was confused. I seem to remember that not only was the plaintiff's passenger dropped off several blocks away from the towing parking lot but after he did his business in the store at the towing lot, he didn't ride home with the plaintiff, he walked home. So, unless I am having a senior moment, the plaintiff's witness who would have been justified in parking in the lot never was in the car in the lot. Either way, the entire plaintiff plus family story smelled to me like an ex post facto conglomeration, why didn't the plaintiff's witness have the receipts from the store he went into at the tow lot, given the towing issue? That at least would have given him some credibility.

Yep, tow owner even said they could have gotten out of the charge with a receipt. Hey if I heard a receipt could save me a couple hundred bucks I think I would have rushed home to dig through the trash, or even gone back to the store to try to get a copy. That said, my only experience of a tow Company towing a car had me paying because he showed up, even though he never towed the car.

[califred]

I don't understand why the actual owner of the dog wasn't responsible, or were they both since they were both sued?  

[AZChristian]

44 minutes ago, califred said:

I don't understand why the actual owner of the dog wasn't responsible, or were they both since they were both sued?  

It sounded like they were both being sued, as the defendant was there for herself and also representing "the dog owner" - who remained nameless.

[AngelaHunter]

On ‎9‎/‎8‎/‎2016 at 8:55 PM, teebax said:

 Secondly, I had to comment on this piece of shit. Oh, I know he doesn't care about my opinion of him because I'm "just a female."  This guy is a product of way too many desperate women out there. If these women had an nice of self-confidence, the only action that loser would get would be from his right hand. What a vile piece of crap. And the women hooking up with him are, in my opinion, even worse.

Exactly. The very worst part is that, no matter how disgusting and revolting these vile pieces of crap are, it's usually THEY who have to do the dumping, and usually because they've found yet another pathetic woman who wants them. Men these days needn't have a single redeeming quality to be in high demand with a legion of women who are beyond desperate.  I would rather eat my loss than have millions of people see what I found irresistable and, to top it off, that I couldn't even keep a "degenerate jerk".

[SRTouch]

First case: juvenile delinquents with a history of bad blood in high school age, who have never grown up, meet up at a red light as 19 and 20 year olds. Trash talk, spitting out the window, etc escalates to one dude throwing trash. That's enough that the idiots in plaintiff's car get out to get physical. Stupid for many reason, not the least of which is that there are two cars of idiots against him. Lucky for him, a passing cop pulled up as he's wrestling with one of the guys in the other car over a lug wrench. Now he's in court claiming part of the trash thrown at mommy's car was a big can of Arizona tea that caused $1800 in damage to her pristine 15yo junk heap. I almost hit FF when plaintiff's witnesses think it's funny when MM points out just how stupid it was for him to get out of the car to get physical. Kind of funny to find out one of the passengers in plaintiff's car was a girl. Turns out she had plaintiff's back and was ready to fight along with the boys - as long as she could fight the little guy. Defendant is actually acting worse, lots of smart a$$ comments, trying to teach JM about award $1500 worth of damages on a $2000 car, smirking and laughing at testimony, etc. MM figures he's acting like such a jerk because he's got a TV audience and asks ifhis mother, who isn't in court, is going to be ashamed of how he's acting in court ... and of course he smarts off and says she'll be fine. Who knows, she may be fine with it, as defendant and his cousins were all ready to fight - she might have been right in there ready to rumble with the kids. Anyway, case probably would have been ruled mutual combat and tossed, except big mouth defendant gets so into acting gangster in court that he admits hitting plaintiff's car with the can. In court after losing big mouth turns to codefendant, driver of the car, and says the ruling doesn't make any difference, then in hallterview refuses to answer if the ruling will end the trouble, leaving the impression there is more fighting to come. I wanted to know if the criminal charges are pending, as he was arrested for the threats and assault with the lug wrench, but alas nothing on that front.

Second case: one of those almost married breakup cases where litigants are in court fighting over who should pay what. Anyway, they were together for 5 years and had a son together. The time girl moves out in Feb and is living with new bf by march. Before moving they had split expenses 50/50, and when she left utilities and cable were in her name. Oh, and she left the 2-3 yo son behind when she moved in with new guy. Not mother of the year material. Anyway, she doesn't realize the bills are still in her name and not being paid until the balance is over $2500 and she gets turned down for a home loan. Neither side deserves any sympathy. He knew the bills weren't being paid, and just let it ride saying he couldn't get it in his name ... but didn't take any time to get them switched over when they were cut off. MM points out she stopped paying her portion of the rent while still on the lease and her son was living there, but turns out his dad moved in right away, actually moving in before she was completely moved out. Anyway, we see a little rough justice and he gets 3 months rent but has to pay half of the utility bill. 

Oh, and Doug asked the question I most wanted to hear the answer ... what the heck does that tattoo on her chest say? Not that it matters, and I forgot as soon as she told us what it says, but I always wonder what the people think is so important that they want it permanently marked on their body and then cover it up partially

THIRD CASE: Another one of those fake vs real hair cases. BOOORRRING... Plaintiff says she paid for human hair, but when she went to her hair salon the stylist says the hair low quality. Defendants really poorly prepared and end up having to pay about half what plaintiff wanted ... course plaintiff not only wanted a refund, but wanted them to pay for the hair she bought elsewhere. Actually, only reason I watched the boring case was because my local station carries Hot Bench has changed the schedule and had some hour long Time Life infomercial airing. Good news, when they DO air today's episodes later today, it will be new ones!

[Jamoche]

Today's rerun, first case, something about a radio show - dude, if you're really a voice actor, you should be able to come to court and tell your story in a voice that is not so whiny.

[BubblingKettle]

I can't be the only one who was wishing the teens in the first case were on Judge Judy instead, right?!  The defendants were infuriating with the yeahs (not even a full yeah - it was more like yeh), smirking, laughing, overly familiar mannerisms, visible undershirt, giant chain, and overall dickish behavior. Actually all of the litigants were dirtbags. Unfortunately, JMM wants to be a member of the cool crowd, so she didn't annihilate the defendant, who thinks he shits peppermint sticks and all ladies drool over him. I appreciated Doug Llewellyn's "What did you learn...Not much" to the mother of the plaintiff and his wise words to knock it off to the plaintiffs.

 

ETA: Doug Llewellyn questioned a litigant about her chest tat, and he added the slightest tinge of snark to it!!!  Doug, you have my love and gratitude forever.

Edited September 12, 2016 by CoolWhipLite

[Brattinella]

19 minutes ago, CoolWhipLite said:

Unfortunately, JMM wants to be a member of the cool crowd

This is why I don't break my neck trying to watch her show.  If I catch it, eh.  She is WAY too liberal for me.

[AngelaHunter]

Quote

The defendants were infuriating with the yeahs

Mahmood(?) was a slimy giant creep asshole who thinks he's a hot property. I agree he didn't get the whuppin' he deserved, but I really doubt anything anyone said could penetrate the thick bone of his skull. Plaintiff's mommy sounded a little dull-witted, and of course her snowflake did nothing wrong.

Quote

one of those almost married breakup cases where litigants are in court fighting over who should pay what.

So maybe she's a bit of a slackjaw when it comes to taking care of her bills and taking care of her son, but she is utterly meticulous when it comes to her makeup, hair and tat placement - all of which was incredibly trashy.

Just watched 3rd case. Yeah - boring, but all these cases make me wish I had gone into the wig/weave/hair business years ago. I'd be rich! Plaintiff might want to rethink that hot pink lipstick.

Edited September 12, 2016 by AngelaHunter

[Bazinga]

Quote

Not that it matters, and I forgot as soon as she told us what it says, but I always wonder what the people think is so important that they want it permanently marked on their body and then cover it up partially

Had to Google it, as I knew the plaintiff couldn't come up with something so "deep" and "meaningful."  The line was 'when a heart breaks it never breaks even' and I now know it was from a lyric by Big Sean, Ariana Grande's ex, in the song 'Don't Tell Me You Love Me'.  The rest of the lyrics, IMO, are worse.  Maybe it sounds better then it reads but I don't want to find out.  At what point will she be embarrassed that that lyric is across her chest?  

Here are the full lyrics:

http://www.azlyrics.com/lyrics/bigsean/donttellmeyouloveme.html

Edited September 13, 2016 by Bazinga

[BubblingKettle]

6 hours ago, Bazinga said:

Had to Google it, as I knew the plaintiff couldn't come up with something so "deep" and "meaningful."  The line was 'when a heart breaks it never breaks even' and I now know it was from a lyric by Big Sean, Ariana Grande's ex, in the song 'Don't Tell Me You Love Me'.  The rest of the lyrics, IMO, are worse.  Maybe it sounds better then it reads but I don't want to find out.  At what point will she be embarrassed that that lyric is across her chest?  

Here are the full lyrics:

http://www.azlyrics.com/lyrics/bigsean/donttellmeyouloveme.html

Most likely, the answer to that is: Never.

While I was reading those song lyrics, I had such strong "Get off my lawn" and "Back in my day" feelings. Ugh, someone got paid for penning that sludge.

[ElleMo]

20 hours ago, SRTouch said:

Second case: one of those almost married breakup cases where litigants are in court fighting over who should pay what. Anyway, they were together for 5 years and had a son together. The time girl moves out in Feb and is living with new bf by march. Before moving they had split expenses 50/50, and when she left utilities and cable were in her name. Oh, and she left the 2-3 yo son behind when she moved in with new guy. Not mother of the year material. Anyway, she doesn't realize the bills are still in her name and not being paid until the balance is over $2500 and she gets turned down for a home loan. Neither side deserves any sympathy. He knew the bills weren't being paid, and just let it ride saying he couldn't get it in his name ... but didn't take any time to get them switched over when they were cut off. MM points out she stopped paying her portion of the rent while still on the lease and her son was living there, but turns out his dad moved in right away, actually moving in before she was completely moved out. Anyway, we see a little rough justice and he gets 3 months rent but has to pay half of the utility bill. r today, it will be new ones!

Oh, I had some sympathy for him.  I am sure he didn't pay the bills and screwed her over on purpose because she screwed him over and left him for someone else.  She was on the lease and I didn't hear anything about her paying child support to him during that time, so I am cool with them splitting the bills. 

You can get someone's name off utilities if you can prove that you are the one who is currently living at the residence .  It's a pain in the ass to do, a lot of paperwork and I think the property owner would need to get involved. He probably didn't want to bother. 

Edited September 13, 2016 by ElleMo

[patty1h]

Can anyone explain the "sexual favors" the plaintiff tried to imply in the refurbished phone case.  It was fuzzy to me, but the plaintiff made it sound like the defendant was forcing him to flirt with girls as part of his job, and that it was horrible, degrading and humiliating.  Was the flirting supposed to be a tool to bring in female customers, or was it just a bro trying to help another bro?

 I give the plaintiff some leeway due to his disabilities, but that nugget sounded like something his mother cooked up to make his case sound better.  

Edited September 13, 2016 by patty1h

[BubblingKettle]

Being nosy, but what were the eight brain surgeries for??!  They weren't for ADHD and Aspergers...there are no surgical procedures for those conditions. I think the mom wanted Francisco to be babysat during the day (because he can't be left alone, and "college" serves as a sitter during the school year), and she didn't want him to get a legitimate paycheck because then she wouldn't get his SSI check. I guess the phone store guy had Francisco handing out cards the whole time, except when he was taking trash out (or being goaded into doing "sexual favors"...omg).  

If you haven't seen the episode yet, make sure to look at the girl behind Francisco when he announces, "I'm a virgin because I'm in college." Bless her, she tried to keep composed, but it didn't work.

The whole case was hinky to me. There were way too many variables. Even though Francisco might be adept at some academic subjects, he doesn't seem equipped to fully comprehend situations (examples: "sexual favors," and his inability to answer Doug's question) and be ready for the he said-he said that was necessary for his case.

[AngelaHunter]

Quote

Being nosy, but what were the eight brain surgeries for??! 

Well, that was interesting. I have no idea, really, of the particulars of this case, but it made me realize what a difficult job small claims court judges have, with no evidence and diametrically opposing stories. "Sexual favors" - I dunno, unless def.(who gave off, IMO, a kind of sleazy vibe) thought it might be entertaining to watch... oh god I don't want to think about it. Is being a virgin a requirement for entering college these days?

The litigants with the matching outfits: Yeah, I'd take out a loan in MY name to buy an Acura for the insolent def, an admitted lazy bum whose "girl" wants him to drive a fancy car they can't afford - when he didn't even have a driver's license -  to take the baby to the doctor or whatever. All he needed was a cheap hooptie to do errands (if he's not too lazy to do any). Not only did he (or his girl) make timely payments, but wracked up 500$ in tickets, because when someone else is on the hook, who gives a rat's ass?  Plaintiff wants to open her own business, but with her judgement and financial acumen, I feel the odds of success are slim.

This is one case I would have liked to see on JJ. She would have decimated the defs and skipped the Kumbaya family speech.

[BubblingKettle]

1 hour ago, patty1h said:

Can anyone explain the "sexual favors" the plaintiff tried to imply in the refurbished phone case.  It was fuzzy to me, but the plaintiff made it sound like the defendant was forcing him to flirt with girls as part of his job, and that it was horrible, degrading and humiliating.  Was the flirting supposed to be a tool to bring in female customers, or was it just a bro trying to help another bro?

 I give the plaintiff some leeway due to his disabilities, but that nugget sounded like something his mother cooked up to make his case sound better.  

I think the phone store manager was trying to have "lad talk" with the plaintiff by saying things like, "She's pretty; you should ask her out!" or "She was checking you out, Francisco!" Francisco's inability to comprehend social cues and his confusion about the nuances of language led him to say that the phone store manager wanted him to do sexual favors. His mother seemed slow, so she wasn't equipped to correct his misuse of that term.

Don't get me wrong, the phone shop guy may have made idiotic jibes and yukked it up when they went over Francisco's head. Francisco obviously didn't want to talk about girls....as he said, he's in college (sorry, I couldn't resist the snark). But legitimate sexual favors were not a part of the situation at all!

[Jamoche]

3 hours ago, patty1h said:

Can anyone explain the "sexual favors" the plaintiff tried to imply in the refurbished phone case.  It was fuzzy to me, but the plaintiff made it sound like the defendant was forcing him to flirt with girls as part of his job, and that it was horrible, degrading and humiliating.  Was the flirting supposed to be a tool to bring in female customers, or was it just a bro trying to help another bro?

 I give the plaintiff some leeway due to his disabilities, but that nugget sounded like something his mother cooked up to make his case sound better.  

Can't imagine him even understanding what "flirting" meant. Maybe "Smile at the girls when you're handing out the cards, otherwise you come across as creepy"?

[DoctorK]

I am sure that my dear mother went to her grave disappointed that I didn't run a hot dog stand, instead of becoming a physicist. (This will make no sense unless you have seen today's show with Mr. Hot Dog Stand hustler.)

[Brattinella]

I have really got to stop forgetting to record this show!

[ElleMo]

26 minutes ago, DoctorK said:

I am sure that my dear mother went to her grave disappointed that I didn't run a hot dog stand, instead of becoming a physicist. (This will make no sense unless you have seen today's show with Mr. Hot Dog Stand hustler.)

I have been watching too much TV so I decided not to tape JJ unless the descriptions sounded interesting.  This one does.  Thanks ;-)

[AZChristian]

12 minutes ago, ElleMo said:

I have been watching too much TV so I decided not to tape JJ unless the descriptions sounded interesting.  This one does.  Thanks ;-)

ElleMo - this is People's Court, not JJ.  Don't tape the wrong thing!!!

[ElleMo]

4 minutes ago, AZChristian said:

ElleMo - this is People's Court, not JJ.  Don't tape the wrong thing!!!

I knew that and even ran to DVR it on my TV.  Don't know why I typed JJ.

[BubblingKettle]

The two litigants from the stolen crutches/high-price sweaters case were such liars. I'm surprised JMM didn't have one of her tantrums on them. I had such a good laugh when good ol' Doug inquired, very seriously, about the "meaning" of the True Religion sweaters. Bless him, he thought they were making some sort of theological statement. I must say, though, I am really enjoying Doug's snarkations in the hallterviews. "You seem to have a very selective memory." You go, Mr. Llewelyn!

[AlleC17]

The sister suing the brother and hi girl over the Acura pissed me off.  The brother was so lazy, he didn't even want to bother to reach into is pocket to check the date of his driver's license when MM asked!  I wished MM to rip him a new one, not think it was so adorable that he handed over his daughter to his sister even in the midst of the family drama.  Okay, at least he does do that.  I wanted to slap the GF too, who snarked about how she (the sister) gets her 'little boyfriend' to pay for things.  how is that any worse than YOU paying for the loser ass POS boyfriend you just bred with?  Whatever...hated them  lol

[AngelaHunter]

Quote

I am sure that my dear mother went to her grave disappointed that I didn't run a hot dog stand

I've probably said this too many times, but: I was trying to imagine putting an ad on CL, looking for total strangers (about whom I know nothing)to live in my house. So, I can't imagine doing that, but these two strangers? This abrasive, loud-mouthed hustler and his ridiculous, mute wife? Oh, wait - he lives in the same city as I do, so he must be beyond reproach. A few weeks later he informs me, with a tear standing in his eye, that his sainted, alcoholic mother had big dreams for him - to own a hot dog stand, and he needs 2K to realize that life-long dream. Of course, I give him the money. Who wouldn't? It all makes perfect sense, right?

Quote

The two litigants from the stolen crutches/high-price sweaters case were such liars.

I nearly turned this off, but I still had half a glass of wine to consume. Please tell me what kind of school has mature students who can't speak English beyond a third grade level? "We was", "me and her went" etc. Somehow I just think it was home health aid or nursing assistant school, which seems to draw only those who cannot do anything else. She had no idea she could buy crutches that every pharmacy sells. Her 6'10" friend couldn't manage to help her get them out of the house? I had a hard time listening to the def. I thought her eyeballs were going to literally fall out her sockets.

The 75$ AAA case was boring and the def was a total no-class bitch.

[Broderbits]

AngelaHunter said:

Quote

 Please tell me what kind of school has mature students who can't speak English beyond a third grade level?

It seems like most of the country speaks this way and I think it has less to do with schools than it does with wanting to "fit in" with one's peers and not seem "elite". All part of the dumbing down of humanity.

It's too bad the AAA defendant won because her smugness and laughing really irritated me. Karma's coming baby, watch out!

[cattykit]

11 minutes ago, Broderbits said:

It's too bad the AAA defendant won because her smugness and laughing really irritated me. Karma's coming baby, watch out!

What was infuriating was that she never understood what MM was trying to tell her.  She was convinced of her correctness all the way, and never grasped that she was screwing over her friend.  I could almost understand it if it was the first time, and the plaintiff offered her the use of the service.  But this was a second hit, and the defendant asked the plaintiff to call AAA again, so I think it really should have been on the defendant.

Do fire departments come out and unlock cars for people?  I couldn't even get them to get my cat out of a tree 30 years ago.

[seacliffsal]

Regarding the college student who was suing for her crutches and tuition-unfortunately, without parental or administrative support teachers just can't 'force' students to work or learn.  The demands placed on teachers have created a social promotion nightmare.  Plus, even though students plan on attending college, they don't think they should have to work in high school.  Fortunately, as I am old and cranky (and my students tend to do really well on their AP exams), most of my students really apply themselves and are prepared for college.  However, what other teachers experience and have to face in terms of parental complaints and administrative directives, it's usually a losing battle to get students off of their phones to pay attention or even to (gasp) learn something.

[califred]

A million moons ago (1998-2000). I worked for AAA and we were always very explicit if it was past your third call that you would have to pay. 

 

Also if we ever had a baby/young kid locked in a car the police would go but our drivers would stop what they were doing to go help them.  I can't imagine the fire dept unlocking you w/o a human inside.

 

The hot dog cart people were interesting.  He was a piece of work, borrowing money for business has nothing to do with landlord/tenant stuff; yes, yes it does.

[SRTouch]

4 hours ago, AlleC17 said:

The sister suing the brother and hi girl over the Acura pissed me off.  The brother was so lazy, he didn't even want to bother to reach into is pocket to check the date of his driver's license when MM asked!  I wished MM to rip him a new one, not think it was so adorable that he handed over his daughter to his sister even in the midst of the family drama.  Okay, at least he does do that.  I wanted to slap the GF too, who snarked about how she (the sister) gets her 'little boyfriend' to pay for things.  how is that any worse than YOU paying for the loser ass POS boyfriend you just bred with?  Whatever...hated them  lol

I agree about the lazy part, but that whole thing made me wonder if he's illiterate. It looked like he needed gf to read the expiration date for him.

[SRTouch]

3 hours ago, AngelaHunter said:

The 75$ AAA case was boring and the def was a total no-class bitch.

My question, as she almost stumbled as she sauntered in the courtroom... is she drunk or did she just smoke some really good weed? I pretty much decided it was weed. Poor girl had trouble keeping her eyes open, much less following what was being said. I have to agree with the Judge, can't really hold her to an agreement which she never made, but she is a REALLY BAD friend.

[edra]

The new Curt (returned Doug) is fun to watch. He seems to have a snarky retort for both the winners and losers. Anyone going off tangent, or not responding to his questions, gets a quick cutoff and auf wiedersehen

[teebax]

15 hours ago, Broderbits said:

AngelaHunter said:

It seems like most of the country speaks this way and I think it has less to do with schools than it does with wanting to "fit in" with one's peers and not seem "elite". All part of the dumbing down of humanity.

It's too bad the AAA defendant won because her smugness and laughing really irritated me. Karma's coming baby, watch out!

You're absolutely correct. My middle school students know proper English. The decision not to speak it is more cultural than ignorance. As someone who often got picked on for "talking white," I can relate.

That being said, I would hope by the time they get to college they'll be less concerned about what their peers think and proud to show off their education. Sadly, that doesn't seem to be happening.

[Arynm]

15 hours ago, SRTouch said:

I agree about the lazy part, but that whole thing made me wonder if he's illiterate. It looked like he needed gf to read the expiration date for him.

I thought that the date of expiration was in numbers so he was double checking that 10 stood for October. Maybe not illiterate, just really stupid and lazy.

[SRTouch]

FIRST CASE: silly case of event planners doing a BIG 75th birthday party without a contract. After the event the defendants, who are footing the bill, refuse to pay the wait staff what the plaintiff promised. Personally, I have no idea what the going rate is for working a fancy event, so don't know if 15 or 20 dollars is a reasonable minimum. Doesn't really matter, since MM waded through volumes of texts and emails and found the plaintiff agreeing with defendants to start wages at 15 per hour, more if staff is good. Difference in wages was $530, but by the time both sides finished piling on complaints MM had a 9k dollar suit/countersuit case. Like I said, silly case, and no one gets anything.

SECOND CASE: Plaintiff suing $5,000 over damage to vehicle that she claims was done by defendant's kids. Defendants say anyone could have caused the damage, and no one saw their precious 2 12 year olds on the non-running piece of junk blocking access to back yard. Another of those scorecard cases. Crazy story about why the car has been sitting needs a flowchart to follow. Plaintiff was passenger in vehicle, in labor, being driven to the beach by defendant's drunk sister. There's a wreck, which she blames on defendant's sister, and the car has been sitting since the accident, which occurred 2 years ago. I actually backed up a couple times trying to get a story that made sense, but am still not sure why car is just sitting. Near as I can figure out, plaintiff had no insurance when accident happened, and the state won't let her register the car until all the damages and fines resulting from the accident are taken care of... so it sits on the side of the house, blocking access to the back yard. Defendants say anyone trying to get to the back yard had to climb over or through the car. They admit their kids climbed over car, but say others did as well, including the guy who read the utility meters. Plaintiff blames the defendant's kids for treating the car as playground equipment. Really, plaintiff is another in a long line of litigants who feels the world should adjust to her needs and wants. (She is an unemployed single mother of 7. Only has custody of 1, rest live with grandma. Has nothing to do with case, but I find myself wondering how many different "baby daddys" there are, and how many pay child support. Oh, and whether she's getting money for those kids, or if it's going to grandma. Accident happened while unemployed mommy was having her drunk friend drive her and a bunch of kids to the beach in the uninsured car. I wonder if child endangerment could have been charged.) Plaintiffs gets $350 - more than I would have given because the whole problem was caused by plaintiff. I guess since defendants offered $350 to settle at one point, MM went with the amount they offered, which could be viewed as admitting the kids did some of the damage. 

THIRD CASE: Plaintiff suing over $1500 she loaned defendant 5 years ago. Defendant countersuing for same amount, saying he worked off the loan, and quit answering her calls because she was chasing him to get romantically involved. Plaintiff acts shocked when she hears his defense, and watching his face as we hear the voice over intro it looks like even he thinks his story is ridiculous. Plaintiff has a silly story, but defendant's story is even worse. She sounds like she's more than a little scatter brained, while he just sounds like a dishonest conman  who took advantage of a 30yo friendship. Even as he's claiming her $1500 check was for work he did, he says she was lending him the money. Oh, and he just did a 2 1/2 year stint in jail for working while collecting unemployment. (I sort of want to know how much truth there is to that. He says he spent 2 1/2 years in jail for fraudulently collecting $3,600. Hmmm, don't buy it, especially with the pause and looking away when asked how much he collected.) He should have just said he owed the money but didn't have it, because MM shot down everything he said. MM really goes off when provided with a copy of her check, with "loan" written in the memo line. But wait, it gets better. His $1500 countersuit is for slander. Seems when he didn't pay up, she told mutual friends he wouldn't pay the money he owed. Ah well, it was so long ago he probably forgot she put loan on the check, and didn't expect her to still have it anyway.

[BubblingKettle]

The plaintiff in the truck jumping case was full of crap about everything. Her facial expressions made that obvious; she had such sketchy mannerisms.

I live in a 4-family house (That was an apartment-- a stubby one, but it was not a house)

I have a driveway (No you don't)

I met up with my friend (More like your friend tied a load on while she was supposed to be watching your 6 other kids when you were at the hospital in early labor)

I didn't know she was drunk (Yes you did, the empty cans and bottles were on the table in front of the TV when you came back from the hospital, and you know it)

I was just released from the hospital and was in labor, so I wanted to go to the beach for the day (I hope this is a lie. But based on everything else she was saying, it's true because she was such a moron. Example - $5k worth of parts in a 14-year-old car?)

Also, that condescending "Wow" is one of my pet peeves. I can't stand when people do that, and it usually comes out of the mouths of the guilty party.

[AngelaHunter]

Quote

silly case of event planners doing a BIG 75th birthday party without a contract.

Contracts? We don't need no stinkin' contracts! We'd rather waste our time in court. IMO, 20 - 25$/hr for kids to pass around canapes is outrageous. I completely believed they were on their cell phones all the time. Young people today are physically incapable of going more than 15 minutes without checking their FBs.  10$/hr would be more in line.

Quote

Plaintiff suing $5,000 over damage to vehicle that she claims was done by defendant's kids.

Plaintiff was a sainted single mother of 6 (I guess she was CEO of a company before she lost her job. These days that kind of job is needed to support 6 children) Six kids just weren't quite enough, so she got knocked up again and was in labour when she decided to go to the beach with her drunken friend in her uninsured car. I don't blame her. I'd rather go to the beach than use birth control, get off my back and get a JOB.  (BTW, I noticed an immediate change in JM's affect when she learned about the gaggle of kids which she and Douglas have to support) She should be able to park her non-working 14-year old POS wherever she likes. It inconveniences everyone else? Tough. She's a Single Mother( by choice) worthy of special dispensation. The "Wow" was disbelief that she struck out on her "bo-nanza" attempt.

Quote

Plaintiff suing over $1500 she loaned defendant 5 years ago.

He was such a shifty, lying, unrepentant scumbag I could overlook the plaintiff's terrible grammar (and I hate it when someone adds, "And everything" to the end of every sentence) and her buying a new, low-cut top for the show instead of getting a decent bra. Kudos to her for actually writing "Loan" on the check.

He was counter-suing for her slandering him by calling him a thief. You'd think with all his dealing with the justice system he'd have learned that the truth is an absolute defense to slander.

He got 2 1/2 years in prison for unemployment fraud? I doubt it.

[SRTouch]

First case isn't the usual run of the mill TV case. Ok, countersuit is silly and can be dispensed with in 3 seconds - defendant wants money for the time and stress of having to come to court.... yeah, not going to happen. Plaintiff's suit has to do with fake tickets to a pro football game bought off Craigslist. A lot of his suit is iffy: he not only wants the money he paid back, he wants the scalper to pay for the real tickets he had to buy, his parking, and maybe the beer and hot dogs for a total $1286. Actually, google tells me dude is not technically a scalper. I always thought scalping was selling tickets outside approved avenues and was illegal, but reading https://www.legalzoom.com/articles/who-needs-tickets-is-ticket-scalping-legal it turns out what he did is perfectly legal in most jurisdictions ... well except from the bogus ticket part, oh and in NJ, where they were, resellers need a license, though individuals maybe don't, so hard to tell with all kinds of exemptions. Anyway, I don't really think defendant was out to defraud the plaintiff, I mean he had no problem with plaintiff coming to his house to pick up the tickets, taking his drivers license and car info, etc. Ah, that's worth another chuckle. The plaintiff who bought the ticket is a retired cop. Case itself is laughable, but definitely worth watching to see MM get all worked up scolding the unrepentant defendant, who I'm not sure still doesn't feel he shouldn't get to keep the money... oh, and in the hallterview the retired cop said he's still going to go after the dude and try to get him arrested and charged.

Second case: back to feuding roommates, complete with car repo'ed, punching pregnant girl in stomach (or maybe in the face), etc., drugs around the kids, Child Protective Services investigations, yada yada. Maybe it's just me, but when litigants insist on running on and on, talking over the judge, standing there with chest tats of some dude's name... well, they have an uphill fight to win their case if the litigant on the other side is halfway presentable --- oh, and let's not forget that she would rather sleep in her car with defendant than go home where grandma is looking after her son, "because that's the kind of friend she is." Course, the one on the other side of the aisle is the one CPS is investigating, so also has a child somewhere while she's sleeping in a car while pregnant after getting kicked out by her bf. Anyway, after sleeping in the car for awhile the two finally find a place and move into an apartment. Doesn't take long before plaintiff moves in bf, then they get in physical fight, cops called. Nope, defendant may not be as loud and brash, but they're both despicable... two single mothers, 1 pregnant with yet another child, getting in physical fights. I don't really know where their kids were, maybe with these two unfit mothers, maybe with the respective grandmas...  they don't even mention the kids except in passing. I'd like to say the kids are better off living with the grandmas, but then I remember the grandmas raised these two (and I wonder if grandma's are just like these two, just older - no mention of a grandpa, were the grandmas sleeping around with multiple baby daddys). I don't even know who is suing for what, this is like a train wreck that I can't not watch. Red, yellow, black or white, trash is trash... there are no clean hands here, and I wouldn't give anyone a penny. MM still tries to wade through the sewage of their lives, and actually breaks down money owed to both sides. 

Liking Doug more and more. When plaintiff tries to reopen the case in hallterview Doug tells her JM has already explained her ruling. Course she tries to talk over him, but he won't have that and he slips in that he thinks it was stupid for these two to move in together, then ushers her on out.

Third case: concrete contractor suing customer for rest of what he's owed. Defendant argues he paid the estimated amount, and after the job was done plaintiff wanted another thousand. MM says this should be easy, let's just look at the contract ... and of course there is no contract, and no texts or anything. Plaintiff brought along two witnesses who had obvious rehearsed stories. The first witness is plaintiff's son, and his story is almost word for word what plaintiff just said. Second witness tells us he's known and worked with contractor for a long time, and he remembers overhearing defendant say how much he still owed. When asked why he remembers this conversation that had nothing to do with him he says he remembers everything. Oh well,  I don't believe the witnesses and don't think plaintiff proved anything, but MM decides the work done was worth another thousand, so plaintiff wins.

Again, Doug comes through and asks a whether it hurt when the witness got the Confederate Battle Flag neck tat 

Edited September 16, 2016 by SRTouch
Missing word

[OhioSongbird]

Yeah...today's show was a doozy!  Tats everywhere.  I liked how the Rebel flag one set off his missing front teeth.  I think the roommates tat said "Anthony".  None of these folks should ever breed.  The only person who made any sense today was the def in the concrete case.  The def in the ticket case was an idiot.  Glad JM called him on it.

Sorry if I sound grouchy.  Home with a case of shingles from hell.  Get your shots, people.  I had one about a year ago, still got it but I don't even want to think what it would be like if I hadn't gotten one.

[AngelaHunter]

Quote

I liked how the Rebel flag one set off his missing front teeth. 

Don't know if I'm looking forward to this or not.

Sorry to hear about your shingles.  A friend had them and she said the pain was excruciating. :(

[BubblingKettle]

OhioSongbird-- How awful! I hope you feel better soon.

I don't think the litigants in today's cases could have been more unlikeable. What a disgusting, dirty bunch of miscreants. Frankly, I wouldn't have allowed the Confederate flag neck tat man go on the air. I know that flag is a hot-button issue, but I would have pulled a JJ-esque 'my show, my decision' and made him sit in the green room (or even better, get out of my studio) to wait for his stupid friends. I wouldn't want that image aired on a show that represented me/my image, and I wouldn't want that dirtbag around my Officer McIntosh.