People's Court - 9 13 2012 - Thursday

Diego And The Linked Computers

Diego  is suing Stephanie for $1830.70. This is for  rent, utility expenses, food expenses, a diamond ring, and the replacement cost of a refrigerator door. Diego and Stephanie dated for 4 1/2 years and moved in together. This lasted 8 months. Diego thinks the problems started when they linked their computers together. Diego says they did this to share movies. Whatever the reason, it is a very bad idea. Diego admits curiosity got the best of him. He read documents that were essentially Stephanie's journal. She wrote about being unhappy in her relationship with him and feeling sexual tension with someone else. Stephanie admits to reading Diego's journal. They were writing about the same topic, being unhappy in their relationship with each other. Diego said this started a huge fight. Stephanie threw a small Buddha statue at him and hit the refrigerator instead. She also threw his guitar. Both of them left the apartment in order to diffuse the fight. Diego came back that night, Stephanie did not. When Diego came back he put all of Stephanie's belongings in trash bags and changed the locks. He texted her the next day to pick up her stuff and asked for the money she owed. Diego said she owed him money for the rent, utilities, and food expenses. Now is is also suing for the cost to repair the refrigerator door. 

Stephanie came the next day to pick up her stuff. She called the police and had Diego arrested for harassing text messages. He also had done an illegal lockout. Diego had no right to lock Stephanie out of the apartment. Stephanie admits that she owes the money for the rent. She does not feel she should have to pay the utilities. She says she always paid for the food. She denies damaging the refrigerator door. The diamond ring was a gift, not an engagement ring.

The Judge finds that Stephanie is required to pay her share of the rent, the utilities and the repair to the refrigerator door. Her denial of the damage to the door is not believed. She does get to keep the diamond ring. Diego gets a total of $1192.62.

These two people really need to move on and find healthier relationships. Hopefully they will learn from the mistakes in this relationship. I would hope in future relationships they do not link personal computers together! What do you think?

Michael And The Lawyer Fee

Michael is suing Carie, a former client, for $604.64. Carie hired Michael to represent her in a very complicated case. She chose Michael because she has known him since she was in the first grade. Carie went to school with Michael's son. Carie says that Michael guaranteed he would win the case. There are no guarantees in life, Carie should know that! Michael's representation for Carie cost over $7,000.00. This seems very silly for a $5000.00 case. Carie withheld the balance of the bill because she dismissed Michael as her lawyer. After the case went to arbitration and Carie lost, she appealed the decision and won. Carie ignored the bill for the balance of her bill to Michael. Because she ignored it, Michael brought her to court. The Judge wants to know why he didn't just forget about it. He says because she ignored the bill and also had told him her father would pay the bill. This was a business transaction and Carie signed a retainer agreement. Michael did the work. Just because she was unhappy with the outcome is no reason to withhold payment. 

The Judge finds in favor of Michael and Carie has to pay him. This is only right since there was an agreement. The history they might have had should not factor in a business deal. Michael is very matter of fact in his presentation of the case - just the facts! There was nothing personal about the lawsuit, he did the work and should get paid for it. What do you think?

Tobias And The Lost Pair Of Pants

Tobias is suing Ken, his dry cleaner for $500.00. This is the cost of a pair of pants from a Hickey Freeman designer suit. Ken admits to losing the pants. The policy of the store is to reimburse a customer 10 times the cost of the dry cleaning when an item is lost. This would have come to $137.50. Ken also offered Tobias an additional $50.00 in store credit. Tobias refused this offer, he wanted $300-$350 for the pants. Ken was not going to pay this amount, he had a store policy in place. Ken is responsible to pay Ken the $137.50. Tobias is not happy with this because he still does not have pants for his suit. 

This is a very straight forward case. The store policy is very clearly stated on the back of the receipt. Since Tobias is a regular customer, he has been given the receipt on many occasions. What I do not understand is why dry clean only the pants of a suit. Wouldn't the pants and jacket wind up being different colors through time and not match? Please Tobias, if you read this, let me know why you did not take the complete suit to the cleaners? I would think you would want the suit to match! What do you think?

                        Please share your thoughts in the comments. Thank you for joining me.

Stay Updated - Subscribe!

A house is just a place to keep your stuff while you go out and get more stuff.
~George Carlin

People's Court - 8 16 2012 - Thursday

You Kept Me Out Of Jail - But I Don't Want To Pay You Too Much!

Nicholas is suing John for $850.00. Nicholas was arrested for the possession of heroin and the intent to deliver. John is an attorney recommended to Nicholas by his girlfriend. Nicholas explains that John agreed to represent him for $500.00. John did not have Nicholas sign a retainer agreement. At this point, it is one person's word against the other. Nicholas signed over his bond to John as payment. When Nicholas received his bond back, he would turn it over to John, minus the fees. This would be $1350.00. Nicholas explains that John said he would give him money back from the bond, since he was only charging him $500.00. John denies this. John explains that he went to court with Nicholas 7 times.The first 2 times they went to court, Nicholas was stoned, so John rescheduled the case. He said he told Nicholas he was facing probation or up to 3-7 years in prison. He was going to try to get him in drug school, this did not happen. He would get him supervision, this did not happen. He would get him expungable probation, this did not happen. Nicholas was not happy with his representation. John did get the sentence reduced to probation after a series of court appearances. In order to receive this, Nicholas had to take a plea. John explains it was not an expungable probation because the arrest was an undercover operation. Nicholas seems very upset over the fact he did not receive expungable probation. He is lucky he did not go to prison for this. The problem with the question of the amount of the attorney's fee rests on the lack of a retainer agreement. The reason to have a retainer agreement is so both sides know exactly what to expect. Because John did not provide this to his client, Nicholas wins this case. An attorney cannot keep changing the fee as the case progresses. This is not fair to the client. John says he is too busy to provide the paperwork to his clients. Is he too busy to be taken to court because of payment issues? Was Nicholas unreasonable thinking an attorney would go to court for him 7 times for $500.00? Both parties would have been better off if they were in agreement regarding the payment. Why do people create problems for themselves? What do you think?

I Need My Transmission Rebuilt Every Year!

Susan is suing Vasile for $2300.00. Vasile owns an auto body shop. In 2009, Susan took her car to Vasile's shop and had the transmission rebuilt in her 1998 BMW 740i. Right before the one year warranty expired, she took the car back and had the transmission rebuilt again. Now, it is 2011 and Susan's car is having problems again with the transmission. The mechanic that usually works on her car does not work for Vasile anymore. Does Susan take her car to Vasile's shop where she has the warranty? No, she finds where the mechanic is working and takes her car to him. She wants this mechanic to honor the warranty from Vasile's shop. When Vasile does not provide information about the specifics of the warranty, Susan sues Vasile. This does not make any sense. If she took the car to  Vasile, he would have fixed the car, since it was still under the warranty. Susan does not win her case because the warranty is valid only if she brought the car back to Vasile. Why didn't she take the car to Vasile? Why does Susan need to have the transmission rebuilt every year? Why did Susan think Vasile would have to pay for another rebuilt transmission? What is going on?

I Do Not Want To Pay The Rent!

Albert is suing Jim for $2701.00. This is for back rent. Jim is counterclaiming for $3000.00 because he claims mold in the apartment and the basement made him sick. Albert rented an apartment to Jim and his girlfriend. Jim did not pay rent for part of February, all of March and April. Jim says the reason he did not pay rent is because there was so much mold in the apartment, he suffered from health issues. The bathroom does not have a ventilation fan and this caused a very humid environment. Jim shows pictures of the bathroom and there is mold growth visible. Albert says that Jim made him aware of the problem and he tried to take care of it. Albert hired a mold remediation company. The company tried twice to evaluate the problem. Jim would not let them in. Jim explains that when Albert would call the night before and tell him the company would be there the next day, it was not enough time. If  Jim was so worried about the mold he would have accommodated the mold remediation company. Also, why would Jim continue to live there? If the mold was making him sick, why not look for another place to live? Jim claims he could not find anywhere else to live. I am sure there are other apartments in the area if the conditions were so bad. The Judge finds that Jim does owe back rent. There is a discrepancy over  $800.00, given as a security deposit. Albert cannot prove that it was not rolled over to the new lease. Becasuse of this, Albert is awarded $1726.00, instead of the $2701.00, he is asking for. Jim does not get anything on his counterclaim. He made no attempt to let Albert fix the mold problem. Why do some people think they deserve a free ride? Jim and his girlfriend rented an apartment, they were responsible to pay the rent. They were responsible to let Albert try to fix a problem. It is a waste of everyone's time when people do not abide by their commitment. What is gained by forcing a landlord to go to court to get the rent? What is gained by not letting the landlord fix a problem? What do you think?

Please share your thoughts in the comments. Thank you for joining me.

To the world, you are just one person. To your dog, you are the world.

-reader submission from a bumper sticker