The People’s Court Podcast

First, the plaintiff says the defendant was a bartender he employed at his restaurant who served alcohol to a minor. That minor got into a car accident and the employee was fired. However, the restaurant was fined $3,000 for providing the alcohol, and the plaintiff is suing the defendant for the cost of that fee. The defendant claims the minor was a regular who was given drinks by all the bartenders at the restaurant, and she had even cut the individual off that evening. She had watched the minor get into a car as a passenger with someone who had not been drinking. Because the fine was issued to the business, not her, she does not believe it is her responsibility.

Then, the plaintiff says he moved into the defendant’s home as a subletter and fixed up countless issues with the unit. Just two weeks later, he was asked to move out because the defendant wanted someone else to sublet. He was left homeless and lost his job. He is suing the defendant for $1,100. The defendant claims she rented out the apartment specifically to the plaintiff’s girlfriend, and not him, something she was intentional about. She says there was even a dog living there, which wasn’t allowed.

Plus, the plaintiff knows the defendant through his son and saw that the defendant was going through a rough patch. He decided to help the defendant out by purchasing him a car and would allow him to get his life in order before requesting repayments. The defendant hasn’t made any payments, and so the plaintiff is suing. The defendant claims the plaintiff never said anything about wanting to be repaid, so the defendant was unaware of such a deal. He even claims the plaintiff slashed two tires of the car!

Don’t forget to rate and subscribe so you never miss an episode.
Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

First, after an eight-year relationship gone nowhere, the plaintiff decided to break up with and kick the unambitious defendant out of her home. She claims he still owes her for rent and a cell phone and is suing him. The defendant claims they had a rocky relationship where the plaintiff threatened him occasionally. He argues he is the one who ended things and had never made any promises to repay her, especially since he did not live with her.

Then, the plaintiff says he rented a taxi from the defendant and gave him a $1,000 deposit to cover any damages. After returning the vehicle to the defendant, he was denied the return of his deposit. He is suing for the deposit. The defendant claims the plaintiff was in two accidents in less than six weeks and even tried to hide the second from him! This cost the defendant considerably more than the deposit in repairs to his taxi, which is why he refuses to return it.

Plus, the plaintiff says she hired the defendant to pave a sidewalk and driveway around her brother’s home. Six months later, the pavement was already chipping and flaking everywhere. The defendant promised to fix the damage but failed to, and now the plaintiff is suing to get $3,500 returned. The defendant says the damage was caused by winter weather and he did return to fix it entirely free of charge.

Don’t forget to rate and subscribe so you never miss an episode.
Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

First, the plaintiff claims that when she bought a car from the defendant, he illegally forged her name on some bank documents, and she reported him to the department of consumer affairs. Because the terms of the loan are wrong, she wants out of the deal and wants her deposit back. The defendant says the plaintiff returned the car to the bank, who she took out the loan with for the car, so he has nothing to do with him. He also claims he received the deposit for the car a year ago, making it nonrefundable.

Then, the defendant says she and her ex-boyfriend planned on splitting the cost of a hotel and rental car for an out-of-town wedding they attended together, but now that they’ve broken up, she says the defendant is stiffing her for his share. She is suing for what she’s owed. The defendant claims that their relationship was on-again, off-again, and the plaintiff only started demanding to be repaid for the trip after she broke up with him via text message.

Plus, the plaintiff purchased a Sub-Zero freezer from the defendant, only to find a broken piece in the condenser that a repairman said could not be fixed. He claims the defendant led him to believe the freezer was in good working order just to get rid of a piece of junk. He is suing the defendant for more than the money he spent on the freezer. The defendant claims he told the defendant he had never plugged the freezer in and was therefore not responsible for whether it worked or not. He also says the plaintiff knew he was taking a chance with purchasing the freezer.

Don’t forget to rate and subscribe so you never miss an episode.
Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

First, the plaintiff is the founder of a ladies social club that gets together and does things for the community. New members are required to pay dues and an initiation fee. The defendant ended up leaving the social club but still has a due balance to pay, and the plaintiff is suing for that. The defendant claims the club doesn’t even exist to begin with, so she couldn’t possibly owe the bitter plaintiff any money.

Then, the plaintiff claims his girlfriend was told her van could be fixed by the defendant. When the defendant received the car for repairs, he said it was unfixable but now can’t even find it, claiming it was towed. The plaintiff is suing for $5,000, the amount he believes he is owed.

Plus, the plaintiff rented from the defendant, but it became clear early on he was a terrible landlord. She claims he would promise to do one thing but do another and damaged her pool table but never paid her for the repairs. The defendant claims the plaintiff had moved out and left a bunch of items behind, including the junk pool table. He also claims the defendant damaged the apartment and is countersuing for those damages.

Don’t forget to rate and subscribe so you never miss an episode.
Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

First, the plaintiff claims the defendant, his great-granddaughter, has a camera and some money of his that she refuses to return. As much as he doesn’t want to, he is suing her for what he is owed. The defendant says her great grandfather is sue-happy and has even sued a restaurant for age discrimination. She claims the money he’s suing her for was a loan given to her now deceased mother, and as far as she knows, her brother has the camera.

Then, the plaintiff claims her neighbor of 15 years cut down a 40-foot tree in her yard, which caught in another tree, which he also cut down. She claims he said he was drunk and is suing him as a result. The defendant says he asked the plaintiff’s son for permission to cut down a dead tree. He didn’t think there would be an issue since he asked the man of the house, and even says the plaintiff had mentioned wanting the dead trees off her property. He doesn’t understand why he’s being sued.

Don’t forget to rate and subscribe so you never miss an episode.
Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices