First, the plaintiff says she hired the defendant to handle a roach infestation in her home, and while he showed up three or four times, the problem wasn’t fixed. He reportedly stopped answering her calls and now her home is infested again. She is suing him for the money she paid to put it toward another company to fix the problem. The defendant says he was ready and willing to fulfil their contract and even did the work. The plaintiff was impatient and wouldn’t give his job time to work. Just because she found someone cheaper doesn’t mean she’s owed a refund.

Then, the plaintiff claims that the defendant, her ex-boyfriend, deposited two bad checks into her bank account, and now that they’ve split, he’s refusing to pay her back. She’s suing him for the money she deserves. The defendant claims he was asked to deposit the checks by the plaintiff, so she’s the one at fault for having faulty checks. He even says she told him to withdraw $600 for himself. He claims she’s only suing him because he broke up with her.

Plus, the plaintiff hired the defendant to refinish his classic car, but when he went to pick it up, he found a piece missing and the rest of the job done incorrectly. The defendant made no attempt to correct the issue, so the plaintiff is suing for the money he spent. The defendant claims the plaintiff took one look at the job and left with the car, never giving a single complaint about the job done. He also says the lawsuit is odd because parts are not as expensive as the plaintiff is claiming.

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 plaintiffs rented a house from the defendant and soon had the defendant’s family wandering in and out as if they lived there. The plaintiffs moved and have yet to be given their security deposit back, much less a reason why it’s been withheld. They are suing for the return of their security. The defendants say they had painted the unit with the understanding the plaintiffs would be staying a year, but instead they up and left only six weeks after moving in. The defendants are keeping the deposit to cover the cost of the paint job.

Then, the plaintiff says the defendant, his taxman, made a mistake on his tax return forms, causing him to pay more in interest than he should have. He has no problem paying what he owes to the IRS but doesn’t think he should pay for the additional $900 in interest from the mistake. He is suing the defendant as a result to get his money back. The defendant argues that the mistake was not his but the government’s, and the plaintiff really has an issue with them.

Plus, the plaintiff took his truck to the defendant to have the heater repaired, but when he got it back, the signal lights and brake lights didn’t work. He took it back to the defendant, and the second time he picked it up, he found his emergency lights would turn on when he signaled turning right. He is suing for the cost of getting his wiring redone. The defendant says he tested everything to make sure it was working, and it was. The complaints were for electrical issues, which he doesn’t even do. He’s innocent of any issues caused.

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 says she had agreed to rent an apartment from the defendant, who promised the current tenant had been evicted and the place was ready on January 1. When the plaintiff went to pick up her keys at the end of December, she found the previous tenant was still there and refusing to leave. The plaintiff is standing up for her rights and suing for the return of the rent she paid. The defendant says she thought the plaintiff would be a perfect fit for her unit but was mistaken. She says the plaintiff is crazy and has been making wild accusations against her for a while. Since no money was exchanged, she doesn’t owe the plaintiff anything.

Then, the plaintiff says the defendant is a scoundrel who sold him a car with a fried engine and is suing to get his money back. The defendant says the plaintiff took the car for a test drive and liked it, so he put down a deposit. All he knows is he sold the plaintiff a perfectly fine car, and nothing was wrong at the time of sale.

Plus, the plaintiff has been using the defendant’s shipping company for a year, and one of his packages has gone missing. The defendant supposedly handles many packages a day and didn’t have time to check delivery on just the one. The plaintiff wants to be reimbursed for the lost merchandise and is suing. The defendant says he has packages delivered to his store for clients all the time and has records of each one. The “missing package” was never logged in his books, despite the plaintiff saying it had been delivered, so he says he’s not at fault for a shipping mistake.

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 was driving home in a camper when the defendant slammed into her. The defendant sped off, so the plaintiff is suing for damages. The defendant insists the plaintiff is the one who caused the accident. The defendant is countersuing for damages.

Then, the plaintiff rented an apartment from the defendant, but he hasn't returned her security, so she's suing. The defendant says the plaintiff seemed like the perfect tenant, but her boyfriend came over late at night. The defendant believes if anyone is owed money, it's him. The defendant is countersuing for past due rent.

Plus, the plaintiff spoke with the defendant, a lawyer, about some trouble her son got into. The defendant charged her but didn't do anything, so the plaintiff is suing for a refund. The defendant argues he was hired by the plaintiff and drafted a letter to the cops.

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 plaintiffs say the defendants threw brush over their fence and into their yard, so they're suing because they hired someone to clean up the mess. The defendants argue the plaintiffs threatened them. They're countersuing for lost wages and time spent gathering evidence for court.

Then, the plaintiff, a real estate broker, brought clients to see the defendant's apartment. The defendant kept pushing the move-in date, so the plaintiff's clients changed their minds and sued her. The plaintiff is now suing the defendant for money she had to shell out. The defendant says she rushed her butt off to have the place ready and it was. On the move-in date, the plaintiff's clients changed their minds, but that's not her fault.

Plus, the plaintiff says the defendant improperly towed his vehicle and caused damage in the process, so the plaintiff is suing. The defendant denies wrecking the vehicle and used a dolly.

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 purchased a kitten from the defendant, but it had a bunch of health issues, so the plaintiff is suing for vet bills. The defendant argues he has already given the plaintiff $1,000 and even offered to treat the kitten at his own vet.

Then, the plaintiff says he hired the defendant to retile a bathroom, but he messed up the shower enclosure, so the plaintiff is suing. The defendant admits he damaged the shower enclosure, but they made a deal that he wouldn't have to pay the rest of his wages.

Plus, the plaintiff built a trailer for his daughter, but the defendants stole it, so the plaintiff is suing. The defendants insist they purchased the trailer from someone else, and they're not going to give it to the plaintiff just because he says it's his.

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 says she purchased an airplane ticket for the defendant, but he didn't go on the trip or pay it back, so the plaintiff is suing. The defendant argues the plaintiff bought him the ticket as a gift only because she has the hots for him.

Then, the plaintiff hired the defendant, a real estate broker, to find her an apartment. She paid him, but when the plaintiff went to her new apartment, the defendant and his friends were partying there. The plaintiff backed out of the deal and is suing for her money back. The defendant argues he is the one who changed his mind because he determined the plaintiff didn't have the money to pay rent regularly.

Plus, the plaintiff was parked at her bagel place when the defendant banged his door into her vehicle. The plaintiff is suing for damages. The defendant argues the winds were excessive that day, so the door hit the plaintiff's car. However, it's not his fault that the wind caused the damage.

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 says the defendant fell on hard times and moved in with her. However, the defendant never paid one of the electric bills she was responsible for, so the plaintiff is suing. The defendant insists the plaintiff was supposed to pay the electric bills.

Then, the plaintiff says she and the defendant dated for a while. However, the defendant owes money for multiple loans, so the plaintiff is suing. The defendant admits the plaintiff gave him money here and there, but he did the same.

Plus, the plaintiffs say their car broke down, so they went to the defendant's shop. However, after the job, the car still wouldn't start, so the plaintiffs are suing. The defendant argues he did everything he could to help the plaintiffs and is owed for the work he did. The defendant is countersuing for the balance owed on the repair.

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 used to be in a relationship with the defendant, and they moved in together. The plaintiff claims her ex-boyfriend won’t return a television and air conditioning unit, so she’s suing for the cost of the items. The defendant argues his ex-girlfriend used his money to buy the TV and air conditioner, so he doesn’t think he owes.

Then, the plaintiff brought his car to the defendant’s repair shop because he needed new tires. He claims the defendant used a sledgehammer to hit the tires, and after he got it back, his axle began smoking. He’s suing for the cost of repairs. The defendant argues the rims on the plaintiff’s truck were badly rusted, so she had to use a sledgehammer. She thinks the plaintiff is trying to sue her for a car problem that she didn’t cause.

Plus, the plaintiff rented a condo near Disney World for herself, her husband, and two women she cares for. She says she had to cancel due to a last-minute health problem, but now the defendant, who owns the rental company, won’t return her deposit. She says she wants the deposit back so she can reschedule her trip for another time. The defendant claims the plaintiff called him on Christmas Eve to cancel, and he agreed to let her reschedule. He says the plaintiff demanded a refund several months later, but he doesn’t issue them.

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’s 19-year-old boyfriend has a son with the defendant, and the plaintiff, 34, is also pregnant with her boyfriend’s child. She claims the defendant keyed her car because she was angry when she found out the plaintiff was pregnant. She’s suing for car damages. The defendant admits she got upset, but claims she never keyed the plaintiff’s car. She thinks the plaintiff did it herself and is just pinning the damage on her.

Then, the plaintiff boarded her horses with the defendants, and the defendants were going to sell one of the horses. She moved her horse to another location, but then the horse was found at the defendant’s barn. The plaintiff is suing for boarding costs. The defendant argues he had a free lease with the plaintiff, meaning they board it and the plaintiff pays for upkeep. They’re countersuing for equipment.

Plus, the plaintiff gave the defendant a deposit for an apartment. She says the defendant never gave the money to the broker and he pocketed the money for himself. She’s suing for the money back. The defendant argues he works for the real estate agent and gets commission. He claims he never got money from the plaintiff directly.

Don’t forget to rate and subscribe so you never miss an episode.

Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices