
Sign up to save your podcasts
Or


First, the plaintiff was heading to her brand-new car after a night with friends when she noticed the defendant drunkenly standing by the vehicle. She claims he scratched the car in his drunken state and is suing for damages. The defendant claims the scratches were already there and not caused by him like the plaintiff argues.
Then, the plaintiff says she’s having a hard time getting the defendant to reimburse her for vet bills after the defendant’s dog attacked hers, causing damage. She is suing to get her money back. The defendant argues there is no evidence that her dog attacked the plaintiff’s dog and doesn’t think she owes anything.
Plus, the plaintiff rented a place from the defendants but found it was unlivable before moving in. When she asked for her down payment back, the defendants refused, claiming they’d already spent the money. She is suing for her money back. The defendants don’t understand why the plaintiff had a sudden change of heart when it came to moving into the unit. They believe that since it was her duty to move in after paying for it, the issue is on her, not them.
Don’t forget to rate and subscribe so you never miss an episode.
Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices
By The People’s Court Podcast4.9
205205 ratings
First, the plaintiff was heading to her brand-new car after a night with friends when she noticed the defendant drunkenly standing by the vehicle. She claims he scratched the car in his drunken state and is suing for damages. The defendant claims the scratches were already there and not caused by him like the plaintiff argues.
Then, the plaintiff says she’s having a hard time getting the defendant to reimburse her for vet bills after the defendant’s dog attacked hers, causing damage. She is suing to get her money back. The defendant argues there is no evidence that her dog attacked the plaintiff’s dog and doesn’t think she owes anything.
Plus, the plaintiff rented a place from the defendants but found it was unlivable before moving in. When she asked for her down payment back, the defendants refused, claiming they’d already spent the money. She is suing for her money back. The defendants don’t understand why the plaintiff had a sudden change of heart when it came to moving into the unit. They believe that since it was her duty to move in after paying for it, the issue is on her, not them.
Don’t forget to rate and subscribe so you never miss an episode.
Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

11,763 Listeners

10,788 Listeners

5,114 Listeners

8,521 Listeners

8,689 Listeners

81 Listeners

3,757 Listeners

1,270 Listeners

47,425 Listeners

1,172 Listeners

5,828 Listeners

2,562 Listeners

545 Listeners

199 Listeners

221 Listeners