@@annetedder8202If the cost of lost money is enough to file bankruptcy then it's normally more than filing in a higher court and he could've sued for the court costs and lawyers fees. But he keeps such lousy records that he still would've lost in that case I bet.
Yeah that's like hiring a landscaping company to come mow your lawn, and then back out of it when the guy is like 90% finished. Like, hell no, you hired a guy and he put in hours of hard work, you need to pay the man for at least whatever has already been completed.
That is why crybabies hire a attorney that knows the law to interpret to themselves the ins-outs of mountains of pages of laws they are not aware of because that is not their hired specialty, but the attorneys. But the plaintiff proceeded anyway, his mistake.
@@Stressless2023I agree. Desperate and taking it out on everyone else. I bet he’s a challenge to live with. I feel bad for the guy, but acting like this is not going to make him feel any better. Hope he’s in a better situation these days.
I feel bad for the guy, but the attorney's first point is 100% correct: if the plaintiff had told him from the first meeting that his son was a co-signor on an credit account, it would have been an instant and easy answer: the son's obligation would not be discharged by the dad's bankruptcy. Either the plaintiff didn't ask that question or he wasn't very clear about the facts that he gave the attorney. Plaintiff says he was in his bad position because he was screwed out of payments for work he did. But now he's turning around and trying to do it to someone else.
@@susanmillionair I don't think the lawyer knew about the son initially being together on credit. The dad is just sadly confused about so many things in life in general and things like this have probably been happening to him for decades and decades. He has no idea what actual proof is or what it means. He spews some crazy verbiage about paying the judge and deputy to go on some fact finding thing for him. Being angry and acting foolish is probably a way of life for him.
I get the feeling he asked the question but in a way that the lawyer couldn’t understand. Like “will my son be affected if I file” to which the lawyer would answer “it depends”
Even I an 80 year old grandma knows that if the sons name is on the account of course it’s going to affect your sons credit rating, transfer the sum owed to a zero rated card in you name then go bankrupt but not with your sons name on anything. You cannot be in business and really be that naive, they will go after any property your sone owns as well and it would be seized to pay off your debts. Common sense tells you that. I’ve no idea why it’s called common sense, because it’s just not that common.
If they did a lowsy job.. Yes !! In this case, the lawyer did everything right... so right, that he didn't even had to go in lawyer mode infront of the judge.
I was surprised that the planttiff made the comment he did about the attorney being a crook. I think he forgot that he was on national television, and he defamed the attorney in front of the judge. If the attorney wanted to, he could sue the planttiff and probably win. Lucky for him, the attorney doesn't appear to be the kind of person that would sue him just because he can. Hopefully the planttiff doesn't continue to try to ruin his law practice by continuing to state the false claims he made during the case, that wouldn't work out well for him since the attorney was able to prove that he had done the work and admitted at the beginning of the case that he owed the defendant for the filing and other fees and had no problem paying him. It's getting rare to find an attorney who doesn't try to take your money and not do the work, but I think this guy is one of the few honest ones still left.
@@arturovega6522 no excuse... Every public library has computers with internet access. Also, I highly suspect that his son would also have a computer/phone to look it up.
@@arturovega6522he doesn’t have a cell phone. My parents had a computer with internet years before they got a cell phone. He could have gone to a library and found his answer in a book or on the internet.
My experience with lawyers is they will never answer a direct question initially. They're a business and are interested in selling their services. They normally want to get paid for time spent at the first consultation in the event a prospective client decides not to move forward .No matter how much research I've done previously, or how thorough my explanation at our first meeting, they have always answered with " i need to look more closely at your facts" while handing me a copy of their retainer agreement!
As soon as he just brushed over how much was on that joint card I knew this guy just doesn't think anything through. And including him storming out, seems very impulsive in everything he does. Act first, think later.
Fascinating case. The plaintiff is reacting from financial stress but he should've asked the question before handing over any $$ and docs. He learned a lesson the hard way.
And the guy is still totally bankrupt - which is his main problem. He wanted his retainer back not understanding what retainers are. But I do believe the show pays for appearing so there's that.
A rare occasion where the plaintiff wins, yet storms out of the courtroom because he got less money than he asked for. 😂😂😂 “Mr. DeMasi, lemme talk to you.” “No! Where’s my paperwork?!”
He didn't win, at all. The defendant already agreed the plaintiff was owed the $375 refund for the unused filing fees. He didn't need to sue for that part.
@@newsflash7609 I know what he said. That’s still a victory for the plaintiff. In a normal court setting, it’s not rare for a defendant to concede in part to one of the claims being made against them. The burden of proof is on the plaintiff and considering how unprepared he was, he probably wouldn’t have gotten that $375 back if it weren’t for the defendant’s honesty.
I seriously laughed out loud when he complains about being burned for doing work and not getting paid, but now he wants to skip out on paying his lawyer for work the lawyer did. There is a reason this guy has over 30K in debt. Everything is always someone else's problem. Also, knowing that he was able to come up with close to 2500 bucks in two months, he has the money to pay his bills. Lastly, calling him a liar and a crooked attorney without proof could be taken as slander and could end him back in court.
In 2020, the defendant was sentenced to 18 montths in prison for tax evasion and failure to pay over payroll taxes for the tax year 2015 as part of a long-running tax fraud scheme that cost the U.S. Treasury over $800,000, including penalties and interests. Between 2013 and 2017, O’REILLY withdrew a total of approximately $481,673 in untaxed funds from his attorney trust account for personal use, none of which he reported on his tax returns for those years. In addition to substantially underreporting his income and tax liabilities, O’REILLY failed to pay even those taxes that he did report, accruing large unpaid liabilities. In total, during the tax years 2007 through 2018, O’Reilly evaded approximately $566,027 in personal federal income taxes, including interest and penalties.
If the plaintiff and his son are in extreme financial straits, their credit is probably trashed anyway. It will have late pays and charge offs, etc, etc. The bankruptcy was not going to hurt his son's credit any worse. And the bankruptcy would get all of the creditors off of his and his son's case. Now they are probably hounded everyday by creditors.
I think you have it partially wrong. The son is a co-signor on the credit card, so he has an obligation to pay back the debt. The bankruptcy for plaintiff and his wife would have discharged their obligation to pay back the credit card debt, but would do nothing as to the son's obligation. The son would need to file his own bankruptcy to do that. It's like when some one co-signs for a car loan---the lender wants that because they have two people they can go after, not just one. You are correct that the son was on the hook for that debt, whether the plaintiff files bankruptcy or not, as the are each separately liable, as co-signors.
@@newsflash7609 Thanks for your reply as you make a great point. If I have it straight, when the father files bankruptcy, then the CC company will then go after the son for the debt. However it looks like the son and the father can not pay it regardless if they file bankruptcy or not and at the time of this filming. I'm sure both credit ratings are in the tank and probably were never good, since two co-signers were needed to obtain one credit card. I do wonder what the lawyer did mean, when he told the father that it would hurt his son, if the father filed bankruptcy. Maybe I'm missing something there?
The Plaintiff showed how much of an ignorant person he is by storming out after only winning partial amount. He has NO CLUE how the law works and that ignorance is what is driving him to believe he is correct.
I think the Judge made a good point towards the end there. You're putting all that time and money, He should have gotten an answer to his question before moving forward
Looks like he got 18 months for tax fraud too: www.justice.gov/usao-sdny/pr/carmel-attorney-sentenced-18-months-prison-tax-evasion-and-failure-pay-over-payroll
If he is so concerned about his son, then he wouldn't have $30k of debt on a shared card, he would have never have had his son on the card or at least taken his son's name off the card. So his son's credit rating is now at zero, because of his negligence...
As someone who worked for a firm that handled, in pertinent part, bankruptcies, this plaintiff clearly does not understand the process and the shear amount of information/ work required in preparing these petitions. I feel for him, but bankruptcies are a ridiculous amount of work, in my experience, and the fees attorneys charge for such are nowhere near appropriate.
So why did the plaintiff have to prove everything yet the lawyer could say that the guy came to his office and didn't prove it. I have never been to lawyers office once when they didn't have me sign something or another. Sounds fishy to me.
The dad is just sadly confused about so many things in life in general and things like this have probably been happening to him for decades and decades. He has no idea what actual proof is or what it means. He spews some crazy verbiage about paying the judge and deputy to go on some fact finding thing for him. Being angry and acting foolish is probably a way of life for him.
I filed for bankruptcy years ago. The lawyer and assistant does all the paperwork after I have filled out all appropriate forms. Do the credit online course. Then you go to court. Then do another credit counseling. Also, it's only common sense the other person the card will be affected too.
The plaintiff makes bad decisions one after the other and feels like everyone should pay for them. I feel like he was even using his “son” as an excuse to not pay. Weird how after everything happens then he asks if this will affect his son
Yeah, lawyers are honest! My husband and I hired a Liar…I mean lawyer, who told us that after hearing our case and looking at the evidence, we would most definitely get monthly visits with our two grandsons that we had raised until they were 9 and 7. After draining our savings and selling every valuable thing we owned, including my engagement ring… We learned on the day of trial, that there was no such thing as grandparents rights in the state in which we lived. The judge was getting ready to retire, and sat with tears in his eyes as he told us how bad he felt having to rule against us. Lawyers are rotten, dishonest, disloyal, and have no remorse or soul. ALL of them!
This is one of the clearest, step-by-step, opaque, BASIS JMM has given about her decision. I empathize with the Plaìntiff because he was protecting his son but he, unfortunately, made a mistake. He fell on his own sword.
People don't work for free.And he already did a great Deal of work for you so he's gonna get paid too bad for you.He should have thought it out a little better
The plaintiff is insistent that no work was done because the lawyer was still asking questions up until a few days before he was supposed to sign the petition. But he also admits that he had given the defendant a lot of documents before hand. I do not think the plaintiff realizes that lawyers can start work before getting all of the information and then finish when they get the last bit of information. After all this is a bankruptcy case not new law; the lawyer seemed experienced in this kind of work and could easily finish up the petition in a few days with the last bit of information.
You could have just filed your own bk, your son needs to know that you are living above your means…I bet son added you as a signer and now you’re ruined his credit.
The judge calling the plaintiffs a smart guy ? What smart person would pay someone for a job not knowing if it can be done the way they wanted it ? Not a smart person.
I don't think she thought he was a "smart guy," I think she could see what was probably going to happen and gave him a compliment to give his ego a little boost. Nothing about his attitude "told me" that he could control himself if things didn't go his way.
Wait a minute,, the plaintiff won something back, I get that he wants all of his 2k back but the attorney did do some work. The plaintiff, like alot of us, is struggling to pay his bills and BK is scary and of course he wanted to protect his son too. I hope things have gotten better for the plaintiff.
First mistake! He sued a person that does law second he didn’t bring any proof to defend himself and I wonder why now that he has so much debt… not so smart guy sadly 🤷🏼♂️🤷🏼♂️
I feel like once the plaintiff said, "You know, you're a Judge, an Attorney, you think of all these things. I'm just an average blue-collar worker trying to survive" I knew everything I needed to know about that him.
3:35 I'm not an accountant or a Lawyer, but I do any financial liability under your name and a co-signer/cardholder will affect both parties. I hate to say this but I believe the attorney.
First off its not necessarily an automatic easy answer like the judge and the people on these comments seem to think. Sometimes it might be but sometimes it depends on the circumstances involved. I think the plaintiff was telling the truth. I think the defendent is a little crooked. I don't think the defendent prepared jack compared to what he got paid. However, the plaintiff shouldn't of signed anything or definitely paid anything untill he had the answer in writing. Even though I feel bad for the plaintiff I think the Judge ruled right. I think the Judge was incredibly rude right before she ruled for no reason and kind of made herself sound like an idiot.
The plaintiff probably didn't ask the lawyer early on if his son's credit would be trashed too as every attorney knows that. The dad could have called one on the phone and asked one or even Goggled it.
He should have sued the people that didn’t pay him for work he did
😂😂 👏🏾🏆 #BESTcomment
The amounts might exceed small claims and it would take more $$ to sue which it sounds like he doesn't have.
@@annetedder8202If the cost of lost money is enough to file bankruptcy then it's normally more than filing in a higher court and he could've sued for the court costs and lawyers fees. But he keeps such lousy records that he still would've lost in that case I bet.
@@MaleStompergreat point
@@annetedder8202he could have sued for the maximum (usually $5k) and that would be more than the $0 he got. Small claims costs less than $100 to file.
The plaintiff is the kind of guy to just snap and go on a rampage.
Yes
Can you imagine what he said to his wife?! I think he's got a mental condition of some kind.
For good reason lol he keeps getting fucked over
So the plaintiff did work and didnt get get paid for it and is upset, so he wants the defendant to do work and not get paid for it? What??
Wow! Excellent point!!
Haha.....the blind can never see...
Yeah that's like hiring a landscaping company to come mow your lawn, and then back out of it when the guy is like 90% finished. Like, hell no, you hired a guy and he put in hours of hard work, you need to pay the man for at least whatever has already been completed.
he went from thanking the judge to snapping in a few seconds
Right🤣
He is a cry baby 😂
The plaintiff is a textbook crybaby.
That is why crybabies hire a attorney that knows the law to interpret to themselves the ins-outs of mountains of pages of laws they are not aware of because that is not their hired specialty, but the attorneys. But the plaintiff proceeded anyway, his mistake.
He just seems broke and desperate.
@@Stressless2023I agree. Desperate and taking it out on everyone else. I bet he’s a challenge to live with. I feel bad for the guy, but acting like this is not going to make him feel any better. Hope he’s in a better situation these days.
😂😂😂😂
This lawyer just advertised himself as being a good lawyer....
I agree. He was so respectful, even when the plaintiff was rude to him.
@amandastandley9403 ...and speaks volume about his character
...but, not long after this, he was sentenced to 18 month in prison for tax evasion.
@@michaelrusso6822 the lawyer or the plaintiff?
@@michaelrusso6822no way! I just researched this. Shocking
I feel bad for the guy, but the attorney's first point is 100% correct: if the plaintiff had told him from the first meeting that his son was a co-signor on an credit account, it would have been an instant and easy answer: the son's obligation would not be discharged by the dad's bankruptcy. Either the plaintiff didn't ask that question or he wasn't very clear about the facts that he gave the attorney.
Plaintiff says he was in his bad position because he was screwed out of payments for work he did. But now he's turning around and trying to do it to someone else.
Honest I feel like an attorney should inform of something like that in consultation without being ask because it’s common
@@susanmillionair I don't think the lawyer knew about the son initially being together on credit. The dad is just sadly confused about so many things in life in general and things like this have probably been happening to him for decades and decades. He has no idea what actual proof is or what it means. He spews some crazy verbiage about paying the judge and deputy to go on some fact finding thing for him. Being angry and acting foolish is probably a way of life for him.
I get the feeling he asked the question but in a way that the lawyer couldn’t understand. Like “will my son be affected if I file” to which the lawyer would answer “it depends”
Even I an 80 year old grandma knows that if the sons name is on the account of course it’s going to affect your sons credit rating, transfer the sum owed to a zero rated card in you name then go bankrupt but not with your sons name on anything. You cannot be in business and really be that naive, they will go after any property your sone owns as well and it would be seized to pay off your debts. Common sense tells you that. I’ve no idea why it’s called common sense, because it’s just not that common.
I like that the lawyer said people have the right to have their case heard. Good advertising for him
"hes a little fried right now" OMGGGGGG
Screaming 😂😂
😂😂😂😂
Douglass is undefeated in the after-verdict interviews🤣🤣🤣
Idk if suing a lawyer is the smartest thing to do
If they did a lowsy job.. Yes !! In this case, the lawyer did everything right... so right, that he didn't even had to go in lawyer mode infront of the judge.
LOL. I agree. It's like buying a house that a realtor owns.
Plenty of lawyers have lost in this courtroom AND Judge Judy's
Attorneys lose in court all the time. Whether they are representing themselves or others
I was surprised that the planttiff made the comment he did about the attorney being a crook. I think he forgot that he was on national television, and he defamed the attorney in front of the judge. If the attorney wanted to, he could sue the planttiff and probably win. Lucky for him, the attorney doesn't appear to be the kind of person that would sue him just because he can. Hopefully the planttiff doesn't continue to try to ruin his law practice by continuing to state the false claims he made during the case, that wouldn't work out well for him since the attorney was able to prove that he had done the work and admitted at the beginning of the case that he owed the defendant for the filing and other fees and had no problem paying him. It's getting rare to find an attorney who doesn't try to take your money and not do the work, but I think this guy is one of the few honest ones still left.
The answer to the plaintiffs question is Google-able. He didn’t do the research before even hiring a lawyer
good point.
Plaintiff said he didn't have a phone. He probably doesn't have a computer either or access to the Internet...
@@arturovega6522 no excuse... Every public library has computers with internet access. Also, I highly suspect that his son would also have a computer/phone to look it up.
@@arturovega6522he doesn’t have a cell phone. My parents had a computer with internet years before they got a cell phone. He could have gone to a library and found his answer in a book or on the internet.
I love Judge Marilyn.
She is so great and the best! I also love her sense of humor 😁
Seems very simple that if his son being affected was so important then he would have gotten that answer before he paid any retainer.
Lol he was a co-signer so don’t see myuch truth to that
My experience with lawyers is they will never answer a direct question initially. They're a business and are interested in selling their services. They normally want to get paid for time spent at the first consultation in the event a prospective client decides not to move forward .No matter how much research I've done previously, or how thorough my explanation at our first meeting, they have always answered with " i need to look more closely at your facts" while handing me a copy of their retainer agreement!
A bankrupt dude doesn’t want to pay his lawyer! Image that!
The plaintiff is a crybaby who can't manage his finances.
The tantrum he had while leaving court sums up his personality.
Even though the plaintiff was upset, he walked out the right way
Yeah, that's a First, usually Doug has to guide them to go the right way!
He seems like a good lawyer.
Plaintiff didn't want son "involved" but added him as a cosigner and they BOTH racked up 30G's?
That's a lot of money to me! Jeeeeeezzzzz!!!
As soon as he just brushed over how much was on that joint card I knew this guy just doesn't think anything through. And including him storming out, seems very impulsive in everything he does. Act first, think later.
it's like the plaintiff thought his own notes counted as proof
Yeah that was all hearsay, and Judge Marilyn wasn't having any of it. All judges don't have time for that "but but but, he said she said" crap.
Hey peoples court peeps 🐥 happy Thursday!
Thanks. Cheers !
👋
Wait! It's not Friday yet? 😫
@@stevelozano9523 It is now. XD
Sunday now! Happy mothers day
Fascinating case. The plaintiff is reacting from financial stress but he should've asked the question before handing over any $$ and docs. He learned a lesson the hard way.
I'd sue the plaintiff for libel. Announcing on tv that he's a crook is not cool.
The law calls that libel per se.
Exactly… The plaintiff is a complete jerk!!!
Libel is written, slander is spoken.
He only thinks he's a crook because he didn't get what he wanted....I think "some of his wires aren't connected."
@@aiming4peace254 Agree!
And the guy is still totally bankrupt - which is his main problem. He wanted his retainer back not understanding what retainers are. But I do believe the show pays for appearing so there's that.
I've been threw bankruptcy and the attorney is correct. Plaintiff is just whinning since he changed his mind and have to pay for the work he did
Through 😎
Exactly!!!💯
A rare occasion where the plaintiff wins, yet storms out of the courtroom because he got less money than he asked for. 😂😂😂
“Mr. DeMasi, lemme talk to you.”
“No! Where’s my paperwork?!”
He didn't win, at all. The defendant already agreed the plaintiff was owed the $375 refund for the unused filing fees. He didn't need to sue for that part.
😂😂😂😂 it was definitely the "NO, where's my paperwork" for me 😂 I watched it 3x 😂 he need that paperwork so he can take his notes for today's case 😅😅
@@newsflash7609He did win. He gave the attorney $2800 and the judge ordered that $375 of it be returned to him.
@@lynne709 re-watch at 4:50. The defendant was already willing to give that amount over and didn't dispute it.
@@newsflash7609 I know what he said. That’s still a victory for the plaintiff. In a normal court setting, it’s not rare for a defendant to concede in part to one of the claims being made against them. The burden of proof is on the plaintiff and considering how unprepared he was, he probably wouldn’t have gotten that $375 back if it weren’t for the defendant’s honesty.
He could have gone forward with the bankruptcy without that credit card. Since he's paying for it anyway with this judgment.
That's the most unIrish looking guy named O'Reilly that I have ever seen. 😂😂😂
Plaintiff keeps talking alot and isnt saying nothing
The plaintiff made all the wrong decisions and assumptions! He’s the only one to blame!
The guy is crazy! It’s common sense that a joint credit card holder would be effected during a bankruptcy.
Common sense is not so common.
I seriously laughed out loud when he complains about being burned for doing work and not getting paid, but now he wants to skip out on paying his lawyer for work the lawyer did. There is a reason this guy has over 30K in debt. Everything is always someone else's problem. Also, knowing that he was able to come up with close to 2500 bucks in two months, he has the money to pay his bills.
Lastly, calling him a liar and a crooked attorney without proof could be taken as slander and could end him back in court.
wow. what a hot head and he's the liar and a big baby. wow. I would go to that lawyer for sure after that sorry display by the plaintiff.
Why would anyone sue Jim's dad? I bet Stifler put him up to it
Best advice in life is to stay away from lawyers and bankers if you can both are out to screw you out of money
In 2020, the defendant was sentenced to 18 montths in prison for tax evasion and failure to pay over payroll taxes for the tax year 2015 as part of a long-running tax fraud scheme that cost the U.S. Treasury over $800,000, including penalties and interests. Between 2013 and 2017, O’REILLY withdrew a total of approximately $481,673 in untaxed funds from his attorney trust account for personal use, none of which he reported on his tax returns for those years. In addition to substantially underreporting his income and tax liabilities, O’REILLY failed to pay even those taxes that he did report, accruing large unpaid liabilities. In total, during the tax years 2007 through 2018, O’Reilly evaded approximately $566,027 in personal federal income taxes, including interest and penalties.
That is incredible. In this case I was on his side however.
Whoa!
If the plaintiff and his son are in extreme financial straits, their credit is probably trashed anyway. It will have late pays and charge offs, etc, etc. The bankruptcy was not going to hurt his son's credit any worse. And the bankruptcy would get all of the creditors off of his and his son's case. Now they are probably hounded everyday by creditors.
I think you have it partially wrong. The son is a co-signor on the credit card, so he has an obligation to pay back the debt. The bankruptcy for plaintiff and his wife would have discharged their obligation to pay back the credit card debt, but would do nothing as to the son's obligation. The son would need to file his own bankruptcy to do that.
It's like when some one co-signs for a car loan---the lender wants that because they have two people they can go after, not just one.
You are correct that the son was on the hook for that debt, whether the plaintiff files bankruptcy or not, as the are each separately liable, as co-signors.
@@newsflash7609 Thanks for your reply as you make a great point. If I have it straight, when the father files bankruptcy, then the CC company will then go after the son for the debt. However it looks like the son and the father can not pay it regardless if they file bankruptcy or not and at the time of this filming. I'm sure both credit ratings are in the tank and probably were never good, since two co-signers were needed to obtain one credit card. I do wonder what the lawyer did mean, when he told the father that it would hurt his son, if the father filed bankruptcy. Maybe I'm missing something there?
The Plaintiff showed how much of an ignorant person he is by storming out after only winning partial amount. He has NO CLUE how the law works and that ignorance is what is driving him to believe he is correct.
I think the Judge made a good point towards the end there. You're putting all that time and money, He should have gotten an answer to his question before moving forward
I have definitely seen the defendant on TPC before.
He has a twin brother who is also an attorney at law. I just looked it up.
Looks like he got 18 months for tax fraud too: www.justice.gov/usao-sdny/pr/carmel-attorney-sentenced-18-months-prison-tax-evasion-and-failure-pay-over-payroll
@@namnack Oh that's part of a joke somewhere. Has to be.
It's incredible how little people understand contracts
JM loves it when an attorney comes on the show. She gets to talk all lawyer'rey.
If he is so concerned about his son, then he wouldn't have $30k of debt on a shared card, he would have never have had his son on the card or at least taken his son's name off the card. So his son's credit rating is now at zero, because of his negligence...
JM should've came back into the court room and scolded the plaintiff for cursing at the end there. Glad he lost.
As someone who worked for a firm that handled, in pertinent part, bankruptcies, this plaintiff clearly does not understand the process and the shear amount of information/ work required in preparing these petitions. I feel for him, but bankruptcies are a ridiculous amount of work, in my experience, and the fees attorneys charge for such are nowhere near appropriate.
So why did the plaintiff have to prove everything yet the lawyer could say that the guy came to his office and didn't prove it. I have never been to lawyers office once when they didn't have me sign something or another. Sounds fishy to me.
Great point
The dad is just sadly confused about so many things in life in general and things like this have probably been happening to him for decades and decades. He has no idea what actual proof is or what it means. He spews some crazy verbiage about paying the judge and deputy to go on some fact finding thing for him. Being angry and acting foolish is probably a way of life for him.
Perhaps we've found the source of the financial troubles?
@@selinesbeau I totally agree.
That part about "you and your deputy" was really embarrassing... or should have been, to him. That sounded like what a teenager would say.
Lawyer should have mailed the finished product to him the same day he said stop
Lawyers are honest and trustworthy ha they're literally paid to lie😂
Boy is he pissed, oh well he'll get over it
Love how we talk about welfare when credit is the real flex. 😂
You know the plaintiff had to run out so he could cry and cry...
How can you believe someone going through bankruptcy
😂 you apparently don’t understand how money works or how the financial system is setup in the USA. Bankruptcy is a financial tool/strategy.
@@themadmillionaire who pays for the bankruptcy?
Doug 😂😂😂😂 He’s fried 😡
the girl with eyes shut behind defendant is killin me 😂 those shades ain't hiding it
I filed for bankruptcy years ago. The lawyer and assistant does all the paperwork after I have filled out all appropriate forms. Do the credit online course. Then you go to court. Then do another credit counseling. Also, it's only common sense the other person the card will be affected too.
Plaintiff has time to take son off the card before he filed.
Did that guy just try to BRIBE her?
That is what I thought but he was saying to dig up the stuff on the defendant because he did not bring the proof he needed to court.
The plaintiff makes bad decisions one after the other and feels like everyone should pay for them. I feel like he was even using his “son” as an excuse to not pay. Weird how after everything happens then he asks if this will affect his son
Yeah, lawyers are honest!
My husband and I hired a Liar…I mean lawyer, who told us that after hearing our case and looking at the evidence, we would most definitely get monthly visits with our two grandsons that we had raised until they were 9 and 7.
After draining our savings and selling every valuable thing we owned, including my engagement ring… We learned on the day of trial, that there was no such thing as grandparents rights in the state in which we lived.
The judge was getting ready to retire, and sat with tears in his eyes as he told us how bad he felt having to rule against us.
Lawyers are rotten, dishonest, disloyal, and have no remorse or soul.
ALL of them!
This is one of the clearest, step-by-step, opaque, BASIS JMM has given about her decision. I empathize with the Plaìntiff because he was protecting his son but he, unfortunately, made a mistake. He fell on his own sword.
People don't work for free.And he already did a great Deal of work for you so he's gonna get paid too bad for you.He should have thought it out a little better
If you didn't want your money problems to affect your son, why would you get a credit card in both your names.
The plaintiff is insistent that no work was done because the lawyer was still asking questions up until a few days before he was supposed to sign the petition. But he also admits that he had given the defendant a lot of documents before hand. I do not think the plaintiff realizes that lawyers can start work before getting all of the information and then finish when they get the last bit of information. After all this is a bankruptcy case not new law; the lawyer seemed experienced in this kind of work and could easily finish up the petition in a few days with the last bit of information.
You could have just filed your own bk, your son needs to know that you are living above your means…I bet son added you as a signer and now you’re ruined his credit.
Big question is why judge did not order defendant to turn over all allegedly cokplete work product to plaintiff.
The judge calling the plaintiffs a smart guy ? What smart person would pay someone for a job not knowing if it can be done the way they wanted it ? Not a smart person.
I don't think she thought he was a "smart guy," I think she could see what was probably going to happen and gave him a compliment to give his ego a little boost. Nothing about his attitude "told me" that he could control himself if things didn't go his way.
Sounds like the plaintiff is REALLY bad with money, including what he is legally intitled to or not.
Boomer just being a Boomer. The wife and son nowhere to be found, probably hate him too
What does THAT supposed to mean ? Tell me ALL about Boomers Chris.
😂 I'm a boomer and that's funny! hahahah
@@GigiRulesTheRoost Why is it funny. Chris thinks you are a total buffoon and well past your worth.
CardCheat Chris thinks he is young at 50
July 6th bothers me. If the lawyer says they met on that date and they didn't, then the lawyer would be a liar. What else did he lie about?
A lot of parents would actually tank thier kids credit for money. Plaintiff is just saying those things to get sympathy
Wait a minute,, the plaintiff won something back, I get that he wants all of his 2k back but the attorney did do some work. The plaintiff, like alot of us, is struggling to pay his bills and BK is scary and of course he wanted to protect his son too. I hope things have gotten better for the plaintiff.
This guy involved his son and his financial problems when they got a $30,000 joint credit card debt
Is it crazy that I 100% believe the plaintiff ….
And then there was that
News at 11:00 - Person who has a problem paying his bills is trying to get out of paying a bill.
I'm shocked! Shocked! No, not really that shocked.
Douglas shady😂😂😂
Credit 101. Whenever there is a co-anything, that “co” is on the hook.
First mistake! He sued a person that does law second he didn’t bring any proof to defend himself and I wonder why now that he has so much debt… not so smart guy sadly 🤷🏼♂️🤷🏼♂️
What a petulant plaintiff.
You eat the steak 🥩😋 you pay the man.
Lawyers? Honest and trustworthy?! Since when?
bert and ernie law offices
I loved this show when they had real ppl vs actors
I feel like once the plaintiff said, "You know, you're a Judge, an Attorney, you think of all these things. I'm just an average blue-collar worker trying to survive" I knew everything I needed to know about that him.
This judge loves to hear herself talk jeez
Then go watch Judge Mathis
This lawyer is a criminal like most are yes there is good ones out there not all are bad
The outside opinions are 😂 😂..
The lawyer does seem like a sneak. I wish the other guy knew to have other documentation before hand.
3:35 I'm not an accountant or a Lawyer, but I do any financial liability under your name and a co-signer/cardholder will affect both parties. I hate to say this but I believe the attorney.
0:1o Now that's comedy!
:43 - why is the def's hair behind his head?
😂😂😂 a little fried😂
So nobody see that girl just fell asleep 5:52
That poor guy… that lawyer is a crook.. 😂😂… that man doesn’t get it.
Waaaaaa, waaaaaa
It’s ironic he said he got in that financial situation for getting “burnt”, e.g. not getting paid for work he performed.
First off its not necessarily an automatic easy answer like the judge and the people on these comments seem to think. Sometimes it might be but sometimes it depends on the circumstances involved. I think the plaintiff was telling the truth. I think the defendent is a little crooked. I don't think the defendent prepared jack compared to what he got paid. However, the plaintiff shouldn't of signed anything or definitely paid anything untill he had the answer in writing. Even though I feel bad for the plaintiff I think the Judge ruled right. I think the Judge was incredibly rude right before she ruled for no reason and kind of made herself sound like an idiot.
I can understand the plaintiff's anger.
The plaintiff probably didn't ask the lawyer early on if his son's credit would be trashed too as every attorney knows that. The dad could have called one on the phone and asked one or even Goggled it.
Anger is the only emotion you know. Of course you see it everywhere and celebrate it.
Plaintiffs son is a douche bag
That attorney lied..
..and how do you know this ?
Yeah riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight.