RE: Judge Judy ! judge Judy !

Collarspace Discussion Forums

Home Login Search

RE: Judge Judy ! judge Judy !

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Polls and Other Random Stupidity >> RE: Judge Judy ! judge Judy !

Page: << < prev 1 [2]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: Judge Judy ! judge Judy ! - 3/15/2009 8:25:40 AM

tammystarm

Posts: 3045
Joined: 7/26/2006
Status: offline

Thanks OP for bringing us this!!!!!

_____________________________

~~Queen of duct-tape~~
~~Emotionally delusional~~

~~somebody pour me my nebuitol and hand me my drink~~

(in reply to yourdarkdesire)

Profile

Post #: 21

RE: Judge Judy ! judge Judy ! - 3/15/2009 8:30:28 AM

yourdarkdesire

Posts: 4477
Joined: 10/2/2008
From: NeverNeverLand
Status: offline

*leans over and shakes the hand of the defense*

better luck next time

_____________________________

President, ProSubsRUs

(in reply to tammystarm)

Profile

Post #: 22

RE: Judge Judy ! judge Judy ! - 3/15/2009 8:35:21 AM

tammystarm

Posts: 3045
Joined: 7/26/2006
Status: offline

dark you forgot to say "you poor bastid"

YES it is MY day to correct you

MWHAHAHGAHAHAHAAHAHAH

_____________________________

~~Queen of duct-tape~~
~~Emotionally delusional~~

~~somebody pour me my nebuitol and hand me my drink~~

(in reply to yourdarkdesire)

Profile

Post #: 23

RE: Judge Judy ! judge Judy ! - 3/15/2009 8:38:49 AM

igor2003

Posts: 1718
Joined: 1/1/2004
Status: offline

fast reply

I haven't really made up my mind yet, but am leaning more toward a 50/50 decision or that the blame should be more totally on shoulders of S. The reason? Well, a laptop is not light weight. It certainly weighs more than even several jackets. To jerk the jacket off of the boxes with enough force to knock a laptop computer off before realizing it is there, to me, shows extreme lack of proper care even in just handling the jacket alone. There could easily have been things in the pockets of the jacket that could be hurt or lost with that much lack of care even if the laptop had not been there. And if the jacket was on top of the boxes...even hanging over, how did that make it so much in the way that it needed to be moved? If the part of the jacket that was hanging over was so much in the way that I could not get through I would think that the common sense thing to do would have been to raise the hanging part and put it on top of the box as well. Apparently the boxes did not need moved...only some part of the jacket. Does that warrent jerking on the jacket hard enough to knock down a heavy laptop computer? It seems to me that there was a complete lack of care and concern on the part of S.

< Message edited by igor2003 -- 3/15/2009 8:41:41 AM >

(in reply to kazzaslave)

Profile

Post #: 24

RE: Judge Judy ! judge Judy ! - 3/15/2009 10:13:29 AM

SavageFaerie

Posts: 4377
Joined: 12/3/2004
From: NYC
Status: offline

Yes while I see S was a bungling fool, I would say yes he has a responsibility, but for the fact that T placed the computer right out in the middle of the room and covered it up so only he knew what was under the jacket. One question to T would be, did said S just walk into his apt unannounced or did T open the door and invite him in?

The problems I see lies in the fact that T did not put H's computer in a place where it could be considered a safe place. I cannot see where 2 boxes, then the computer being hidden by a coat, in the middle of a living room would constitute a safe place for the greater duty of care while having H's property.

Where is was placed and from all looks hidden to me shows carelessness on T's part. Even the most graceful of people entering his domain would not by site know that there is laptop of value under neath it, it was still in fact not in a more than reasonable safe place as to not get damaged. Reasonable would have been flat on a table so as not to accidental knock it off.

To me sitting on 2 boxes in the middle of the living area covered by a jacket is well as Judge Judy would stay "stupid".
One does not recover for being stupid.

Now mind you T, I am not calling you stupid, but if I was Judge Judy you put the laptop in a place where it could be damaged. If you had somehow grabbed the jacket yourself and pulled the laptop off in a hurry to get out the door and pulled it down, the same scenario would have happened. Down comes the laptop that no longer works.

I'm just saying in the case of bailment (which is precisely this case since T had permission to have property, he assumed a greater responsibility to care of said property than he would property he owns out right.

So I guess the question is, was the laptop put in a secure place to avoid damage?
Was S a tumbling tornado without care to what he might possibly knock down in his careless pattern of destruction?
Would laptop have been safer sitting somewhere other than it was, since it was borrowed property?

Accidents happen, but one must determine the direct cause of the accident to place blame. Could this have been avoided?

Having only read a little bit that T presented, its my opinion the accident could have totally been prevented if T had taken time to place the laptop in a more secure place.

Here is a link to the term bailment:
http://www.answers.com/topic/bailment

I realize not everyone will agree to this, in fact BP and I had to agree to disagree.
I am just going by my experience with bailment and having a more experienced view as an ex adjuster, where my job was to determine the 1st direct cause of loss.
The main question an adjuster needs answered was by what series of events caused the loss and what was the 1st primary reason it was caused.

My reasoning is not based on who average Joe or Jane would see it but as someone that analyzes all the fact to see what started the events to end up with the conclusion, damaged property.

_____________________________

Disclaimer:If its the wrong word or misspelled I blame on my fingers and brains refusing to interact.

(in reply to igor2003)

Profile

Post #: 25

RE: Judge Judy ! judge Judy ! - 3/15/2009 10:26:14 AM

hejira92

Posts: 2272
Joined: 10/27/2005
From: Palm Beach County, Fl
Status: offline

I just love it when you talk all legal......

_____________________________

Property of Cuffkinks

Member:
The Pimpettes
MoGa's IN-Crowd

"You're the gleam in my eye, the smile on my face and the bulge in my pants" - Cuffkinks

(in reply to SavageFaerie)

Profile

Post #: 26

RE: Judge Judy ! judge Judy ! - 3/15/2009 11:18:51 AM

MasterG2kTR

Posts: 6677
Joined: 8/7/2004
From: Wisconsin
Status: offline

I am disappointed

.....I thought this was a thread about Judge Judy, that babe ROCKS!!! I watch her show every chance I get. I love her style of justice.

As for your case T......like the others have already said....SavageFaerie nailed it......btw....if this case were to go before Judge Judy....first ask yourself if you really want to be embarrassed on national TV in front of 10 million viewers.

(in reply to hejira92)

Profile

Post #: 27

RE: Judge Judy ! judge Judy ! - 3/15/2009 11:41:34 AM

SavageFaerie

Posts: 4377
Joined: 12/3/2004
From: NYC
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: hejira92

I just love it when you talk all legal......

Dawlin, for you I would talk legal anyday....or we could talk about non legal things that gets our kink on :)

Master G, I could not help but make her stupid reference, although I am in no way referring to T as stupid, as I know he is one smart cookie. It's just a Judge Judy mannerism, so of course LOL I had to throw it in there.

_____________________________

Disclaimer:If its the wrong word or misspelled I blame on my fingers and brains refusing to interact.

(in reply to hejira92)

Profile

Post #: 28

RE: Judge Judy ! judge Judy ! - 3/15/2009 11:57:49 AM

Termyn8or

Posts: 18681
Joined: 11/12/2005
Status: offline

FR, to noone in particular. Also all true.

OK saving the friendship is not at issue. First of all we are on temporary outs, and it has nothing to do with this.It has to do with the exploitation of my family mechanic, and this issue pales in comparison, but suffice it to say that his ball joints are not new.

S is a careless individual, S stands for Scratch. He bought a new truck, a black full size Dodge with a V8, actually drives nicer than I thought it would, but after having it only a few days he ran it through a narrow alley with tree branches and scratched it all up. This after of course getting it clearcoated. I gave him that name and it was accepted, especially when his own Mother let out with a belly laugh hearing it.

He is a careless person, he wasn't in the house for about three minutes when he did this, and at the time I was considering giving him a chair to sit in. It would just be a matter of grabbing it from over by the piano and handing it to him. I did not leave him to stand for hours or anything like that. One time S and I were moving appliances into his house, and he grabs it and starts walking before I could even get ahold of it. Luckily it was a clothes dryer because he wound up carrying it himself a few feet before I could catch up. I told him then "If you do that with the washer you''ll probably screw your back up".

On the other hand, I am a complete slob, however that is known to S in spades. I fully agree with the bailment part brought up by Fearie, any debt to H is absolutely mine, but I am talking about me going after S for recompense.

Note that I haven't even tried to run the laptop since, but it is a non issue whether it runs or not. I brought it up on it's own just with the assumption that it is broken and cannot be fixed for the purpose of an argument, in the empirical sense.

Now I in no way want to change the subject, but consider this. We got the boys on the road, picking up a largescreen TV for repair. They haul it up the stairs succesfully from the basement and it has wheels. so they roll it across the tile floor and apparently the wheels were either not quite right or the floor was too vulnerable to damage (IMO). We got sued for the replacement of the whole floor. If something is on casters is it not a reasonable assumption that one can roll it around on the floor ? And why sue us ? Why not Magnavox who made the bigscreen, or the tile manufacturer who marketed a product unsuitable (IMO) for use ?

I don't know about you but when I go looking for linoleum or floor tile I take a fork with me, and I give the tines a flip onto the surface, if it leaves a mark I move on to another brand. This is a floor dammit, and some of this garbge is so soft that even a dog's toenails can damage it. But then linoleum (and tile of that sort) is actually garbage. It is the gunk they scrape off the bottom of the tank when they crack petroleum. They roll it into sheets between rollers and then paint it. What a scam.

But that does not change the facts.

Back to the point, is not a guest, when confronted with a situation where there is no viable seat for him would ask or wait ? In a few seconds I would've grabbed him the chair from by the piano and bade him to have a seat. As stated it's not like I let him stand there for a long time. And all the time of course it was yackety yack, so even a verbal warning would not have worked. And just for the record this was a totally unnanounced visit.

And of course the jury is instructed to disregard the blood alcohol levels of all the involved parties as it is no excuse under the law.

Further deliberation ?

T

(in reply to hejira92)

Profile

Post #: 29

RE: Judge Judy ! judge Judy ! - 3/15/2009 12:54:11 PM

SavageFaerie

Posts: 4377
Joined: 12/3/2004
From: NYC
Status: offline

What ones need to do it find the direct cause of the accident or Proximate in the legal terms.

Did S walk in without knocking and bully his way to the couch? Or did he knock and you let him in?

What I'm getting it T is that the laptop was already in a precarious position and assuming as you said that your place was a mess, it you had tripped on said mess and knocked into the boxes the result would have been the same. Laptop on floor.
You increase you liability and even more enhance the fact that walking in the apartment is already providing the laptop an unsafe place, to put the laptop in the line of fire was just asking for an accident to happen which anyone could have caused.
The fact that you cant stand S, or that he is an accident waiting to happen, do not take off of you where you placed the laptop which was quick frankly in a place where damage would be most likely to happen, instead of putting the laptop on a stable surface like a table or side table.

The laptop more likely than not would not have fallen if you had put it in a safer place. That and the fact that you say yourself are a complete sob which put an expensive piece of equipment at risk, be it your laptop or another's.

You had 3 minutes to move it out of the way of said rhino, you didn't, you stopped and considered offering a chair, after 3 minutes and no offer to sit, I would myself have taken upon myself that meant seat yourself.

To give you something to compare it to. I am staying with blackPhx and poenkitten. The only available plug leave the cord where it can be tripped on. Now because I don't move it or take greater care to insure the cord is not in the way of feet does this absolve me from it being my own damn fault it gets damaged if someone trips the cord and my laptop comes crashing down to the floor. I was the one that put it that way just as you put the laptop on the boxes under a jacket.

So who's fault is it that my laptop crashed and burned due to someone else tripping on the cord I laid down and didn't figure out a way to make it less hazardous to potential damage. Would it perhaps be my friend who was visiting and has sight problems fault, not being entirely able to see it because I didn't warn her? Hell no. I made the mistake of putting the cord there. I would not expect her to bellyup the cost my my computer when I was the not thinking one and put the laptop in peril of being pulled off. I trip over the damn thing myself, but I know I should fix the problem I haven't yet. I sure wouldn't be pointing fingers at others for the position I put my own laptop in.

The core of the problem is the laptop shouldn't have been where it was for any D, Q or K person to knock it off for whatever reason. Idiocy discounted on your friend part, (sight problems in my example) in my own opinion it was not the place to put it. You took a risk putting it there and in light of your housekeeping there could have been anything in the way to trip someone and have the same result.

I see little difference in the two.

I hope this puts a better prospective on it.

As for the floor, if you thought the floor couldn't handle the weight of the TV, you should have put plywood over the floor to roll the TV out instead of assuming the floor would accept the weight. You said yourself in your opinion it was the floor that couldn't handle it, safeguards should have been made to insure no damage was done to the TV and/or the floor.

Again just my opinion based on the hell I don't know how many cases I had to get to the nitty gritty and decide who's damn fault it was. But then again its based on law and how insurance companies determined it oh some 15 years or more ago.

Just me 2 cents.

_____________________________

Disclaimer:If its the wrong word or misspelled I blame on my fingers and brains refusing to interact.

(in reply to Termyn8or)

Profile

Post #: 30

RE: Judge Judy ! judge Judy ! - 3/15/2009 1:40:25 PM

SteelofUtah

Posts: 5307
Joined: 10/2/2007
From: St George Utah
Status: offline

Am I being Ignored........

Shoveles, Trunk, Hole...... Any Questions?

Steel

_____________________________

Just Steel
Resident Therapeutic Metallurgist
The Steel Warm-Up © ™
For the Uber Posters
Thanks for the Grammatical support : ) ~ Term

(in reply to SavageFaerie)

Profile

Post #: 31

RE: Judge Judy ! judge Judy ! - 3/15/2009 2:00:51 PM

Daddysredhead

Posts: 23574
Joined: 11/6/2005
From: Northern (yet still part of the South) Virginia
Status: offline

Steel, I like your idea. Gets out a lot of aggression.

However, I was about ready to type out virtually the same thing that SavageFaerie wrote when I read to the end of the thread. In VA at least, the person who has care and control of the property in question is responsible. The fact that a bull in a china shop knocked it for a loop means zero when the placement of item was in a less than safe, and fairly hidden, spot.

It's the standard of "but for..."

But for its placement on boxes under a jacket, S may have taken more care in ambulating around it. Therefore, it's pretty much on you. Sorry...

_____________________________

Founding Member, Clan of the Scarlet O'Hair-a's

Do not challenge me to a battle of wits & come to fight unarmed.

Are you really that stupid? ~ Bless your heart

13th doughnut

(in reply to SteelofUtah)

Profile

Post #: 32

RE: Judge Judy ! judge Judy ! - 3/15/2009 4:30:59 PM

DesFIP

Posts: 25191
Joined: 11/25/2007
From: Apple County NY
Status: offline

T's fault. He borrowed it, he left it on top of boxes with a coat on top. No way for anybody to know the laptop was there.
Should S offer up the money? Yes, if he had even half of a decent upbringing. But the responsibility lies with the one who borrowed it.

Go pay H for it since your lack of foresight caused it to bite the dust. Or pay for its repair if you prefer. Or buy one on Ebay and give it to him.

_____________________________

Slave to laundry

Cynical and proud of it!

(in reply to yourdarkdesire)

Profile

Post #: 33

RE: Judge Judy ! judge Judy ! - 3/15/2009 5:34:30 PM

windchymes

Posts: 9410
Joined: 4/18/2005
Status: offline

I'm agreeing with faerie and red. T took responsibility of the laptop while in his care, which includes taking "reasonable" care for it's safety. Throwing a jacket over it hid it from view, and moving a jacket to gain access to a sofa is a reasonable activity, but expecting to find laptops under jackets isn't a reasonable enough expectation to warrant placing responsibility for the laptop's destruction onto the person who moved the jacket. How many of us would actually think, "Gosh, I'd better pick up this jacket carefully because someone might have placed a laptop computer under it!" ?

_____________________________

You know it's going to be a GOOD blow job when she puts a Breathe Right strip on first.

Pick-up artists and garbage men should trade names.

(in reply to DesFIP)

Profile

Post #: 34

RE: Judge Judy ! judge Judy ! - 3/16/2009 10:26:36 AM

Termyn8or

Posts: 18681
Joined: 11/12/2005
Status: offline

FR

You guys better beat the hell out of this case because it is unlikely that I'll come up with another one. I wouldn't be afraid of Judge Judy, who my coworker calls the bitch of the bench. For example the olman has a cellphone on the olady's account. Know what that fucker does ? He uses it sparingly and pays his end of the bill on time all the time. Imagine that ! People like us would put judge Judy out of business if there were enough of us !

Well except for the $1,500 I loaned out without any paperwork or payment schedule. The actual loan happened years ago and is beyond the statute of limitations, but as the lender, can I call it in as due and payable now and file suit ? There was a verbal contract, albeit a loose one. He said "I'll probably hundred bucks you to death", OK that sounded good, every month or so I would be getting a hundred bucks fifteen times. Sounded reasonable. But the hundred buckses never came. You have never seen anyone so excommunicated from Termy's Terminal as this guy, especially after he claimed he didn't owe the money back because he loaned me his truck for a month or so. What's more is that I have decided I don't like his attitude. Like a schoolyard bully attitude. All he wants to talk about is getting a piece of ass, kicking ass or his latest drug bust. Last I heard he was bragging about how much money he makes, yet still no payment, and on top of that his olady is in jail for stealing DVDs !

So can I as the lender declare the loan due and payable now, and therefore it would be well within the statute of limitations ? Or should I just consider more of my precious (weed) money down the tubes for good ?

Here ya go for a blonde moment ! To complicate matters I respect a gentleman's agreement and have loaned out money before with nothing in writing. Since the loan was for a downpayment on a truck, I left "Pay to the order of" blank, so as far as I know he could have just filled in the name of the person who got that. I know he got the highly coveted truck, and I also know that the guy who sold it to him is now deceased.

I think I am totally fuuuuuugggged in this matter. Talk about something I am never going to do again in my life ! Next time anything over about $500 there is going to be a cognovant note in triplicate, notarized and filed with the clerk of courts, a GPS and who knows what else. I am never going to give away that amount of money that freely again. Not that I won't ever do it for someone, but there is going to be a paper trail that a deaf, dumb and blind Man could follow.

Come on people, you can see this case is practically untryable, I am digging here. Perhaps someone else can come up with a case for our careful adjudication. Sorry but these things happen rarely in Termy's life, and I would have to dig so deep for another case that I would have to go back to Louise from Alabama. She stayed with me maybe a month and ran my phone bill up to over $400. I don't know her last name but she gave good head. We have stopped loaning money out and even bailing people out of jail, so if someone wants to keep this thread alive, come on, you must have gotten screwed over somewhere. Present your case.

Of course in lieu of any real help in this matter here I could go to some others I know, not the brightest bulbs on the tree.

C is working for R, and is driving a decent size dump truck. C has a car and valid insurance but it of course does not cover him in a commercial vehicle. There is a fender bender and as one might presume the truck won. The car was not in good shape. The truck was fine. C was advised by the cops that the law would consider him at fault because of the vehicles' relative positions, that is the car had more of itself out of a paralell driveway acros the street than the truck. How to avoid this in the futurs nobody knows, but then that's the reason for insurance. However there was no insurance. The commercial insurance had lapsed and whatever, someone forgot to send a check or something, whatever. The judgement was sizable enough that C has not had a license for years because of it.

Also, even though C has been known to be careless, that was not a factor in this incident. This was a case of a big truck and an eentsy weentsy lil car, which C could not see. I don't believe a citation was issued even. Subsequently C and R got into an argument and C is no longer in R's employ. However R got thrown in jail for growing weed and C ran his company for a time during that incarceration, at which time he embezzled plenty of money, but ill gotten gains are not so sweet and he just blew the money instead of paying the judgement. I did mention that sometimes these people are about as sharp as a bowling ball did I not ?

As you can now obviously detect, I am scraping the bottom of the barrel here. Someone out there must have something more litagable, soimething fresh and juicy. Something we can sink our teeth into GRRROWLLLLL.

T

(in reply to windchymes)

Profile

Post #: 35