Irritated Judge Warns of Severe Consequences for Winning the Case!
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 12 ก.ย. 2024
- Judge Simpson and lawyer have a long argument.
Subscribe to support the channel!
Every defendant is presumed innocent until proven guilty. These videos aim to provide a glimpse into the US justice system. CourtCamTV's mission is to educate and entertain.
This is not an official court record. Please refer to official court transcripts and channels for more information.
Women in Court
Men in Court
Family Court
#JudgeSimpson #landlord #home
This attorney doesn’t stand a chance. Judge Simpson is too smart
lol he had a pretty good argument if it took that long for the judge to win the debate! they have a pretty good rapport.
Simpson doing literally everything he can except for telling them "You need to dismiss your own case" and even mentions that at some point that they should. And the Lawyer still wants to argue, until Simpson makes it extremely clear as to WHY they need to.
Oof.
Simpson trying to warn the plaintiff they've already discriminated against the defendant, and plaintiff's attorney is too slow to pick up on the issue.
he's not too slow - he's responding to the judge's questions by making his argument.
their argument is that it's the landlord's prerogative to enforce rules regarding tenants' pets. judge simpson's argument is that none of the rules apply specifically to animals, only to the person who owns the animal; and therefore, this is unfair to the tenant because this enforcement was selective.
if the attorney is able to convince judge simpson with his argument, then it's on paper that this _wasn't_ selective - those rules apply to all tenants.
you'll notice 2 things: the hypothetical involving the cow, and the thing you're talking about, which is the discrimination thing.
judge simpson acts exasperated a lot, but we also know from watching a lot of his work that if he's annoyed and doesn't want to engage with an argument, he just ends the argument. he was willingly engaging the attorney in a legal debate. he wouldn't have entertained the cow thing if he wasn't into the convo lol.
the only time he got real serious was in the end with the heavy implication that if he had to make a finding on this case, he would be including that in his finding. and the attorney immediately ended argument and asked to confer with his client. he agreed with that and also could see pandora's box getting opened on his client with such a finding.
the attorney was doing a pretty good job of reading the room and his argument wasn't bad. he made concessions where he'd been out-argued until checkmate.
i find it delightful seeing people doing what they're good at. these men have a rapport and he stood his own. it's just that he was gonna lose his case. simpson wasn't made a judge for no reason.
@@zubetp He's slow.
He didn't recognize the jeopardy he placed his client in by filing the discriminatory action, and had to be led by the hand to the issue that destroys his suit.
If he didn't council his client on the discrimination issue, before filing, then he needs to notify his malpractice insurance company.
@@John_McJohnson He's not slow, he's doing his job. Even if a client brings him a flimsy case its still his duty to work the case to the fullest extent of his ability. Its a shitty client that put the attorney in that position.
@@DavidPruitt 'Hey, file this discriminatory suit, that violates Federal law. '
'Sure thing.'
Slooooooow or incompetent are his only defenses, if he knew and did it anyway, the professional standards board would have words.
@@DavidPruittHe’s slow and he is not doing his job. The lawyer isn’t getting it, despite many attempts by the judge to get him to an understanding of the law.
Not a lawyer, I know nada but it appears that when the Judge gives you a hint, take it and run!
IMO, landlord wants to evict early to charge more on a new tenant. Judge smells it a mile away!!
He should rule for the landlord and let fair housing get involved. That way they can straight out tell her that these "emotional support" animals are bullshit and stop trying to play the system.
The lawyer is apparently attempting to try two cases at once. Or, using the ESA re-certification as a reason to try and claim pet fees.
Exactly!
All pets are emotional support animals. I think people use that phrase too much to break the rules of no pets. Just put in the new lease that everyone has to redo the need for a support animal every year or 3 years. Then let this go
Cause they can't expect her to get rid of the pet after a year if dr. Won't sign a new one.
They don't have to show them any documentation of disability
The support animal concept has been around, and in the news, for decades. If the landlord didn't think to put anything into the lease agreements, they can't complain.
WHile all animals are emotional support animals in a general sense, there are specific laws where a person can go to a doctor and get a certification to have one specifically for health reasons.
support animals are different. it's not just an animal that supports you emotionally lol, there's a legal process. she made it clear she had a certification and a doctor's note.
Emotional support animals, while not service dogs, are exempt from pet restrictions and fees. Landlords can ask for a letter from a medical professional verifying the need for an emotional support animal. Landlords are required to make an accommodation for emotional support animals.
Service dogs are also exempt from pet restrictions and fees. If the disability that the service dog is required for us not evident, then additional information can be requested. Landlords are required to make accommodations for service dogs.
The "Fair Housing Act" includes all is the information about housing and assistance animals such as emotional support animals and service dogs. States may expand obligations of housing providers.
Thee is a huge difference between an emotional support animal (ESA) and an actual service dog and I believe people often want a pet, so they claim it’s an ESA, allowing them to avoid paying pet fees by doing so . An actual service animal has a specific purpose, usually for medical reasons, and is similar to medical equipment. Service dogs are extensively trained to perform their functions and are well behaved and even tempered. Rarely, if ever, are Pit Bulls used as a service animal.
The defendant just wants to keep a pet dog and not pay the fees associated with ownership at that complex and due to the poorly written protocols and lease agreement, she is able to easily do so. All she needs is a note from her doctor saying that she would benefit from owning a dog. I don’t believe it should be legal to forbid service animals, however I find “support” animal arguments and use to be nebulous, at best. Many times these dogs are poorly behaved, with no training at all and are a nuisance to neighbors in an apartment building.
People taken advantage of needing a support animal. Doctors hand those letter out like Prozac prescription.
Watching this was so frustrating for me because I don't understand what makes them think that her need did not change? She already certified that she needed an emotional support animal then they made her get rid of the one she had so she had to get a new one and they just want to be jerks about it. I feel like the landlord just didn't want a dog there so after he made her get rid of her first one he thought okay I don't have to worry about it anymore. Once he found out she had another one that's when he started trying to figure out a way to make her get rid of it by questioning her need again but she should not have to get recertified again because she had already proved that she needed an emotional support animal. My daughter needed an emotional support animal when she was in college and I understood having to get certified for it but she never had to get recertified for each year that she was there.
Is the issue that they don't charge the monthly pet fee for service animals? It sounds like they allow pets.
Further on, yes, seems like that's what has the landlord's panties in a twist.
Technically a service animal is NOT a pet. So maybe they could get in trouble for charging for having a service animal
@@SteWieHTheTowel Technically an emotionally support animal is not a service animal its a bullshit class of pet used to get around the rules. I'm pretty sure they were trying to charge extra but never actually had that stipulated in the lease.
@@DavidPruitt it is a bullshit set of rules, but sounds like this is some sort of affordable housing, and ordinarily on none affordable housing they would not be required to allow ESAs
This attorney is dense. Fact is according to the Fair Housing Act Emotional Support Animals are considered assistive aids, not pets. A landlords 'pet' policy would not apply.
Nope, that's a bullshit lie told by the people trying to make off of skirting the rules. The landlord could have pulled this off if they actually had something written d own."Service animals are not: Emotional support or comfort dogs" www.ada.gov/topics/service-animals/
1.) The Fair Housing Act says that the assistive aid cannot cause undue hardship to the landlord or other tenants. This is largely up to interpretation by a judge, but a pet policy may still apply if it eases the hardship to the landlord or other tenants, i.e. if the policy says the dog can be removed for excessive barking, then that would still apply to the assistive aid because the barking is a hardship on the other tenants. Saying a 'pet' policy doesn't apply to 'assistive aids that happen to be animals' is a game of semantics. Judges hate games of semantics, but lawyers seem to love them.
2.) The issue here isn't about the definition of an ESA or if a pet policy applies. The issue here is whether or not the landlord is allowed to ask a tenant randomly to recertify whether or not they need the ESA. I don't know what the law says, but Judge Simpson's opinion seems to be that unless there is a written policy about it as part of the lease, then asking to recertify once the tenant has been certified once is inappropriate or even discriminatory.
The answer is easy, “Your honor, this is new territory for us, too. We are trying to come up with more consistent policies. She had done without a support dog for X amount of months so we were just trying to determine the need. And since the last dog bite a tenant, we are concerned about our liability.”
I have confusion because they originally said that a dog bite occurred from the pitbull. The defendants now say that dog doesn't live there. Does that not mean that perhaps the Chihuahua did the biting ? And there should be some responsibility for that. And maybe even disapprove the dog if that's the one who did the biting.
Who the hell gets a pit bull as an emotional support animal? I mean, that's insane. They're just more likely to cause you more emotional distress in the long run.
My pit is a great emotional support dog there affectionate smart protective great with kids well mannered. Not sure why u think a pit is an agressive dog lol must be one of those people that believe anything u read or hear.
Dear god! The reason her Dr. Wouldn't give them whatever it was they wanted, was because it would violate HIPPA! For an emotional support animal you CERTIFY the animal! Not the disabled person. She has a lawsuit on that alone!!! That lawyer is an effing moron! The landlord is just as bad! 😒😒
The Fair Housing Act says you must show the landlord a letter from a doctor or therapist if the landlord isn't already accommodating the animal, i.e. if the landlord allows pets without restrictions anyway, you're not required to show them the letter.
Basically, the landlord is entitled to proof that you need accommodation outside of what the lease allows.
Another day of begging law enforcement to stop these horrible people from robbing me....
My name is Brian ellinger I live in Montgomery county Maryland
Thank you Judge! 😂
Where’s Mr Allen? 😢
I don’t think a pit bull should be on the list for an emotional support dog. Or a chihuahua, a little yappy ankle biter. Woman has questionable choices for an emotional support dog!
Emotional support animals are BS.
This one statement says so much about you
i hope judge simpson's argument convinced the plaintiff. a lot of people don't realize they're being prejudiced, and we can often be defensive against what we perceive to be indictments on our character. but i hope he thinks on this one.
I have a trained (when I say trained, I mean both of us went through about $400 for specific therapy training, took a tough test, and were certified by a recognized therapy dog organization) and I was allowed to buy a condo. This atty. mentioned “fair housing,” that’s what it falls under: federal law. We were able to prove my physical situation (hearing) and of my dog’s training. My dog & I went through the training & certification before I was in a situation that I was required to have/prove it.
Service animals take a long time to be trained. I didn't know that a person with a service animal has to show proof of anything
This is not a service animal this is an emotional support animal there is a big difference in the two
Emotional support animals, while not service dogs, are exempt from pet restrictions and fees. Landlords can ask for a letter from a medical professional verifying the need for an emotional support animal. Landlords are required to make an accommodation for emotional support animals.
Service dogs are also exempt from pet restrictions and fees. If the disability that the service dog is required for us not evident, then additional information can be requested. Landlords are required to make accommodations for service dogs.
The "Fair Housing Act" includes all is the information about housing and assistance animals such as emotional support animals and service dogs. States may expand obligations of housing providers.
@@departmentofredundancydept4121 I guess you copypastad that from one of the sites the sells the certification for a small fee. That's entirely wrong. Its people like you that give legitimate disabilities a bad rap.
"Accordingly, entities that have a “no pets” policy generally must modify the policy to allow service animals into their facilities"
"Service animals are not: Emotional support or comfort dogs,"
www.ada.gov/resources/service-animals-faqs/
www.ada.gov/topics/service-animals/
support animals or service animals dame jobs and are for life... he needs to research better... he cant decide who needs a dog for how long, he isnt qualified... the judge was spot on on this case.
An ESA is not covered under the ADA
Emotional support animals, while not service dogs, are exempt from pet restrictions and fees. Landlords can ask for a letter from a medical professional verifying the need for an emotional support animal. Landlords are required to make an accommodation for emotional support animals.
Service dogs are also exempt from pet restrictions and fees. If the disability that the service dog is required for us not evident, then additional information can be requested. Landlords are required to make accommodations for service dogs.
The "Fair Housing Act" includes all is the information about housing and assistance animals such as emotional support animals and service dogs. States may expand obligations of housing providers.
The ADA doesn't govern housing.
@@departmentofredundancydept4121 you explained it so well. Thank you
@@drill4206 you're welcome. It can be confusing sometimes.
Have a great day!
@@departmentofredundancydept4121 you too!!
Why would you ask... Simple answer GREED, we want pet charges/fees, and laws that have ambiguity are interpreted to the non moving parties favor.
Also a lot of people don't understand the difference between emotional support animal and a service dog. And emotional support animal can be a cat or a dog or a ferret or whatever. A service dog is obviously something like a seeing eye dog that has been trained. But just because somebody doesn't actually need a service dog doesn't mean that they don't have a disability that is emotional some autistic children need emotional support animals as an example. It's clear that some people don't like dogs like this landlord apparently and doesn't want this lady to have it.
@@angeladawn8707 if this emotional support animal idea keeps getting faked as service animals, I’m going to get an angry Canadian goose as an emotional support animal and just sit near them.
All this brouhaha over pet rent and late fees. 🙄
Attorney should’ve talked his client out of this case and worked with Fair Housing on getting an acceptable policy in place going forward regarding service/emotional support animals.
The argument is poorly built.
The essence of an ESA is that there is an important and specific bond between a certain animal and a certain human. That is where the supposed need exists. Neither the dog nor the human can be switched out willy-nilly. At least that’s one way of describing the situation. This allows a reevaluation any time the initial animal-human bond is disrupted and a new bond is asserted.
That’s how I would argue this case, anyway.
you'd want to bring in an expert witness to that fact and i think you might be successful. their argument was pretty simple and had to do with whether or not they were being fair to the tenant.
Judge Simpson usually finds for the tenant.
Judge Simpson usually finds wherever facts lead him. If anything, he's mindful of landlords not getting into huge messes.
Even here, he protected the landlord from himself. He could have easily dismissed the case, and let him face a massive lawsuit that could have ended his entire livelihood. He coached landlord's lawyer how to get out of the huge mess.
Simpson told both sides the defendant has a clear discrimination case against the plaintiff, and if he ruled in their favor they'd be f-ed.
Plaintiff should be praying the defendant doesn't seek a consultation with a housing lawyer.
@@sandboxplayerz667 No Simpson makes landlords jump through hoops and sides with the tenants way too often. It's the lenght of time that this lady supposedly "needed" a so called emotionally support animal. I don't see how a little yapping nervous chihuahua can support anyone emotionally.
100% correct. I love Judge Simpson, but he definitely favors tenants over landlords. Why anyone would want to be a landlord in Michigan is beyond me. Heads they win, tails you lose.
i've seen him find in favor of the landlord many times. the first video i ever saw of him was the case with trellis lane - which isn't really the same because trellis lane was a sovereign citizen, but that's the one that comes to mind.
This lawyer is a fg joke!!!
💯
I can’t believe a doctor signed off on pit bull as a support animal
😂😂😂I wish I could introduce you to my 100 pound esa pit. She knows when I'm having panic attacks, she will sit on my lap and hug me with her head and neck. When my kid got hurt she stayed with him while his sister got me. Thought maybe if you heard about ours it might help...are all zo smart or well trained heck no but neither are chihuahua 😅 I've been bit by more small dogs and cats than this pit whom I adopted 13 years ago. I think almost any animal can be an esa
JS biased against landlord….shocking.
Your understanding of landlord/tenant law is quite tenuous.
If I replace my ESA, I have to notify the office. I am NOT required to recertify myself. It's in the pet addendum.
No landlord has the right to ask periodically to recertify a tenant while having the same animal. If they try to put that in a contract, it won't fly. ADA has strict rules on being harassed. This is straight-up harassment.
ESAs are not service animals and I wish people would stop pretending they are, most people with them are just adults that need to grow up and realize they don't get to take their random dog registered with a BS agency in places they don't belong.
I'm fairly positive ESA is not covered under ADA
@@LolatheACS Correct, I have to deal with people trying to sneak them into where I work all the time. They get registered with some random online place, throw on a 'service dog' vest and think they are special. Most have no training, let alone trained to only void outside. Service animals on the other hand have rigorous training. And typically do not have any reaction to outside stimulus, instead, they do their job.
That's absolutely the case. The landlord has no right to ask her what her need is, or even the right to ask for recertification! Its down right discrimination! What, is he after? He want her gone? Or, the $20 bucks pet fee? Not 1 thing in writing! 😂😂
@@LolatheACS She still appears to be disabled and could still get assistance with protecting herself from harassment.
I love judge Simpson's but I think he oversteps his judicial role in these cases. This is a efficiency game for the system because we don't have a contested hearing. If it has a matter of law, I think he should hold back from so much encouragement to dismiss for the plaintiff if the plaintiff really wants to go forward. Just my two cents
yeah, i don't disagree. he shouldn't be giving legal advice from the bench.
I'm genuinely trying to figure out if the landlord and lawyer genuinely aren't following what the judge is saying, or they are being intentionally obtuse because they _do_ follow what he's saying. She needed _a_ support animal for several years. There was nothing to suggest that that need vanished just because she lost one. The landlord just wanted to put the lady through a process where they hoped she wouldn't be able to get certified, thus losing her ESA.
Like, I understand him wanting to defend his client's actions, but the correct response to that is "I'm following what you are saying, your Honor. However, that was not my client's intentions when asking for the new doctor's letter" While it seems likely to me that that is indeed the reason for it, acting as if you don't understand the judge isn't the correct response. Having The Court explain it in simpler and simpler ways, on the record, repeatedly feels like it would easily backfire.
Also, if a cow or elephant were refused, that would be as likely to happen at the initial stages, but they should really have a clause in there that says the apartment complex reserves the right to refuse an animal, which may or may not have certain legal protections in and of themselves. I've heard of some strange non-dog and cat ESAs in my line of work in my country.
nothing in lease about this. plaintiff attorney knows this and is grasping at the wind. why a pit bull? my niece with 8 yr old has one and i do worry.
My mom and sister had pitbulls. My mom passed away with hers sleeping next to her.
Rich white man throwing his weight around on an elderly black woman.
Why is everything about race? It's not, you are making it about race. What does the color of the litigants matter?
SHUT UP!!!!
@@ragnarok7791 cause that's the ONLY DEFENSE they have!!!!!
Really? That’s all you got?
@@ragnarok7791 The judge went there as well!! 😅