BEST EPISODE EVER! The surprise twist at the end where the plaintiff thought he was going to get $650 and not have to give back the phone was epic. He was quite the petulant child.
Plaintiff is a giant loser! So glad they told us at the end that he failed to bring the phone back. The way he was acting, he probably sold it to someone else.
The ending was just perfect. Why would you not bring the phone to the trial, the very phoen this trial is all about? Why would you call it unfair when you are the one that is holding onto a $1000 phone and expecting money back? What universe is this guy living in?
Because he had sold it to another suckered and couldn't get it back. That's why he was so upset when she first said to return the phone. He was just a slimy as the defendant (I'm sure he knew it was stolen). Great ending!!!
He totally sold the phone to someone else. No way he gave it to his nephew. That's why he couldn't get ahold of it to return it. He had a solid reason to get his money back...if he had any integrity. If he had done the right thing and turned the stolen goods in to the authorities, he would have been made whole and all would have been well. Clearly he didn't care it was stolen when he was trying to get it activated anyway and paying $100 in hopes of using the stolen phone. No moral compass. No brain. No refund.
Yes plus at the end he came across as a REAL JERK, especially to the reporter in the hallway, looked like he wanted to punch the poor guy. I think that the plaintiff is a really bad person, he just hides it well.
@@rockobill7637 there's the episode where she rips into a husband and wife because they hid a teen in their house for six days, while there was a massive search party looking for the girl because she was assume abducted.
You just know the plaintiff had resold the phone and that's why he threw a hissy fit at the end. Two thieves through and through. No honest person tries to unlock a phone they know is stolen.
i don't think the defendant is a thief. i think the defendant bought a phone and decided to resell it. it happens ALL the TIME as evidenced by new phones that come out basically every six months to a year. people decide they don't like a phone and decide to get a new one ALL THE TIME. i honestly think the defendant was just trying to get rid of a phone he did not know was stolen.
@@newplayer29 its a contract breach. not a theft. that is why JM ordered the defendant to return the money upon receipt of the phone. if it was theft JM would have alerted the cops which she does when thieves come in with lawsuits.
@@sonquatsch8585 JM had no solid proof the defendant was the original thief. She undid the deal. That doesn't mean the defendant WASN'T the one who stole the phone or who had knowledge that he was selling stolen merchandise. His whole story was bogus and filled with red flags. Buying a phone for your cousin to give as a gift to their boyfriend, sus. Selling the phone instead of returning when it was the wrong color, sus. Selling the phone through PayPal to avoid eBay fees/buyer protections SUS AF. Both of these guys are dirtbag scammers.
@@newplayer29 Harvey said he never returned the phone to get his money back. Even though he said he gave the phone to his nephew to play games, I think be sold it.
Secretly glad he didn't receive his judgement 🤣 JM was super patient with this plaintiff and his interruptions/almost insults towards her throughout the case. You can tell he is a complete jerk. He 100% sold the phone or did get it unlocked to use it himself and tried to still get his money back on top of it. 🙄 I'm glad she heard him at the end, too often she misses what they mutter under their breath at the end as she's walking away.
YES!!! Finally the full case with the plaintiff who says “I think this is BS”!! JM: “What’d you say?! Say it again! Say what you said exactly! SAY WHAT YOU SAID AGAIN.” You go, Judge Milian!!!
i wish that a litigant had said that on one of her cases that actually was a bad verdict but this one was a good verdict and im surprised she didnt reverse her decision after he said that .
@@marleonetti7 I think she knew that he wasn’t going to be able to produce the phone. So he wouldn’t be able to collect on the verdict. Plus she already dismissed his claim on the extra $300. So she knew that he was walking away with nothing
It would seem that the plaintiff was UNABLE to return the phone for a refund because he probably sold it on, (he obviously did not give it to his nephew). He cheated ebay out of their commission, then tried to unlock a stolen phone and then sold it on and then expected a full refund anyway. He is a worse scammer than the defendant, who must have known it was stolen because he says he bought it and yet NEVER even opened it, before selling it on...
I really believe they're both scammers because the defendant's story didn't make any sense. But the plaintiff is a real f*cking idiot. And he's a scammer as well. The defendant, well I would bet money that he's also a scammer but so much smarter than the dumbass plaintiff. Even though it was obvious the plaintiff was an idiot; I was even surprised that he didn't bring the phone. He actually thought he was going to get his money back and get to keep the phone! SMH. I don't think his brain cells are communicating with each other, LMFO!
Wow! The plaintiff is a first class idiot! He seriously disrespects the judge throughout the case! She should’ve given him ONE HOUR to return the phone.
Not him asking a NEW YORKER and a judge at that if she was familiar with calling NYPD 🥴 Narcissists always think they know better, even when it makes them look like complete fools. The KARMA!
I'm shocked that she didn't retract her judgement that was in his favor after his temper tantrum - Not like he would have gotten his money back anyway since he re-sold the stolen phone like a dumbass 😂
I wouldn’t be surprised if the plaintiff later tried to bring in a $20 Fisher Price pretend smart phone to pass off as the stolen iPhone considering how dumb and “shortsighted” he thought the judge was. Smh I’m glad he didn’t end up getting his money back.
@@lescobrandon9693 The legal remedy for this type of situation is to undo the sale. If his own actions (giving the phone away) prevent that, then he's out of luck. The legal principle is called "unjust enrichment" - he can't end up with both the $650 and the phone!
PayPal offers six month protection ffs he could have got his money back by filing a claim through there, and that’s regardless of whether or not it went through eBay.
The main scammer was exposed, the guy with the mic after the hearing is awesome "you want the money and you want to keep the phone right?": "Don't you understand you have to return the object to receive the money" , "What's so hard to understand about that?" and to the other scammer "What are you doing with stolen merchandise?" -"What's the matter with you" , awesome!
First of all... I love how the interviewer handled the plantif after the case. Second of all "if I knew it was stolen I wouldn't have tried to sell the phone.." wouldn't be in possession of it anyways.. Stolen phones nowadays are way too risky.. All the trackers and everything..
The plaintiff is a jerk. He should have been held in contempt of court. Imagine speaking that way in a court of law. It bothers me that he wouldn't return the phone to get his money. He's very sneaky
JM: So the defendant sold the phone to you directly so that you could cut out eBay's stake? Plaintiff: No, let me correct you. The defendant told me he would cut me a deal if we went directly through personal PayPal instead of through eBay. JM: So what you're saying is that eBay didn't get paid? Plaintiff: Yes. Me: SMH
@@journeysalkebulan well in the end the plaintiff never returned the phone to the court which means I believe he sold it. I think he thought he would say it was stolen and that's the end
plaintiff was a scammer, too. dude was arrogant, disrespectful and stupid. cannot believe he disrespected the court and thought he would get free money.
The reason he wanted to cut PayPal out of their cut is because he knew the phone was stolen and he would have to give the money back when they found out so the defendant is a crook and he's probably the one that stole the phone or else he would have wanted it to go through eBay. And the other guy not wanting to return the phone continued the theft by keeping it. So they're both crooks
Exactly - I'd have felt a little better if JM retracted her judgment at least just to piss him off even more despite him likely knowing he already scammed somebody else into buying the phone.
Judge Milian should've just changed her ruling to rule in the defendant's favor after the BLATANT DISRESPECT shown by the bratty, whiny plaintiff! Unbelievable! And btw, he can't even lie convincingly, he flinches like a small child every time he gets caught in a lie that it's beyond cringey to watch lmaooo.
At the end, when the plaintiff made that rude remark, you can see the wheels spinning in judge Milian's head on how she could overturn the Judgment she just gave him. She really wanted to undo it! Lol!
They ask you that, before the trial. You can’t change your mind after, since someone could have used your real name during. I was on a court tv show once.
She can't find people in contempt and throw them into jail. This is binding arbitration for civil cases, this is not an "actual" court. I believe she was previously a judge, I could be wrong but I don't believe she is currently a sitting judge in any court.
Why do people come to court so unprepared? You really think you can get the money AND the phone? Glad he didn't end up getting the money back with his attitude there at the end. 🙄
There's lot of shady "cell phone repair stores" that will help you unbrick a stolen phone for a hefty fee. My assumption is that the plaintiff successfully did that, so he didn't want to return the now functional phone. He may have assumed that the show paying the judgment means he gets to keep the phone. NOPE!
I love that the Plaintiff, wearing glasses, said the judge was being metaphorically "short sided" SOMEONE got spoiled as a child; it's always the people who already got to speak, but insist: "If you just listen TO WHAT I have to say, *yoU'LL ComPleTeLy cHaNgE yoUr MinD aNd seE hOw RIght i Am!!"*
Plaintiff has a huge morality and ethics personality flaw. He got a small promotion where now he can even finally afford an iPhone and he thinks he’s somehow even near the same level as a judge. He kept telling her she’s incorrect because he doesn’t want to face his actions. But she’s right. He thought he could outsmart eBay by circumventing them and got screwed. He called her shortsighted but what he meant is he wishes she wouldn’t look at the entire picture. What he wanted is like ordering food at the restaurant. They get the order wrong so he wants a refund. But he should still keep the food because they would throw it out anyway. Then get upset if they either want to make him the correct food and charge or he gets nothing. He’s literally like the most juvenile saying. He wanted to “have his cake and eat it too”. Probably charged his sister to buy the iPhone as an iPod. The court is to make you whole, not benefit. He’d end up with the money AND an iPod. Even if it’s a brick. The money and a brick… He was obviously banking on going “it’s stolen look! Look!” And thought he could get even pain and suffering.
This plaintiff really thought that he could come to court, and show evidence that the phone was stolen and no longer working, so he would get his money back and keep the Phone 😱😱. The defendant knew that the phone was stolen he was hoping that the phone would work and he would not be caught. Judge Milian had eaten her bowl of Wheaties for breakfast today because her verdict was on 🎯.
Wow. Regardless if she's a TV judge or not, you gotta show some respect. As far as sympathy for this guy, I have none. He tried to get the phone cheaper, so he cut EBAY out of the sale. Shady, and illegal by EBAY's standards. THEN, he tried to pay someone to unlock it, so he could use it, KNOWING it was a stolen phone. He had no problem with that. But wait, it didn't work. Two things he did were unethical, yet he wants the defendant to pay for his unethical decisions. Yeah, no. He gets his $650 back, but he loses out on the rest. Boo Hoo. What a tool. As for the defendant? Yeah, I believe him. Bad things happen to good people all the time, but still, he's responsible.
So, let me see if I got this straight; this plaintiff who purchased a "stolen" phone, turns around and sues for all his money back, but then tries to steal said phone to give to his "supposed nephew", yet still expects full refund, then dares to "call bullshit" to judge's face? What a jerkoff! I'm surprised she even gave him 24 hours and didn't just turn around and dismiss the case entirely.
I love the fact that the plaintiff didn’t even turn the phone in. That’s probably why he was so mad at the end is because he knew he didn’t even have it anymore
Up until halfway through, I was rooting for the plaint9iff to get his money back... and then his entitled attitude showed up. The guy was just as crooked as the original eBay seller of the stolen phone. Only the defendant seemed to have a shred of embarrassment over the situation. The plaintiff definitely scammed some poor sucker and sold them that useless phone. I hope the scammed party comes back with their large angry family to discuss a refund.
He thought that the judge was going to grant him $1000 without having to return the merchandise, to make an example of the other guy selling stolen property.
"What'd you say? Say it again. Say it again, mothafucka! I dare you. Say exactly what you just said." Did Tarantino write this ending?" Hilarious that this guy tries to scam the court and then gets pissy about the ruling. Luckily for him these TV judges don't have the power to hold him in contempt.... or just overt stupidity.
Why was the plantiff so upset about not getting the 100 back for trying to unlock a phone after he found out it was stolen? As as soon as he found out he should’ve just held onto the phone and sued.
@@Only1prettyblack but he’s giving it to the court so he’s guaranteed to get his money back so there’s no need for him to be so angry or feel it’s an unfair ruling
@@Only1prettyblack He's quite silly because how could you expect to keep the item and get a refund. Also why would you want a stolen phone, he probably resold it.
I was going to hate the defendant...until the plaintiff opened his mouth. They are BOTH unlikable. Makes me wonder if he was somehow in on it and this was some other side hustle. Who tries to unlock a phone they KNOW is stolen? No WAY is he being truthful.
I love the way she handled that! First he lied under oath in the court when she asked if he still had the phone and he said no because outside the court he said he gave it to his nephew, which more than likely was a lie. Then he tried to get smart and cuss in the court and say the ruling wasn't fair! My man, you don't get to go to a store and purchase an item then turn around and take the receipt back to the store and demand your money back because the item was defective without returning the actual item! People are so delusional.
BEST EPISODE EVER! The surprise twist at the end where the plaintiff thought he was going to get $650 and not have to give back the phone was epic. He was quite the petulant child.
Strange I got a multiple choice question from TH-cam to rate your comment. Gave you an excellent👍
oh my god i saw this and freaking loved it!!! i love it when someone digs a hole for themselves.
@@jasonkojro-badziak Haha. Me too!!
i was jumping and screaming i was so happy when harvey said he hadn't returned the phone. i knew he wasn't.
100% agree!!!
Plaintiff is a giant loser! So glad they told us at the end that he failed to bring the phone back. The way he was acting, he probably sold it to someone else.
For sure he sold it to another unsuspecting person.
Agree, he is an idiot because if he is willing to pay $650 for a phone, he can definitely pay $850 as well.
@@dcabral00 brand new at the store with no strings attached🤦🏾♀️. But he was putting on an act. He was a lot more aware than he pretended to be.
stupid milennial
The ending was just perfect. Why would you not bring the phone to the trial, the very phoen this trial is all about? Why would you call it unfair when you are the one that is holding onto a $1000 phone and expecting money back? What universe is this guy living in?
Because he had sold it to another suckered and couldn't get it back. That's why he was so upset when she first said to return the phone.
He was just a slimy as the defendant (I'm sure he knew it was stolen).
Great ending!!!
I love crybabies who VOLUNTARILY submit their case to the PC, then call the process b******* when they don't get the verdict they want.
He totally sold the phone to someone else. No way he gave it to his nephew. That's why he couldn't get ahold of it to return it. He had a solid reason to get his money back...if he had any integrity. If he had done the right thing and turned the stolen goods in to the authorities, he would have been made whole and all would have been well. Clearly he didn't care it was stolen when he was trying to get it activated anyway and paying $100 in hopes of using the stolen phone. No moral compass. No brain. No refund.
Yes plus at the end he came across as a REAL JERK, especially to the reporter in the hallway, looked like he wanted to punch the poor guy. I think that the plaintiff is a really bad person, he just hides it well.
And to bloat his lawsuit to $1000- the cost of getting a legitimate phone. What an absolute jerk.
Exactly! Lol
Agree ☺️ He was so shady, from start to finish... what could possibly go wrong?🤣🤣🤣🤣
i know most of us are focusing on the guy who lost but i think the defendant is also shady and probly does sell stolen items on ebay knowingly .
This was one time that she WISHED she could have held him in contempt of court. She was pissed beyond words.....🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥
Not even close. you must not watch much.
@@Mimi197-f2z OK.
@@Mimi197-f2z do you know of any right off the top of your head?...I'd like to see some more where she gets really mad 😀
@@rockobill7637 there's the episode where she rips into a husband and wife because they hid a teen in their house for six days, while there was a massive search party looking for the girl because she was assume abducted.
@@mariwhite3433 ooooh that was a good one! I've watched it a few times 🤣
I like how Kurt dismissed him at the end. Kurt was not having his bad attitude. 😂😂😂
I wish Curt had his own show. He is hilarious
hell yeah
Kurt does not play about JM
That plaintiff! What an attitude he has. Disrespectful to Judge M! He deserved the judgment against him.
He won the conditional judgement.
You just know the plaintiff had resold the phone and that's why he threw a hissy fit at the end. Two thieves through and through. No honest person tries to unlock a phone they know is stolen.
i don't think the defendant is a thief. i think the defendant bought a phone and decided to resell it. it happens ALL the TIME as evidenced by new phones that come out basically every six months to a year. people decide they don't like a phone and decide to get a new one ALL THE TIME. i honestly think the defendant was just trying to get rid of a phone he did not know was stolen.
@@sonquatsch8585 Then he would have given the guy his money back and taken the phone to the police/ reported the original seller.
@@newplayer29 its a contract breach. not a theft. that is why JM ordered the defendant to return the money upon receipt of the phone. if it was theft JM would have alerted the cops which she does when thieves come in with lawsuits.
@@sonquatsch8585 JM had no solid proof the defendant was the original thief. She undid the deal. That doesn't mean the defendant WASN'T the one who stole the phone or who had knowledge that he was selling stolen merchandise. His whole story was bogus and filled with red flags. Buying a phone for your cousin to give as a gift to their boyfriend, sus. Selling the phone instead of returning when it was the wrong color, sus. Selling the phone through PayPal to avoid eBay fees/buyer protections SUS AF. Both of these guys are dirtbag scammers.
@@newplayer29 Harvey said he never returned the phone to get his money back. Even though he said he gave the phone to his nephew to play games, I think be sold it.
The judge’s face when she’s about to confiscate the stolen phone and he doesn’t have it! “ WHAT! “ lol 😂
When she turned back around.. I got major mom vibes. IDK how many times thats happened to me. Lol
when she turned back i got major someone is about to get devoured vibes.
I thought for sure she was going to retract her judgment, but I think from a legal standpoint, she couldn't.
Okuuuuuuuurrrr!!!!!!!
Same here! I was like, uh oh- you ticked her off.
Makes sense, she has 3 daughters.
Secretly glad he didn't receive his judgement 🤣 JM was super patient with this plaintiff and his interruptions/almost insults towards her throughout the case. You can tell he is a complete jerk. He 100% sold the phone or did get it unlocked to use it himself and tried to still get his money back on top of it. 🙄 I'm glad she heard him at the end, too often she misses what they mutter under their breath at the end as she's walking away.
He didn’t mutter he wanted everyone to hear. If it was another court he would been fined or in jail for contempt.
YES!!! Finally the full case with the plaintiff who says “I think this is BS”!!
JM: “What’d you say?! Say it again! Say what you said exactly! SAY WHAT YOU SAID AGAIN.”
You go, Judge Milian!!!
Lol Douglas couldn’t catch up lol
@@justhereyeah1112 🤣😂😆
i wish that a litigant had said that on one of her cases that actually was a bad verdict but this one was a good verdict and im surprised she didnt reverse her decision after he said that .
@@marleonetti7 I think she knew that he wasn’t going to be able to produce the phone. So he wouldn’t be able to collect on the verdict. Plus she already dismissed his claim on the extra $300. So she knew that he was walking away with nothing
My SHE-RO. The Judge is 🔥🔥🔥🔥
Two shady people found each other.
👍
I absolutely love it when she has to check somebody!
It would seem that the plaintiff was UNABLE to return the phone for a refund because he probably sold it on, (he obviously did not give it to his nephew). He cheated ebay out of their commission, then tried to unlock a stolen phone and then sold it on and then expected a full refund anyway. He is a worse scammer than the defendant, who must have known it was stolen because he says he bought it and yet NEVER even opened it, before selling it on...
I really believe they're both scammers because the defendant's story didn't make any sense. But the plaintiff is a real f*cking idiot. And he's a scammer as well. The defendant, well I would bet money that he's also a scammer but so much smarter than the dumbass plaintiff. Even though it was obvious the plaintiff was an idiot; I was even surprised that he didn't bring the phone. He actually thought he was going to get his money back and get to keep the phone! SMH. I don't think his brain cells are communicating with each other, LMFO!
She popped that U Turn so fast the camera man almost missed it!
“Popped that U turn” 😅 You win the internet.
Wow! The plaintiff is a first class idiot! He seriously disrespects the judge throughout the case! She should’ve given him ONE HOUR to return the phone.
he should have given him 30 minutes. he had 24 hours and didn't get it done.
He didn’t return it after all that.
@@hutchu1 I know!!!! He really made himself look bad in this case 😂👍
FACTS!!!!
he must be a je_uwww
Not him asking a NEW YORKER and a judge at that if she was familiar with calling NYPD 🥴 Narcissists always think they know better, even when it makes them look like complete fools. The KARMA!
How do you lose a case after you win the case? Lol
😂😂right
You win the internet 😅
😂
"Snatched defeat from the jaws of victory"
I'm shocked that she didn't retract her judgement that was in his favor after his temper tantrum - Not like he would have gotten his money back anyway since he re-sold the stolen phone like a dumbass 😂
This was a great one! What a baby to think he could keep the item and get his money back! I am soooo glad the judge gave him only 24 hours.
I wouldn’t be surprised if the plaintiff later tried to bring in a $20 Fisher Price pretend smart phone to pass off as the stolen iPhone considering how dumb and “shortsighted” he thought the judge was. Smh I’m glad he didn’t end up getting his money back.
He resold that phone. The end
I agree
Wow, the plaintiff’s a tool. He really wanted to keep the phone..... well, looks like he did keep it . 😂😂😂😂 He’s a fool.
He doesn’t have the phone. That’s the problem.
@@lescobrandon9693 The legal remedy for this type of situation is to undo the sale. If his own actions (giving the phone away) prevent that, then he's out of luck.
The legal principle is called "unjust enrichment" - he can't end up with both the $650 and the phone!
And he's a thanks thief and too! He's just as guilty as the defendant!
He has a working phone. Anyone who has a useless working item will have it there and is ready to return it.
She had him shitting his pants when she said " say exactly what you said " 🤣 😂😂😂
He did repeat it...ijs
I really hope wherever the plaintiff goes for the rest of his life people recognize him from this and mock him.
I hope his employer saw this.
I loved the way the judge stopped speaking in the middle of her ruling . The confused face was funny.8:50
🤣🤣🤣
Gotta love how cold Harvey is with the claimant after he backchatted the judge 😅🤘🤘🤘
Curt was not holding back his feelings for the plaintiff either. I love him for that.
Once he knew that it was stolen, he should have never tried to get it unlocked!
PayPal offers six month protection ffs he could have got his money back by filing a claim through there, and that’s regardless of whether or not it went through eBay.
The main scammer was exposed, the guy with the mic after the hearing is awesome "you want the money and you want to keep the phone right?": "Don't you understand you have to return the object to receive the money" , "What's so hard to understand about that?" and to the other scammer "What are you doing with stolen merchandise?" -"What's the matter with you" , awesome!
7:34 “I’ve stole several things on eBay before” 😈
First of all... I love how the interviewer handled the plantif after the case. Second of all "if I knew it was stolen I wouldn't have tried to sell the phone.." wouldn't be in possession of it anyways.. Stolen phones nowadays are way too risky.. All the trackers and everything..
The plaintiff is a jerk. He should have been held in contempt of court. Imagine speaking that way in a court of law. It bothers me that he wouldn't return the phone to get his money. He's very sneaky
Since this is arbitration and not a judicial court, JM has no contempt powers sadly.
Giiiiiirrrrrlllllll…. My face when he muttered “bullshit”. 😮😳🥴🤦🏽♀️🤣
JM: So the defendant sold the phone to you directly so that you could cut out eBay's stake?
Plaintiff: No, let me correct you. The defendant told me he would cut me a deal if we went directly through personal PayPal instead of through eBay.
JM: So what you're saying is that eBay didn't get paid?
Plaintiff: Yes.
Me: SMH
Can the plaintiff get arrested for making a false lawsuit like this? Clearly, there was no stolen phone. He shouldn't get off that easy. What a tool
Arrested? For what????
right he could have reported the phone stolen himself.
@@SilverSergeant Fraud.
How the hell is this a false lawsuit! The defendant stole a phone and sold it to the plaintiff. That doesn't mean it's a false lawsuit! 🙄
@@journeysalkebulan well in the end the plaintiff never returned the phone to the court which means I believe he sold it. I think he thought he would say it was stolen and that's the end
plaintiff was a scammer, too. dude was arrogant, disrespectful and stupid. cannot believe he disrespected the court and thought he would get free money.
10:34 The look on his face was like he was trying to solve the riddle of the spinks.
What’s a spink?
Why is he mad he has to return the phone to get his money back. I think he resold it as well.
Judge M is so awesome. She knew something weird was up. 👏🏼
The reason he wanted to cut PayPal out of their cut is because he knew the phone was stolen and he would have to give the money back when they found out so the defendant is a crook and he's probably the one that stole the phone or else he would have wanted it to go through eBay. And the other guy not wanting to return the phone continued the theft by keeping it. So they're both crooks
Omg the plaintiff seemed legit in the beginning and showed his ass in the end.
Plaintiff is lucky this is arbitration, and not a real court room. That's got contempt written all over it.
Exactly - I'd have felt a little better if JM retracted her judgment at least just to piss him off even more despite him likely knowing he already scammed somebody else into buying the phone.
Judge Milian should've just changed her ruling to rule in the defendant's favor after the BLATANT DISRESPECT shown by the bratty, whiny plaintiff! Unbelievable! And btw, he can't even lie convincingly, he flinches like a small child every time he gets caught in a lie that it's beyond cringey to watch lmaooo.
At the end, when the plaintiff made that rude remark, you can see the wheels spinning in judge Milian's head on how she could overturn the Judgment she just gave him. She really wanted to undo it! Lol!
Ha ha ha. I love the Scooby Doo ending.
I just noticed, the plaintiff isn't allowing his last name to be used. He must have been pretty embarrassed about how it went.
They ask you that, before the trial. You can’t change your mind after, since someone could have used your real name during. I was on a court tv show once.
I love how ride or die everyone working in this courtroom is for JM. 🥺♥️♥️♥️
What planet are you on?! You think that you should get your money back and not return the property that you have?! 😂🤦🏻♂️
Bro I know the defendant and knew right away something was off with plaintiff
I think the plaintiff knows he bought a stolen phone. Why else would you try to unlock it after finding out it was blacklisted for being stolen?
That plaintiff was sassy lol
Wow 😮 I thought she was going to throw the verdict out for contempt
She should have
She’s not judge Mathis she’s not emotional like that.
u know what she wanted the satisfaction of proving the plaintiff was a scammer as well....
She can't find people in contempt and throw them into jail. This is binding arbitration for civil cases, this is not an "actual" court. I believe she was previously a judge, I could be wrong but I don't believe she is currently a sitting judge in any court.
Bro a sassy little diva ain't he lmao😂😂
Just when you think the case was over..
SMH.🤡🤣😂😆😁🤭
was that not the most fabulous you have ever seen JM?
@@sonquatsch8585 the most ❤️
Wow what makes this weirdo think he can keep the phone and the money judge Mathis would have not gave him anything after that comment
The defendant could've sued the original seller....IF the plaintiff ever returned it. Looks very suspicious😂
Why do people come to court so unprepared? You really think you can get the money AND the phone? Glad he didn't end up getting the money back with his attitude there at the end. 🙄
ninja he was not unprepared he purposely came without the phone!!!
There's lot of shady "cell phone repair stores" that will help you unbrick a stolen phone for a hefty fee. My assumption is that the plaintiff successfully did that, so he didn't want to return the now functional phone.
He may have assumed that the show paying the judgment means he gets to keep the phone. NOPE!
I love that the Plaintiff, wearing glasses, said the judge was being metaphorically "short sided"
SOMEONE got spoiled as a child; it's always the people who already got to speak, but insist: "If you just listen TO WHAT I have to say, *yoU'LL ComPleTeLy cHaNgE yoUr MinD aNd seE hOw RIght i Am!!"*
he knows it was stolen and the plaintiff is a rude privileged princess
My friends mother always said cheap is expensive
The plaintiff is just as dishonest as the defendant. This dude wants the money and the stolen phone.
I’m so confused!! Why didn’t he return the stolen phone to get his $650 back?!?
Plaintiff has a huge morality and ethics personality flaw. He got a small promotion where now he can even finally afford an iPhone and he thinks he’s somehow even near the same level as a judge.
He kept telling her she’s incorrect because he doesn’t want to face his actions. But she’s right. He thought he could outsmart eBay by circumventing them and got screwed.
He called her shortsighted but what he meant is he wishes she wouldn’t look at the entire picture.
What he wanted is like ordering food at the restaurant. They get the order wrong so he wants a refund. But he should still keep the food because they would throw it out anyway. Then get upset if they either want to make him the correct food and charge or he gets nothing.
He’s literally like the most juvenile saying. He wanted to “have his cake and eat it too”.
Probably charged his sister to buy the iPhone as an iPod. The court is to make you whole, not benefit. He’d end up with the money AND an iPod. Even if it’s a brick. The money and a brick…
He was obviously banking on going “it’s stolen look! Look!” And thought he could get even pain and suffering.
Classic narcissist.
he has already sold it to another sucker.
This plaintiff really thought that he could come to court, and show evidence that the phone was stolen and no longer working, so he would get his money back and keep the Phone 😱😱. The defendant knew that the phone was stolen he was hoping that the phone would work and he would not be caught. Judge Milian had eaten her bowl of Wheaties for breakfast today because her verdict was on 🎯.
Both of those two are full of it.😒
Wow. Regardless if she's a TV judge or not, you gotta show some respect. As far as sympathy for this guy, I have none. He tried to get the phone cheaper, so he cut EBAY out of the sale. Shady, and illegal by EBAY's standards. THEN, he tried to pay someone to unlock it, so he could use it, KNOWING it was a stolen phone. He had no problem with that. But wait, it didn't work. Two things he did were unethical, yet he wants the defendant to pay for his unethical decisions. Yeah, no. He gets his $650 back, but he loses out on the rest. Boo Hoo. What a tool. As for the defendant? Yeah, I believe him. Bad things happen to good people all the time, but still, he's responsible.
The defendant came in like he was coming to class lol
So the plaintiff was trying to hustle the system? Glad he absolutely NOTHING with his potty mouth!
That was awesome. Subscribed!
So, let me see if I got this straight; this plaintiff who purchased a "stolen" phone, turns around and sues for all his money back, but then tries to steal said phone to give to his "supposed nephew", yet still expects full refund, then dares to "call bullshit" to judge's face? What a jerkoff! I'm surprised she even gave him 24 hours and didn't just turn around and dismiss the case entirely.
I love the fact that the plaintiff didn’t even turn the phone in. That’s probably why he was so mad at the end is because he knew he didn’t even have it anymore
This is my new favorite episode!
Up until halfway through, I was rooting for the plaint9iff to get his money back... and then his entitled attitude showed up. The guy was just as crooked as the original eBay seller of the stolen phone. Only the defendant seemed to have a shred of embarrassment over the situation. The plaintiff definitely scammed some poor sucker and sold them that useless phone. I hope the scammed party comes back with their large angry family to discuss a refund.
Welp the defendant won’t have to pay anything lol…. Plaintiff already got rid of it🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
Plaintiff looks and acts like the entitled whiny type that drives in his Prius car alone with a mask on.
Sounds like something a person would say who has sex with their cousin in a double wide and spits chewing tobacco from her stepdaddy’s pickup
what a MAROON
Dude thought that because it was stolen he wouldn’t have to return it 💀💀
He thought that the judge was going to grant him $1000 without having to return the merchandise, to make an example of the other guy selling stolen property.
"What'd you say? Say it again. Say it again, mothafucka! I dare you. Say exactly what you just said."
Did Tarantino write this ending?" Hilarious that this guy tries to scam the court and then gets pissy about the ruling. Luckily for him these TV judges don't have the power to hold him in contempt.... or just overt stupidity.
Paypal has it's own protection policy too you know..
Not in a situation like this
The Judge teleported🤣🤣🤣
The defendant knew it was stolen, and the plaintiff wanted to keep the phone. Both seem like a match made in heaven
The plaintiff shouldn't have gotten a refund because he scammed eBay; he knew what he was doing was shady.
They, both, are scammers.
Hahaha!!! NO MONEY FOR THE PLAINTIFF!! I’m sure he didn’t return the phone 😂
Lmaooo that little man with the glasses sure is angry.
Silence is golden my man.
Why was the plantiff so upset about not getting the 100 back for trying to unlock a phone after he found out it was stolen? As as soon as he found out he should’ve just held onto the phone and sued.
He’s upset because he has to give the phone back before he can get his money back
@@Only1prettyblack but he’s giving it to the court so he’s guaranteed to get his money back so there’s no need for him to be so angry or feel it’s an unfair ruling
@@melli2413 he said he gave it to his nephew
@@Only1prettyblack He's quite silly because how could you expect to keep the item and get a refund. Also why would you want a stolen phone, he probably resold it.
I was going to hate the defendant...until the plaintiff opened his mouth. They are BOTH unlikable. Makes me wonder if he was somehow in on it and this was some other side hustle. Who tries to unlock a phone they KNOW is stolen? No WAY is he being truthful.
Yooooo she came FLYING out, I thought she was about to get physical for a second 😭😭😭
the plaintiff is the thief
I love the way she handled that! First he lied under oath in the court when she asked if he still had the phone and he said no because outside the court he said he gave it to his nephew, which more than likely was a lie. Then he tried to get smart and cuss in the court and say the ruling wasn't fair! My man, you don't get to go to a store and purchase an item then turn around and take the receipt back to the store and demand your money back because the item was defective without returning the actual item! People are so delusional.
man this case has such a great ending to it. wanted to watch it again but couldn't find it, and then it pops up as a recommended video.
It's almost like there's no conversation where to stand before the show starts.😂