Post by doggiedaddy on May 3, 2018 13:01:21 GMT
On 5/1/18 there was an interesting case about a former waiter (yummy Tyler Stoneking) suing his former Buffalo Wild Wings coworker for defamation of character, and a host of other things. The issue stemmed from a day in October 2017, where he claimed he had permission to leave early from his manager that day, and his coworker got upset (which she admitted to, and getting the manager further involved).
JJ ruled against him, and found in favor of the plaintiff, which made me upset.
If the 21 year old defendant was upset that the plaintiff had gotten permission to leave right after his shift was over (and excused him from doing his sidework), then Judge Judy should have advised her to 'quit'. Instead, she purposely tried to make trouble for him. She's an instigator, so she's at fault. Again, all she had to do was QUIT IF SHE WASN'T HAPPY with the way her coworker was being treated more favorably than others. There are plenty of restaurants in Springfield, IL - she could find one where she'd be happier.
Instead, she complained enough about him and blew this isolated incident up where he ended up getting fired. (JJ had no problem with that.) She then felt 'scared of him' and 'threatened', so instead of quitting, she...she then wasted the court's time in getting a restraining order against him - and he, in turn, got a lawyer to bring to court. JJ was angry with him for that move - why? He has every right to choose to take a lawyer, a legal team, or go solo - what did JJ care? He wasn't using JJ's money.
When the defendant saw him with his lawyer, she felt scared - she they delayed the hearing for another month so she could get a lawyer! ANOTHER MONTH!
JJ should have called her 'a big baby' and reprimanded her for 'wasting the court's time over such nonsense'. Instead, JJ agreed to the actions she took.
NOT ONLY THAT, but JJ also listened to her testimony about what their manager 'Kevin' said, throughout the case!
Whatever happened to 'Is he here? Why not? Then you can't tell me what he said if he's not here, so I can cross-examine him. That's hear/say'.
JJ broke all the rules on this one.
JJ ruled against him, and found in favor of the plaintiff, which made me upset.
If the 21 year old defendant was upset that the plaintiff had gotten permission to leave right after his shift was over (and excused him from doing his sidework), then Judge Judy should have advised her to 'quit'. Instead, she purposely tried to make trouble for him. She's an instigator, so she's at fault. Again, all she had to do was QUIT IF SHE WASN'T HAPPY with the way her coworker was being treated more favorably than others. There are plenty of restaurants in Springfield, IL - she could find one where she'd be happier.
Instead, she complained enough about him and blew this isolated incident up where he ended up getting fired. (JJ had no problem with that.) She then felt 'scared of him' and 'threatened', so instead of quitting, she...she then wasted the court's time in getting a restraining order against him - and he, in turn, got a lawyer to bring to court. JJ was angry with him for that move - why? He has every right to choose to take a lawyer, a legal team, or go solo - what did JJ care? He wasn't using JJ's money.
When the defendant saw him with his lawyer, she felt scared - she they delayed the hearing for another month so she could get a lawyer! ANOTHER MONTH!
JJ should have called her 'a big baby' and reprimanded her for 'wasting the court's time over such nonsense'. Instead, JJ agreed to the actions she took.
NOT ONLY THAT, but JJ also listened to her testimony about what their manager 'Kevin' said, throughout the case!
Whatever happened to 'Is he here? Why not? Then you can't tell me what he said if he's not here, so I can cross-examine him. That's hear/say'.
JJ broke all the rules on this one.