Uploaded by JJMinisodes on Jul 30, 2011
Judge Judy dismisses the complaint against the defendent, Ms. McDaniel, then shortly afterwards reverses herself and awards plaintiff, Ms. Owens, $5000 in damages.
I watched this twice in trying to understand what happened that could have produced this astonishing outcome. In addition, I read over several of the comments in order to get a clue.
Before Judge Judy reverses herself, she asks the defendant, Ms. McDaniel, did she have a suit against the doctor. McDaniel said yes. The answer must have been the deciding point. The issue of how Ms. McDaniel was injured was not forthcoming from the testimony of either McDaniel or Owens, but the question about the suit against the doctor must have decided the judge that it was the doctor who caused the injuries to Ms. McDaniel. That's why McDaniel is suing the doctor, so the claim that the plaintiff attacked Ms. McDaniel was false, evidently.
The rest is easy enough to understand.
The truth is a slippery thing indeed, especially if someone is lying.
Update:
I did have a video up that illustrates the discussion above, but it was taken down. It seems that this happens a lot, so I won't be so careless in the future.
On the other hand, I don't see why it was taken down just because of copyright. Seems to me that this promotes the show and helps them sell their product. Whatever. It's their copyright and they can do what they want with it.
Al Fin: "Cowboy Commentary", aka "Eat your veggies" The Flag banner is posted in order to defy those who would make patriotic symbols illegal or disreputable.
9 comments:
I watched the case. Judge Judy asked if asked if Mcdaniels had a lawsuit against Owens in another case. Mcdaniels responded yes, and judge Judy awarded 5k to the plaintiff. The plaintiff in THAT case would have been Mcdaniels. The bailiff wrongly states to Owens that she was awarded 5k.
Jabali:
Thanks for commenting. I don't remember the case that well, even after reviewing my post. Do you have a link to it by any chance? I'd like to see it again.
Judge Judy clearly asked the defendant if she had filed a lawsuit against "Doctor ...". McDaniels said, "yes". Judge Judy immediately changed her ruling and DID award the plaintiff Owens $5,000
They just showed this case & the Judge asks McDaniel if she has a case pending against the Dentist. When Ms McDaniel said yes, THAT's when the Judge reverses her ruling awarding Ms Owens the maximum amount. That was awesome!!! The look on McDaniels face was priceless but even more so, the plaintiff was vindicated!
Jabali, you have this TOTALLY wrong!
I JUST saw this and the Judge had NO insight into the other lawsuit because it was NOT before her. She asked the defendant if she had a lawsuit against the dentist, then reversed her ruling because she figured out Angel McDaniels, the defendant in THIS case, was suing the dentist. My guess the judge surmised this was ALL part of McDaniels' plan to get money.
The judge CANNOT rule on McDaniel's lawsuit against the dentist because it was not before her.
She DID in fact award the plaintiff, Kenyatta Owens, the maximum amount of $5,000
The bailiff did on fact tell Ms. Owens that she was awarded $5,000 after Ms. Owens started complaining because she thought she had lost.
I believe she changed her ruling due to the fact that the act of macdaniels suing the doctor proves she is lying and most likely just looking for revenge on her old employer. If the story macdaniels told Judge Judy about the incident was truthful, then she would have no possible claim against the doctor what-so-ever, but if Owens is being truthful, then macdaniels case against the doctor could make sense. According to Owens, the doctor was on owens side regarding the fight and they both knew mcdaniels was the person who posted the photos and were trying to get proof to confront and fire her. Also Owens states that after the altercation, the doctor told macdaniels to leave the office, essentially firing her. McDaniels claimed she chose to quit her job and only left because she wanted to. Macdaniels also claimed the doctor was not acting against her or taking Owens side in any way. The only way macdaniels could have a case against the doctor was if owen's story is true. Judge Judy realizes this, and therefore concludes that all of macdaniels' testimony is worthless.
Brianne A - Exactly my view and, I believe, the correct one intended.
Brianne A. is close. The other lawsuit is a worker's comp claim. When you file one of those, you state that the injury you received on the job was a work related accident. If it was an accident, then she lied to Judge Judy on the show, saying it was a deliberate act done by the plaintiff. Can't have it both ways.
No she changed her ruling because if Angel was suing the dentist for a work place accident (which documents show she was) the Ms Owens pushing her is not a work place accident it's assault so it was final proof beyond reasonable doubt that she was lying about the assault.
Post a Comment