He was going to be our third roommate.
He helped out with the rent,
then he helped himself to your girlfriend.
Correct.
Hey! Try not to hold each other's hands.
Let's do the coochie-coochie someplace else.
This is Judy Justice.
Kamar Jalil is suing his former roommates,
Katie Calderon and Amonte Nepomuceno,
for rent and the cost of two cats.
Court come to order. All rise.
Have a seat, everyone.
Case 2170: Jalil v. Calderon/Nepomuceno.
- Thank you. - You're welcome.
Oh, my goodness.
- Calderon. - Hello.
What's your first name?
Amonte.
Amonte? - Yeah.
Good, it's much easier than your last name to pronounce.
Mr. Jalil, this roughly is what the case is about.
You and Miss Calderon were in a relationship
for a period of time.
You decided to take an apartment. You were both on the lease.
- So far correct? - Correct.
Your arrangement with Miss Calderon,
which seems to be consistent
in both your complaint and your answer
is that you had a much better-paying job.
She was going to provide the food and some other stuff for the house,
and you were going to be covering the rent when you lived together.
- Which you did. - Correct.
There came a time when Amonte,
who was a friend of yours, came to live with you.
According to you, he was going to help out with the rent.
Correct. He came, he lived with you,
he helped out with the rent for maybe a period of time,
and then he helped himself to your girlfriend.
Correct. Now they're a couple.
When you were no longer a couple with Miss Caldeorn,
she stayed in the apartment for a period of time.
But then they both left.
Correct. And you're suing both of them
for rent and for the return of two cats
that they took when they left.
- You claim the cats are yours. - That's correct.
That's what the case is about.
And some cat expenses in the event that I let them keep the cat.
Cats. Two cats.
So when did you and Miss Calderon sign a lease together?
We signed the lease together
at the end of July with the landlord present.
July of 2022? - July of 2021.
And it was for a year. Correct.
And you had a job working for whom, sir?
I worked for a company called Stairs.
What do they do?
They provide medical equipment to hospitals all over the world.
How long have you been working for them?
I'm going to have eight years under my belt this year.
And when you moved into the apartment in July of 2021,
what kind of work was Miss Calderon doing?
At the time, she was working at an,
I want to say, an animal hotel.
It was a pet day care boarding facility. Okay.
Were you an hourly employee?
I was an hourly employee.
And I am correct that when you moved in in July,
your arrangement was that you were going to pay the rent.
That was... The arrangement.
Correct. When did Amonte
come to live with you?
About August to...
That's not correct. Shh!
Just...
Amonte was going to be our third roommate.
You mean one, two, three. Correct.
Well, you're not roommates, really. You and the defendant, Miss Calderon,
were not roommates, you shared a room.
We shared a room, and...
And Amonte was going to live where?
In another room. And what was your arrangement
with Amonte with regard to paying rent?
We would split the rent three ways.
Is that correct? - Yes.
And how much was your share of the rent?
I would say approximately 927.
How long did you live there?
I was there when they signed the lease.
I watched it all happen when they signed the lease.
I came in, they signed everything.
Well, you didn't sign the lease. - I did not.
But you were there from the beginning.
Yes. And it was your agreement,
with the plaintiff,
- that you would pay a third of the rent? - Yes.
Great.
We asked the landlord to-- Okay, so--
Hey! Try not to hold each other's hands.
Let's do the coochie-coochie someplace else.
So you agreed with the plaintiff
that despite the fact that you were not on the lease,
you were going to assume the responsibility
of a third of the rent:
- $927. - Yes.
So you moved in July, August, September,
October, November, December,
January, February, March. You left in April?
Yeah. So you were there nine months.
- Yes. - Did you pay rent for the nine months?
- Yes, ma'am. - Is that correct?
He paid rent for about seven and a half months.
Okay. And then you left?
- Yes. - Why did you leave?
I decided to leave
because he decided to go to another place he was offered.
What do you mean he decided to go to another place?
He got a place from his grandparents
in another city,
so I couldn't hold down the rent with her,
so I decided to leave to save money,
and go back to my parents' house.
Now, Mr. Jalil,
you see, you don't make up a story like that,
like he just told me.
A lot of that has the ring of truth to it.
Where are you living now?
My grandparents' house, in an in-law unit.
So, when did you tell them that you were going to a different place?
In March. When did you leave?
I left in July. Did you let him know
that you were staying until the end of the lease?
I... I what?
- I... discussed it-- - I what?
I discussed with them that I would be leaving,
but I would stick around to help them find
either a different location,
or even suggesting that we all went back to our respective families,
just to, you know, call it--
Mr. Jalil, this isn't working for you. I have to tell you something, sir.
This case is not working for you at all.
And it's only because Mr. Amonte is very direct with me
that you're suing them for $10,000.
Where does that come from in your mind?
Your agreement with her was you were going to pay the rent,
but never out of pocket.
Your agreement was you were going to pay the rent.
He paid his rent when he was there. He paid his one-third.
You then told them you were leaving.
That's a whole different story than what you wrote in your complaint, Mr. Jalil.
- Do you understand? - Correct.
It's a whole different story.
So at best, Amonte would owe you for three months' rent
if they just left.
But you told them that you were leaving.
Now, when did you find out that they were a couple?
I found out at the end of April.
- Were you all living together? - Yes.
So you just had two months left to the lease.
So he was paying you. He paid you in March.
You had May, June. You signed the lease in July.
So it was over at the end of June.
June 30th.
It had been over at the end of July, Your Honor.
Well, she doesn't owe you any money for rent.
At most, he owes you two months' rent.
Tell me why you left.
My job doesn't pay that well,
so I decided to go back to my parents' house.
When you took this apartment,
this expensive apartment that was almost $3,000 a month rent,
had you had a discussion with Amonte about moving in with you before?
Yes. Okay. Mr. Jalil,
I'm reading your complaint,
because something wasn't registering right with me.
You say you moved into the apartment together in August of 2021.
Then you go through a whole bunch of stuff about a cat.
And then another adopted cat.
You said in October, we adopted a second cat.
"Around the same time, a third roommate moved in
to shoulder some of the rent."
Well, that's not true. He moved in right at the beginning.
And that was-- That was what?
That was, uh... A mistake.
That was a mistake. Okay.
But Amonte acknowledges that he agreed right at the beginning.
He volunteered the fact that he was there at the lease signing
because it was agreed at the lease signing
that he was going to pay a third of the rent.
So, sir, you owe him rent as long as you show me
that you've paid the rent.
You moved out in July?
- Yes. - And you paid your rent through July,
or were you evicted?
No, I paid my rent in July, yes. Through July? Okay.
1,854. Amonte, you owe him $1,854.
That's for two months' rent.
Got it? I'm not subtracting anything, because you stole his girlfriend.
That's fair.
What were you requesting when you filed your small claims case?
Either the return of both cats, or $5,000.
That's not happening for you, Mr. Jalil.
And later today...
There were restrictions put on the space.
No.
- You have to pay attention, sir... - Okay.
...because what I'm suggesting is really in your favor.
Okay--okay.
Kamar Jalil claims his former roommates,
Katie Calderon and Amonte Nepomuceno
are wrongfully keeping his cats,
and owe him rent money.
Now let's deal with the issue with the cats.
She doesn't owe you any rent. That was not your agreement with her.
You moved out in July.
August, September, October, November, December.
Five months ago. She's had both cats.
Correct. She says they're her cats.
When did you first file a small claims case?
September of 2022.
What were you requesting when you filed your small claims case?
- Be careful. - I was requesting
either the return of both cats, or $5,000,
which was the accumulated expense of not just the cats,
but also the expenses of her dogs as well.
So any animal expenses.
- for the time... - Okay.
That's not happening for you, Mr. Jalil.
When the cats were either registered or went to the vet,
whose name is on the sheet as owner?
I believe it was Miss Calderon. Is that correct?
That's correct. Then she owns the cats.
And she's had them for the last five months.
I'd suggest that you go and adopt two more
if you want some more cats.
- Do you understand? - Yes.
You were living together as a couple.
However, your friend Amonte has to pay you
for the couple of months' rent that he didn't,
because he says, not you,
he volunteered that that was your agreement from the very beginning.
So he owes you $1,854.
We're finished. Thank you very much.
This court is adjourned.
I think he's just kind of butt-hurt that I moved on.
At least now I can put everything behind me
and say that I did try.
I didn't think it would escalate this far.
All you can do in a situation like this is just, you learn from it and move on.
The heart wants what the heart wants.
It's just what it is. It's life.
You know what I find fascinating, Sarah?
That people will write,
and/or be assisted in writing a complaint and an answer.
But they read it over.
This man is an intelligent man.
He has a serious job for eight years.
First of all, he was suing for $10,000.
Come up with that money?
Five thousand dollars for the cats' expenses.
Ridiculous. But his complaint
had really nothing--
Even the timeline...
As your clerk, I know that is a pet peeve of yours when--
I don't understand. You know, if you're going to tell a lie...
- At least tell a consistent lie. - Right.
I think the right thing happened.
I think the defendant friend admitted himself
that he owed rent, and that was great,
even though he probably should have just...
Zipped it and not said, "I was there when the lease was signed."
"This was always our agreement, that I was gonna be the third..."
Yeah, but he was honest, which we always appreciate.
And so I think the right thing happened.
I think he needs to, like you say, put a period, move on.
Anyway, all happy. And they look happy.
They couldn't keep their hands off each other.
Case number 2172: Foster/Garner v. Manziel.
All parties please come forward.
Jamar Foster and Shawn Garner
are suing record producer Lvyn Manziel
for event costs after Lvyn canceled their Halloween party.
Who's Mr. Garner?
- Mr. Foster? - Right here.
Are you going to be speaking? You're standing in the speaking spot.
Yes, ma'am. Okay, great.
According to what I read,
the defendant rents a music studio, is that correct?
I rent a facility in which I own a music studio.
You rent in someone else's building.
Yes. And you're recording people.
During the course of your business,
you decided to enter into an agreement with the defendant
to use that recording studio,
which she rents from that space which she rents from a landlord.
May I correct you, Your Honor? - Yes.
She actually... it's a facility that has multiple units in it.
She runs a studio,
and then there's other event space inside of that same facility.
Okay, give me an idea of how large the space is.
I believe we were quoted something like 5,800 square feet.
And so you have a music studio,
and around it is other open space.
Yes.
You decided to go into some sort of a business with her.
- You wanted to run events. - Yes, ma'am.
Social events. Nothing to do with the music studio.
Absolutely not. Is that correct?
- Yes. - And according to you,
you gave her $6,000.
Yes, ma'am. Sort of front money
to start using that space.
- Yes, ma'am. - Subsequent to giving her the money,
according to you, there were restrictions put on the space
on the number of people you could have,
the kind of parties you could have, et cetera.
No, absolutely... I apologize.
Well, you have to pay attention, sir... Okay.
...because what I'm suggesting is really in your favor.
Oh, okay.
So it's really in your favor, so you have to think.
Okay.
Subsequent to giving her-- that means after giving her the money,
restrictions were put on the kinds of events
and the number of people you could have in this space.
- Is that true or not true? - That is absolutely true.
No, that's not-- I'll get to you in a second.
- Okay. - And you want your $6,000 back.
Yes, ma'am, and-- - That's what it's about.
The defendant does not deny that you gave her $6,000.
And then I'm going to hear what her defense is.
So I want you to tell me
when, for the first time, did you have a discussion
with the defendant about going into this business venture
where you would front the money
and whatever events you would have there,
you would reap the benefit, the financial benefit, from that.
When did you have that discussion with her?
Okay, so we met Lvyn at the end of August of 2022.
We actually signed an agreement pretty fast.
We signed the contract agreement on September 1st.
- May I see the agreement? - Yes, ma'am.
There is no agreement signed, so I don't know how it could be signed.
She keeps arguing that-- Just a second.
- Could you be quiet? - Yes, ma'am.
So in your hand-- - Shh!
What's-- That's the studio that she runs.
Sarah, you have to sort of explain it, because I don't see signatures.
You know, I'm used to looking at contracts where people sign things.
But I know you can sign things by DocuSign now.
Your signature isn't on here.
Yes, ma'am. That looks like a signature
from a DocuSign, or some sort of online...
Okay. Is that you?
This was a proposal that I did, I did not even own yet as a DBA.
Just a second.
It's getting better. Don't say anything.
This is your proposal. Now I'm going to read it.
Okay. You're Masterpiece Management?
Yes, ma'am.
Okay, well, this is sort of easy.
You prepared this proposal.
- Speak. - Yes, after--
Just a second. You prepared this proposal.
- Yes, ma'am. - And as a result of this proposal,
you received and deposited $6,000.
- Yes. - Well, then you have a binding contract.
Okay? So that's what I'm telling you. You have a binding contract.
And there is nothing in this contract that limits the kinds of events
or the number of people,
or anything else with regard to this space.
All it says is, "Business activities, event planning, and event rentals."
Nothing else. And this is your proposal,
so the terms of it are construed if there's any material question,
since you prepared the agreement,
which became a contract once you accepted their $6,000.
I view the terms of the agreement most harshly against you,
because you prepared the document.
And it says, "This agreement cannot be amended
without the written consent of all parties."
Yes. Yes.
So, signed the agreement, you got the money,
and then at some point, according to them and according to you,
you made certain limitations on the kinds of events,
the numbers of people, et cetera.
That is-- Now, that happened
according to you, because you do not own that space.
You rent that space.
And there was a problem with the first party that they threw.
- Correct. - We're not talking Gone with the Wind.
We're not talking about a six-volume masterpiece.
We're talking about a yes or a no.
Based upon this proposal, they gave you $6,000,
which you deposited into your bank account.
That means a contract was created. Bup! That's the agreement.
I'm telling you, that's the law.
Jamar Foster and Shawn Garner
claim record producer Lvyn Manziel
broke their agreement by canceling their event.
Lvyn is countersuing for the cost of a recording session.
Okay, there was a party that got out of hand.
Yes, ma'am. Okay.
And after that party that got out of hand, too many people or whatever it was,
your landlord complained.
Yes. Okay.
And it was after that
that you told your two partners that the--
We are not partners.
Yeah, according to this, you are.
We didn't finalize the agreement.
This is a finalized agreement, madam.
I just said to you-- I want you to pay attention.
This is your proposal.
Based upon this proposal, they gave you $6,000,
which you deposited into your bank account.
That means a contract was created.
Bup! That's the agreement. I'm telling you, that's the law.
Okay. You prepared the proposal.
You signed it. They said, "Okay."
And they fulfilled their part of the agreement
by giving you $6,000, which you accepted.
Got it? Got it?
And you can't,
according to the agreement that you prepared,
modify this agreement any other way
than a written contract signed by both parties.
You can't change the rules.
Did you know that this was rented space?
No, we didn't have all of the details about the place.
Well, see, next time you should know what you're dealing with.
Whether she's the owner or whether she's not the owner.
Whether she's a renter, whether she has the ability
to rent out, to sublease, for events.
I mean, all these things before you give somebody $6,000.
You should know that. Okay.
And you had one event at this space?
No, we actually didn't get an opportunity to throw any events at the space at all.
The event that you were speaking of,
she had partnered with another group of promoters, individuals,
to throw that party, so we--
So you didn't have anything to do with that.
What was it, a Halloween party or something?
It was a Halloween party.
- But that wasn't with you? - No, that wasn't.
Is that correct?
He was part of the event-- - Is that correct?
No. That it was with other people.
Yes, correct, it was with other people. They were just associated with the event.
They worked at the event--
I don't care whether they worked at the event.
You received money from other people for an event.
Yes, ma'am. Well, then let's be clear.
And after that event, you imposed additional restrictions
on the use of the space.
No, Your Honor. Just-- hold on a second.
They knew about the--
Hold on, you can't tell me what they knew.
- This is your contract. - They called a fire marshal.
"My landlord contacted me that the neighbors were complaining."
"People were parking on their lawns 90 minutes into the party."
But it was not their party. Somebody else paid you for it.
"The next party they wanted to throw involved minors,
and I told them absolutely not."
Yes, ma'am.
"I just made it clear what types of events would be approved."
Well, you can't do that. I'm just telling you, you can't do that.
I'm not allowed to throw events that have drugs for children.
You have to understand something.
You can do whatever you want, as long as you put it in a contract.
You prepared the contract.
This contract is silent
as to any restrictions on the space for events.
So you have to give them their $6,000 back
because they didn't have an event.
They got nothing of value for their $6,000.
they were managing an artist
whenever I met them, that they were responsible for paying.
So I'm countersuing them for $1,050. Just a second.
- Okay. Okay. - Six thousand dollars they get back.
Easy? That's a contract case.
Now, you have a counterclaim,
and your counterclaim is for $1,000
because you say they owe you that
for a rental that they did for an artist that they manage.
I provided my services as a recording artist and a music producer
for their artist.
I provided them with two exclusive beats.
Well, show me the contract with them.
I have-- Just show me the contract.
There is no contract.
Judgment for the plaintiff in the amount of $6,000.
Counterclaim's dismissed. We're done.
This court is adjourned.
I was just trying to have a proposal, not a finalized agreement.
Well, I appreciate us getting some type of justice out of the situation.
They come in wanting to do multiple things.
I was excited for my small business.
We tried as much as we could to help out
and make sure that we increased the revenue streams
inside of that business.
They're actually going to be hosting hookahs
with children at your event, in your space.
I'm not comfortable with that.
To ever associate us with any type of drug use
or abuse, especially involving children, that was just an inaccurate claim.
I think it's better just to part ways.
Move on to bigger and better things.
I was going to tell you, I had the invitation, per se,
for the event for Halloween that they had put together.
So they put a lot of time and effort into planning the party.
It seemed very legitimate. There was notes about security.
There was notes about no alcohol, food and drink will be provided.
So I could tell that they had put in a lot of effort
to hosting this event.
And although it wasn't a malicious breach on the defendant's part,
I understand she hosted a party that had nothing to do with the plaintiffs.
She got into a little bit of hot water,
so to be cautious she was letting them know,
"Hey, I can't host these types of events with a lot of people.
It makes the street too crowded..." Whatever the reason.
However, I disagree with you, because I would have given them
the full 10,000 that they were asking,
because although not a malicious breach, and I understand her concern
after having the incident with the previous party,
but that's not their fault.
You believe that the difference between the cost of one venue to another
should be ascribed to them.
It's interesting, but the $6,000 was to cover a lot of events.
- This is one event. - I see your point now,
that you put it that way.
I just think if you were going to make them whole,
they should receive their expectant damages as well,
or whatever they relied on based on the contract.
- I accept your opinion and perspective. - Sure.
Want justice?
Go to JudyJustice.tv.