- He was gonna make it car show ready? - Correct.
You said it was gonna take a year.
- Give or take, yeah. - [chuckles] No.
Everything was gonna have to custom-made, you know?
[Sarah] He says it's gonna take me a few months.
He would've never been done even in three months or six months.
- Is that true? - Yes.
No. Yes.
Yeah, no, yes, no, yes.
[announcer] Now on Tribunal Justice.
["Ride of the Valkyries" plays]
[announcer] Today's case was filed in Sparks, Nevada.
Your Honor, this is case number 2085 Reynosa versus Garcia.
All parties have been sworn in.
Thank you, Cassandra.
You're welcome. You guys may be seated.
Okay. Ms. Reynosa,
you and the defendant were basically motorcycle buddies
and apparently, you are also a classic car enthusiast.
Yes.
[Judge DiMango] You had a 1952 DeSoto
and he was gonna make it car show ready.
He gave you a timeframe within three to six months.
He asked for $5,000.
You say not only didn't he accomplish any of that,
but the little work that he did do had to be redone.
You had to pay someone else.
You want your $5,000 back from him.
Mr. Garcia, what you say is that you never said it was gonna be finished
in three to six months and for $5,000
because that's on an unrealistic timeline and cost.
So you say she pulled out too soon.
You could've finished it, but you didn't.
And you don't owe her anything
- because of that. - That's correct.
So let's just take a look at what the car, uh, looked like.
- That's your 1952 DeSoto. - Yes.
- [Judge DiMango] And what color is that? - Pink.
- [Judge DiMango] It's pink. - Yes.
[Judge DiMango] Did the car come in pink or you had it painted?
[Sarah] I had it painted.
[Judge DiMango] Was this what the car looked like when you first gave it to him?
- Did it look like this? - [Sarah] Yes.
This car, apparently, in 1952
sold for $2,572.
What did you pay for it when you bought it?
I think I paid 1,500.
- [Judge DiMango] 1,500? - Uh-hmm.
And by the way, what made you a car enthusiast?
Uh, my son as a sophomore was taking shop in high school
and I thought it would be a good bonding experience
for us to try it out.
And is it complicated to learn?
I mean, did you learn the workings of a vehicle?
- No. - [Judge DiMango] No. Okay.
- So you didn't think that much from it. - No, I'm still learning.
[Judge DiMango] But you did wanna enter this vehicle
in a Hot August Night show, right?
Is that what the car show kind of looks like?
- [Sarah] Yes. - Have you ever been
to the show yourself, sir?
Yeah, I enter it every year.
And what kind of car do you put in?
[Manuel] '36 Plymouth.
- A '36 Plymouth? - [Manuel] Uh-hmm.
[Judge DiMango] That's really old.
And so, you purchased this car for $1,500.
You wanna bond with your son,
but he apparently doesn't really wanna bond with you.
So he kind of leaves you midway in this.
What do you do to the vehicle before you and Mr. Garcia get together?
[Sarah] Um, all of the electrical of the vehicle,
um, the clutch was put in.
The brakes were changed from drum to disc as well before he got it.
[Judge DiMango] Right. But what did you specifically want him to do?
[Sarah] Um, before I gave him any money,
he picked it up July 7th, I think,
- and I was hesitant to pay him. - [Judge DiMango] That's okay.
I didn't pay him till the 10th.
But before I paid him, I said, "Wait, what does the 5,000 include?
I don't want any misunderstandings and I don't wanna assume."
He said, "All the wiring, engine work, dash work, and anything else,"
was his exact response.
[Judge DiMango] So it was your position then
that this vehicle was going to be finished top to bottom...
- Uh-hmm. - [Judge DiMango] ... show ready
- for just $5,000? - Correct.
[Judge DiMango] So when I read you the text from July 6th,
he says, "When I was looking up the numbers a little,
you think you can do 5,000 up front for parts and labor.
That should get a lot of it done."
He never tells you that this, in fact, was going to be completely finished
for $5,000.
- [Sarah] Uh-huh. - In fact, he tells you
that the carpet alone is gonna cost you close to $4,000.
Would that be correct?
He didn't tell me that until days
- before I picked it up. - So you said you wanted my--
your money back. You thought it was gonna be done
- for 5,000. - [Sarah] Yes.
And indeed you did bring this vehicle to someone else to look at, correct?
- Yes, and work. - [Judge DiMango] And that person,
I saw the bill-- he charged you 3,000 for the carpet.
In fact, the estimate you got from the person who was going to fix it
was for almost $10,000.
It was 9,000 and change
to do the same work that he was going to do.
- Yes. - So in truth,
he charged you half, you took half up front.
And so I'm not so sure that you had a realistic expectation, of course.
Now, you say she did not have a realistic expectation,
of course, or timeline.
Didn't you give her a timeline of three to six months?
No. I told her it would be ready for Hot August next year.
And that would've been 11 months later, correct?
- [Manuel] Roughly, yeah. - And she wanted
to get it in some competition in May possibly,
- was that correct as well? - Um, I didn't know about that
until about, uh, two weeks, three weeks before.
[Judge DiMango] Because I'm gonna tell you,
we do have an expert here who I'm going to call upon at this time,
who may help us resolve some of these, uh, issues
that are due to what we would call in the law--
you don't have a meeting of the minds on certain issues.
And so let's put our witness up.
I think he's available to us on Chime.
Please state your name for the record, sir.
[Marty] Marty Ruth.
[Judge DiMango] So, Mr. Ruth, you're here as a court-appointed expert, basically.
So you don't have any real allegiance to either side.
So I'd like to ask, what makes you think you're an expert on classic cars.
Uh, I was in the collision and restoration business
for over 30 years.
And then I retired,
and then I started, uh, a classic car appraisal company.
I'm also the president
of the National Auto Appraisers Association.
[Judge DiMango] So then, Mr. Ruth,
have you had an opportunity to review any documents
regarding this 1952 DeSoto?
- I was sent the, uh, file to review. - [Judge DiMango] And?
$5,000 would not have gotten that car,
from--the photos that I saw before and after,
would not have gotten that car to show quality.
The carpet alone, uh, would run probably about $3,000.
What about, um--I did see somewhere some--
I wanna just get a copy of the bill that was submitted.
Okay. Uh, what about an exhaust and headers?
Yeah, the exhaust and headers,
you're looking at about $1,700 for show quality exhaust.
Okay. And what about full engine wiring?
[Marty] On that car, there's-- I mean, it's not a complex system.
So you're--we're looking at about $1,800.
[Judge DiMango] Okay.
And how about door panels and interior on the vehicle?
[Marty] From what I see there with the condition with the headliner,
um, and the door trim panels,
you're looking at about $5,000
- for those items. - [Judge DiMango] Oh, my goodness.
- So just in parts alone? - [Marty] Yeah.
So in looking at the vehicle, as you saw it,
what would be the overall cost to put that car in show quality?
I would say you're looking between $12,000 and $15,000.
[Judge DiMango] So for my purposes right now,
I think you've given me the information that I need.
- Thank you. - [Sarah] Might I just add?
[Judge DiMango] You can add. You...
That Manny had told me a lot of this stuff I already have in my garage.
He did it at home in his garage, not in the shop.
A lot of those prices are including labor at hundreds of dollars an hour.
Well, I asked specifically on some things.
The carpet, just the carpet alone was 3,000.
But you did say he said three to six months.
And when you pulled the car back from him, it was only four months later.
You know, this is like a contractual agreement.
And when I look at the timeline here,
it looks to me as though you pulled out before.
So you were the one who breached this contract.
But also you were willing to give her back, what?
- $2,500, Mr. Garcia? I think. - Yeah.
Why would you agree to do that, sir?
Because I didn't get as much done as I wanted to.
One of the biggest issues we were running into
was there was wrong parts.
There was a fuse box that's made for racing cars.
It didn't have any of the flashers, any of the hazards, the blinkers,
so everything was gonna have to be a custom-made, you know?
Okay. Thank you. Judge Levy.
So did you breach the contract?
Uh, I don't think I did,
because he would've never been done even in three months or six months.
[Judge Levy] So in your complaint,
what you say is that he started the project
- in July of 2023, right? - [Sarah] Yes.
- Picked the car up July 7th. - Yes.
And at first, you wanted to put it in this, uh, Hot August Nights car show
- for August 2023? - Yes.
And then that would've been, at most, 60 days, two months.
Two months. He said he was gonna try
but he was looking like more towards three months.
[Judge Levy] Okay. But you have absolutely no evidence whatsoever
to prove that statement that you just made to me, right?
- No, it was verbal. - [Judge Levy] Right.
So what you're saying is that he breached the oral contract.
- Uh-hmm. - [Judge Levy] Right?
In order for there to be a contract at all,
there's got to be a meeting of the minds.
And that means that you have to agree on what's to be done.
You got to agree on how much it's gonna cost.
And because timing was important to you,
- you got to agree on timing, right? - Yes.
[Judge Levy] Prove to me that there was a contract.
- Do you have it? - [Sarah] Just the texts.
So I read those texts.
You say that he took the car in July 2023, July 7th.
You wanted it in the car show for August 2023.
But you agreed, after speaking with him on July 7th,
when he looked at the totality of work that had to be done,
that that August Nights car show was gonna be August of 2024.
Well, he didn't say he'd have it done by then.
He said months, a matter of months.
Show me where he says that.
[Sarah] Um...
[Judge Levy] And I'll take judicial notice of the fact
that it's not in there, what you claim.
He never said it was gonna take a few months.
It's not once in there,
because if it was there, you would've given it to us.
[announcer] Coming up on Tribunal Justice.
Why did you give her such a good deal?
I know that you guys were friends before.
I mean, were there some romantic shenanigans?
[dramatic musical sting]
[theme music plays]
[announcer] Sarah Reynosa is suing biker buddy Manuel Garcia
for a $5,000 refund
on car renovations she claims he never completed.
But Manuel says Sarah didn't give him enough time or money
to finish the job.
Now, the defendant claims,
if I hear your testimony correctly, Mr. Garcia,
is that you said it was gonna take a year.
Give or take, yeah.
Do you have any proof that what he just said is inaccurate?
Neither one of us ever said a year.
-[Judge Levy] Is that true, Mr. Garcia? - [Manuel] Just...
[Judge Levy] Do you remember ever sending her a text
on or about November 29th and again on November 30th,
in which you told her that you took the car too early,
I told you it would be a year?
- [Manuel] No. Yes. - [Judge Levy] No?
No. Yes.
- No, yes, no, yes. - No, I mean, no, I do remember.
[Judge Levy] Ms. Reynosa, November 29th, November 30th,
you were telling him that the mechanic that you were taking it to
said he did everything wrong,
and it was gonna cost more like $9,800.
Now the defendant, he said it was gonna take at least a year.
He said, and again, "You picked it up six months early."
That's what he told you.
And when you picked it up six months early, that's November.
Six months thereafter, would've put him at his timeframe, right?
- Right. - And you know what you did not say
in response to that text?
"What are you talking about?
You said you were gonna get it to me in a few months."
Do you see the problem that you have with that?
With timeframe, yes.
[Judge Levy] And that goes back to breach.
He breached by asking for more money.
Okay. Well, that may very well be.
What do you have to say about that, Mr. Garcia?
I said, "If we got to the upholstery, it may need more.
I will pay with what's left."
[Judge Levy] How much was the carpeting gonna cost you to put in the car?
Uh, my, uh, quote was right at 4,000.
[Judge Levy] 4,000.
So when you were there on July 7th, you knew
- that car needed carpeting, right? - Oh, yeah.
And you also recall text messages with the plaintiff on July 7th,
in which you told her,
"Do you think you can do 5,000 upfront for parts and labor?"
Her response was, "Wait,
- what does that $5,000 include?" - [Manuel] Uh-hmm.
Now we're talking about putting the pieces together
to show an oral contract.
You say, "All the wiring, engine work, dash work,
and anything else inside and out,
- upholstery as well." - [Manuel] Yup.
Putting aside the fact that she wanted it earlier,
you guys have a conversation in around November,
in which you say to her, "You took it early.
And by the way, you got to also come up with an extra $4,000 for carpeting."
Do you see the problem with that?
You changed the terms in November,
- that's what happened. - Yes.
Listen, you did a heck of a lot of work on that car, though, didn't you?
Yeah, it was about 40 hours, 50 hours of labor,
and about 40 to 50 hours looking for parts.
And my son and my father would help.
[Judge Levy] Hold on. On November 29th,
this is your text messages, sir, that you gave to us.
You told her November 29th,
- "I spent 60 hours." True? - Yes.
Thank you. Can we get the expert back up here, Mr. Ruth?
Sir, Mr. Ruth, I did a really quick Google search yesterday
and I'm gonna take it for what it's worth.
They said that the hourly rate in Nevada where you guys live
for the restoration of classic car
could be anywhere between $22 and $40 an hour, right?
We're talking about a guy that's working on his own, in his garage, and got cash.
So I can tell you exactly, a body technician are paid
about $22 to $25 an hour.
[Judge Levy] That's what I thought. Thank you. That's it.
Judge Acker?
Thank you, Judge Levy.
You, at one point, sir, said, "I'm gonna give you $2,500 back."
And when Judge DiMango said, "Why did you do that?"
"I didn't get everything done."
And I'm glad that you said that
because when there was an initial dispute
over what the price was,
you in fact did say to her,
"I wanna get it all done for $5,000, upholstery as well.
When I'm done, the car will be complete and ready for shows."
- You said that. - [Manuel] Uh-hmm.
[Judge Acker] Which is why you were willing to refund her half the money.
And we heard from the expert
the real cost of doing this work could've been at least
- twice that amount. - [Manuel] Uh-hmm.
[Judge Acker] Why did you give her such a good deal?
I know that you guys were friends before, I mean,
- were there some romantic shenanigans? - [Manuel] No.
- [Judge Acker] Just... - It was, uh...
[Judge Acker] Why did you give her such a good deal?
[Manuel] Because of all the work that she had done already
that wasn't done right.
[Judge Acker] That's interesting, that response.
Because my question for you, Ms. Reynosa,
was when the mechanic to whom you took the vehicle
after it was with Mr. Garcia, told you, "Oh, he did everything wrong
and, like, it's an undrivable car."
How do you know if he did anything wrong or if it was the person before
when the car was brought to him in an undrivable condition?
Because in his text messages, he told me he fixed the gas tank.
He told me he fixed the clutch.
He said--in the messages that you have,
he says, "Sarah, the clutch was upside down,
and I put it right side up so that it is now drivable."
When I took it to the mechanic, he goes, "Why is it upside down?"
I go, "What do you mean?"
He says, "Yeah, I flipped it back and it is now drivable."
- Did you put the clutch in upside down? -[Manuel] I never even touched the clutch.
[Judge Acker] Mr. Garcia, what do you do for a living?
I work at GNC.
- [Judge Acker] In retail? - [Manuel] Yeah.
But, uh, I used to work for Ford.
I also worked for Firestone for many years.
I had to stop.
[Judge Acker] Uh, why did you have to stop?
Um, I got a lot of back issues.
[Judge Acker] So, Ms. Reynosa, in order for me
to rule in your favor on a $5,000 claim,
you'd have to prove to me that one, he did nothing,
or two, that the work he did was so substandard
that you should get all of your money back,
and I don't have anything from which to draw that conclusion.
I know you've submitted a bill from another mechanic.
That tells me nothing.
He's not here, I don't know what he did.
And what's working against you is that when he received the car
in his possession, it was not drivable.
I didn't know what was done right or wrong either,
but when I took it to the new mechanic,
he took pictures and told me what was wrong.
The problem with your case is that as I sit here,
I don't have independent objective evidence
that allows me to determine what was done properly
and what was done improperly.
But what I do know is that I'm not inclined at this point to say
that he did nothing because you haven't proven that he did nothing.
But I would like Mr. Ruth back, please.
Mr. Ruth, a big part of the work that the defendant says
he did here was research.
He said that he spent 40 to 50 hours on research.
Can you just describe for us how hard or how easy it is
to find parts for these vehicles?
Yes. Most definitely. So on classic cars,
uh, especially if it's not as popular like a Chevy Corvette
or Camaro, um, it is hard to locate parts.
And you do have to have them custom-made,
so you can spend hours
trying to locate a part for the car,
so it is, uh, time-consuming and laborious.
[Judge Acker] So in your view, does it make sense that somebody
might spend about 40 to 50 hours simply researching parts for this car?
Absolutely.
[Judge Acker] Thank you, sir. That's very helpful.
Also, I didn't request DeSoto parts or DeSoto research.
He could've used any vehicle part that's available.
[Judge Acker] I don't know if that's true, and I don't know if that's consistent
with your plans to enter the car
- in a classic car show. - Well...
And frankly, I'm just gonna tell you something.
Everything that you're telling me, he said, "Oh, so we could use this,
we could use that."
All of that goes to show that you got a really great deal,
because that expert said that you should've spent
at least twice this amount.
So all you've demonstrated to me right now is that he was trying to help you out.
- But I'll discuss with my colleagues. - [Judge DiMango] Thank you.
I'd like to ask you, Ms. Garcia, to please step up
since you're here, looking very attentive.
You are the defendant's wife,
- is that correct? - I am.
[announcer] Coming up on Tribunal Justice.
Right now if I said to you, do you wanna give her back 2,500, what would you say?
[dramatic musical sting]
[theme music plays]
[announcer] Sarah Reynosa is suing biker buddy, Manuel Garcia,
for a $5,000 refund on car renovations
she claims he never completed.
But Manuel says Sarah didn't give him enough time or money
to finish the job.
I'd like to ask you, Ms. Garcia, to please step up since you're here.
Looking very attentive.
You are the defendant's wife,
- is that correct? - I am.
And you were all friends at one time,
you and Ms. Reynosa and your husband, everybody was friends, is that correct?
- I still consider her as a friend. - [Judge Acker] By the way,
I'm sorry I asked if they were involved.
- That's why I brought her up here. - I'm very...
- [laughs] - It's okay.
And that's why I brought her up. I saw her face.
And you do have something to add to this, and that is that you were a witness
to the extensive time you say that your husband put in.
- Yes. - And when did he do that?
- Um, a lot of the evenings... - [Judge DiMango] Uh-hmm.
... sometimes really early mornings
- because he is an early riser... - [Judge DiMango] Uh-huh.
... and then on weekends, as he could.
[Judge DiMango] And so would you say his estimate that he put in 50 hours,
60 hours would be realistic here?
- [Latonia] Absolutely. - All right.
I would say he did at least 15 to 20 hours a week
as he was also still working full-time.
[Judge DiMango] Thank you, Ms. Garcia. I appreciate your testimony.
You can be seated.
Right now if I said to you, do you wanna give her back 2,500, what would you say?
- I don't know. - [Judge DiMango] Okay. Thank you.
Then we're gonna retire to deliberate.
Court is now in recess. Parties will be recalled.
[dramatic musical sting]
[Judge DiMango] A 72-year-old car.
This guy spent all this time working on it.
Even if we cut what he did in half, he put a lot of work into it,
a lot of research into it.
The expert was pretty clear about the value of the work that was done.
They had an agreement.
It wasn't the tightest of all the agreements we've seen here,
but I think that for the $5,000,
he did a lot of work, put a lot of time in.
Not everything you do work-wise can be visible sometimes.
But she did breach the contract.
She was the one that pulled it back within six months.
The new mechanic that she hired actually showed her
he was giving her a deal,
and I read the two sentences together,
5,000 upfront and when I'm done with the vehicle, it'll be show-ready.
And he didn't have the opportunity to do that.
I would dismiss her complaint.
[Judge Levy] I agree with you as far as the breach goes. She breached.
Having said that, under the legal theory of quantum meruit,
he did work on it, there's no issue that he did work on it.
He said 60 hours, and the question to the expert was what's the hourly rate?
He said $22 and $25 an hour.
You take $25 an hour times 60 hours is $1,500.
That's the quantum meruit amount that he should otherwise be entitled to.
And the rest of it, I believe, has to be returned.
I think that he is her best evidence for precisely that reason.
He gave her a number of hours that he said he worked.
He said in court today that he knows he didn't do everything
that she paid him for, so I would join that.
I would return--uh, so what's that? Thirty-five?
- Uh... - But what's...
- I would... - But wait, I have another question.
- Yeah. - [Judge DiMango] Because we don't know
everything that he did, everybody's estimating how many hours.
Don't forget he had his son. He's got a father.
I don't think they were just all in there doing nothing.
How about this? Can we agree on giving her 2,500...
- [Judge Acker] Well, he... - ... which is what he would've done...
- [Judge Acker] That's what he... - ... in the first place.
[Judge Acker] And that's really what he valued this work at...
[Judge DiMango] I agree with you.
is the--I think that's really how you value it.
[Judge DiMango] I think that that's the way to do it,
- and I would give her back the 2,500. - [Judge Levy] I agree.
So he said he spent 60 hours doing that work.
It clearly did not include
- the work of the other two. - Yes.
[Judge Levy] Presumably, they're entitled to get paid for their time as well.
That's where he came up with that $2,500 figure,
I'd be all on board with that figure.
[Judge DiMango] And do you know why that makes sense, too?
If he's getting 1,500, they're getting the thousand,
that's 2,500, and I think it works out.
[Judge Acker] I think that's incredibly fair.
I'll just throw this out.
You know, she had the chance to take the $2,500.
You know, there's a rule in some jurisdictions
that if you don't take a settlement offer and then you get less than the amount,
you lose the benefit of that.
I don't know that I wanna hold her to it, but I think it's something to consider.
[Judge DiMango] I like that argument because I'm thinking,
"He would've paid you back. Why didn't you just take the 2,500,
take what he did on the car, and walk away?"
- Instead, his wife... - Um, and instead...
- ... has to come to court... - That's right.
... and hear me ask whether or not they were having an affair.
I had to look in my notes to say, "Isn't she his wife?
- I don't think Tanya realizes that." - Yeah. Yeah.
- [Judge DiMango] So what... - [Judge Levy] I...
[Judge DiMango] ... do we wanna do here?
I think $2,500 is fair and I also think it's consistent with the evidence.
[Judge DiMango] I think it's more than fair.
Let's stick with 2,500.
I'll stick with 2,500.
We're all so kind.
[dramatic musical sting]
[Cassandra] Court is back in session.
All parties are reminded that you're still under oath.
[Judge DiMango] Thank you, Cassandra.
You know, Ms. Reynosa, Mr. Garcia really is your friend
because he kinda gave himself up here with one question.
And that was when I asked you, sir, about the $2,500
that you offered to repay her during the course of this.
I mean, that was pretty honest. I think at that point,
you might've been a little greedy because you knew he wanted to help you.
He wanted to fix it. He gained nothing.
He was busy. He has a job, he has a son,
he's got a father, he's got a wife, you know.
I mean, life gets in the way of a lot of good deeds that people mean to do.
But that being said, everybody agreed that this value
would've been at least a $10,000 job.
So what we did, sir, with the expert and Judge Levy, research,
and we came up with the fact-- and we give you high amount on it,
$25 an hour.
When we put that $25 an hour to the 60 hours that you say
that you did work, that was 1,500.
But we did give you also including that the work that would've probably
had to pay your son and your father.
So, because of that, ma'am, we are gonna award you $2,500.
Uh, you were unrealistic in your expectations
both time-wise and work-wise as to what this really would've cost.
And I think in the end, what did you end up paying?
- The 9,000. - [Judge DiMango] Yeah.
You paid the higher number.
But you got what you wanted.
Anyway, you're gonna get back $2,500.
The verdict is unanimous, it's in your favor for $2,500.
- [gavel bangs] - Okay.
[Cassandra] This case is closed. All parties are excused.
[theme music plays]
I did feel like she should've gotten something back,
so I'm okay with it.
It was frustrating and sad.
There's a few things said that, uh, I don't--I couldn't go with too much.
I have no hard feelings at all.
She--I don't know.
That one's gonna be harder to get over.
Ready for Hot August Nights.
I hope I don't see her. [laughs]
[announcer] Did someone break an agreement?
Let Tribunal Justice decide your case.
Find us on social media.
["Ride of the Valkyries" plays]