FULL VIDEO AT THE END OF THE POST
The Halfway House Business
Mr. Hilgers, the plaintiff, sued Ms. Colvin, the defendant.
He claimed she owed him money for breach of lease.
He also alleged damages to a house she rented.
Ms. Colvin rented two separate properties from Mr. Hilgers.
She used these properties to operate halfway houses for women.
In the first house, Ms. Colvin housed 12 women.
The rent for this house was $800 per month.
She leased this first house in July 2015.
Ms. Colvin stated she was paid by the women directly.
She charged each woman $400 per month.
If the house was full, she would make $4,800 a month.
Ms. Colvin clarified that the house was not always full.
She estimated making around $4,000 a month when full.
Judge Judy noted this was a "neat profit" compared to the $800 rent.
Zoning Questions
Judge Judy asked if these were single-family homes.
Ms. Colvin confirmed they were.
Judge Judy then asked if the property was zoned for commercial use.
Mr. Hilgers initially answered "Yes, ma'am."
Ms. Colvin immediately interjected with "No."
Judge Judy pressed Mr. Hilgers for clarification.
She asked if he had proof it was zoned for commercial purposes.
Mr. Hilgers responded, "Correct, but—"
He then stated, "I'm licensed to have this house."
Judge Judy clarified that she wanted to know if the property was zoned for 12 tenants.
Mr. Hilgers claimed it was "already zoned because of other recovery houses or in the area."
Judge Judy dismissed this explanation, stating, "That doesn't mean anything."
The Second Property Lease
Ms. Colvin leased a second house from Mr. Hilgers in June 2016.
The rent for this second property was $750 per month.
This lease included a verbal agreement to purchase the house.
The agreement was for Ms. Colvin to buy the house for $10 after seven years.
Ms. Colvin stated she did not sign this lease-to-buy agreement.
She moved out of the first house in October 2016.
The dispute primarily concerned the second property.
Unpaid Rent and Damages
Ms. Colvin's last rent payment to Mr. Hilgers was on July 28, 2017.
She moved out of the second house completely on August 17, 2017.
Mr. Hilgers claimed she owed him for August rent.
Ms. Colvin admitted she did not pay for August.
She explained her reasoning for stopping payments.
She cited damages to the house as the cause.
Alleged Damages
Ms. Colvin described a basement flood.
She claimed the flood affected the entire basement.
She also mentioned mold that spread to the kitchen, bathroom, and walls.
Mr. Hilgers acknowledged a drainage line issue in the basement.
He stated there was a sump pump designed to handle water.
He claimed a drain line came loose from the washing machine.
Mr. Hilgers said he had repaired this issue.
Ms. Colvin disputed his account of the water damage.
She claimed the water came to the top of the stairs.
She presented a video of the flood.
She admitted the video was dark and hard to see.
However, she said you could hear the water rushing.
Electrical Issues
Ms. Colvin also reported electrical problems.
She stated there was no power upstairs.
She sent a text message to Mr. Hilgers on July 5, 2017.
The message asked him to call a landlord for an electrician.
It explicitly stated, "We have no power upstairs."
Ms. Colvin also presented a paid bill for electrical work.
The bill was dated July 8th.
Mr. Hilgers' Contradictions
Mr. Hilgers claimed he was not notified about repairs.
He stated he was unaware of the issues Ms. Colvin was addressing.
Judge Judy confronted him with the text message from July 5th.
This message directly contradicted his claim of not being notified.
Judge Judy then read another text message from Mr. Hilgers.
This message was from "this first week in July."
In his text, Mr. Hilgers stated, "I went by today and fixed the electrical."
He claimed the electrical work he fixed was in the back bedroom.
He said this was a different issue from the upstairs power outage.
Judge Judy pointed out the timing of his text.
His text claiming he fixed the electrical was sent two days after Ms. Colvin's notification.
Judge Judy's Scrutiny
Judge Judy highlighted the inconsistency in Mr. Hilgers' testimony.
She noted his initial claim about the first house being zoned for commercial use was false.
She then focused on his denial of notification regarding repairs.
The text messages proved he was notified about the electrical problem.
His own text message claimed he had fixed it.
Judge Judy found his explanations unconvincing.
She stated that he only gets to lie to her once.
The Verdict
Judge Judy dismissed Mr. Hilgers' claim.
She stated, "The case is dismissed, sir."
She also dismissed Ms. Colvin's countersuit.
Ms. Colvin had a countersuit for money spent on repairs.
Judge Judy called Ms. Colvin's countersuit "nonsense."
She explained that Ms. Colvin made money from the women living in the house.
Ms. Colvin fixed things that Mr. Hilgers was supposed to fix.
Judge Judy told Ms. Colvin she would not get her money back for the repairs.
She reiterated that Ms. Colvin made thousands of dollars from the business.
Therefore, Ms. Colvin would not receive any money from Mr. Hilgers.
Mr. Hilgers would also not receive any money from Ms. Colvin.
Judge Judy concluded the case by stating, "We're done."