FULL VIDEO AT THE END OF THE POST
A Canceled Trip to Italy
Mr. Cevir and Ms. Navarette had been dating for about four years.
They had a child together.
Sometime last year, Ms. Navarette planned a vacation to Italy.
The trip was for herself, Mr. Cevir, and their son.
Ms. Navarette was going to pay for the entire vacation.
Mr. Cevir confirmed he did not pay for the trip.
Defendant's Employment History
Judge Judy asked Mr. Cevir about his employment.
He stated he had just started working again.
Last year, he worked for his family's locksmith business.
He was laid off because his brother had too many employees.
Mr. Cevir is 25 years old and lives with his parents.
He currently works as a behavioral therapist for East Bay ABA.
He has been with them for a few months.
Before that, he worked at AT&T.
He also mentioned he just started working with his brother again, doing locksmithing.
Travel Insurance and a Sick Child
Ms. Navarette was smart enough to purchase travel insurance for the trip.
Their son became sick, which led to the cancellation of the Italian vacation.
The insurance company paid out $4,000 for the cost of the trip.
Ms. Navarette claimed the insurance checks were issued in two parts.
She said $2,000 went to her and $2,000 went to Mr. Cevir.
Initial Payment Claims
Judge Judy asked Ms. Navarette how much she had paid towards the trip.
Ms. Navarette stated she had just purchased it on a credit card.
She claimed she had not made any payments yet.
Judge Judy expressed her dislike for this situation.
She asked if Ms. Navarette had made zero payments.
Ms. Navarette then said she eventually paid off the credit card.
However, she did not have proof of payment with her.
Judge Judy told her to come back with proof of payment.
She warned that if Ms. Navarette did not provide proof, the case would be dismissed.
Proof of Payment
Ms. Navarette returned to court with documents.
She presented a document showing a refund from the airlines for $827.
Judge Judy asked her to circle the payment she made for the trip.
Ms. Navarette explained she made payments over several months.
She had only one statement with her.
Judge Judy asked for a statement from Priceline showing the trip was paid in full.
Ms. Navarette pointed to a highlighted section on a document.
It showed the trip was paid for in full for $3,240.
Mr. Cevir's Insurance Money
Mr. Cevir confirmed he received $1,144 from the insurance.
He then explained what happened after the trip was canceled.
He said they realized their son was sick and could not travel.
Around that time, Ms. Navarette was looking to buy a new car.
Mr. Cevir claimed they made an agreement.
If Ms. Navarette drove the car he was paying for, he would not have to pay back the insurance money.
Judge Judy reacted strongly to this claim.
She asked Mr. Cevir if he was "nuts."
Child Support Issues
Judge Judy shifted her focus to Mr. Cevir's child support payments.
She asked if he paid child support.
Mr. Cevir confirmed he did.
However, he admitted he had not paid last month.
He explained he was not working when he was served with the child support papers.
Judge Judy questioned his employment status.
She reminded him he had just said he was working for his brother.
Mr. Cevir clarified he had just been hired again two weeks ago.
He claimed he had not been paid officially yet.
IRS Involvement Suggested
Judge Judy suggested Ms. Navarette report Mr. Cevir's brother to the IRS.
This was for paying an employee in cash and not withholding taxes.
She explained that if he was paid by check, his wages could be garnished for child support.
Mr. Cevir reiterated he was not working when served with papers.
He then repeated that he had just been hired two weeks ago.
Judge Judy noted his many excuses.
She emphasized the IRS works with child support enforcement.
The IRS could investigate his brother's business practices.
She mentioned that child support enforcement could take away his driver's license.
The Verdict
Judge Judy ruled in favor of the plaintiff.
She awarded Ms. Navarette $1,144.
Post-Verdict Accusations
After the verdict, Mr. Cevir accused Ms. Navarette of being vindictive.
He claimed she tried to change their son's name.
He also alleged she was withholding their son from him.
Ms. Navarette denied trying to change their son's name.
She stated she was just expecting him to make child support payments.
She said she sees him quite often.
Mr. Cevir claimed Ms. Navarette said she would drop the name change petition if he paid the money.
He expressed hope they could work things out without animosity.