FULL VIDEO AT THE END OF THIS POST
THIS ROOMMATE DISPUTE GETS COMPLICATED!
A Bakery Owner, Her Daughter, and a Former Employee Face Off
Imagine a situation where a landlord, her daughter, and a former employee all end up in Judge Judy's courtroom.
This case brings together a tangled web of living arrangements and accusations.
The Plaintiff Seeks Justice for Missing Opera Glasses
Ms. Peterson is the plaintiff.
She owned a bakery where Ms. Cowdy, the defendant, used to work.
Ms. Peterson's daughter, Ms. Audrey, also lived in a house owned by Ms. Peterson.
Ms. Cowdy and her partner, Jade, rented a room in that house.
Ms. Peterson is suing for the alleged theft of irreplaceable opera glasses.
She claims they were pawned.
The Defendant's Side of the Story
Ms. Cowdy, the defendant, disputes the claims.
She says she paid her rent.
She also has her own claims about property left behind.
The Move-In and the Rent Agreement
Ms. Cowdy and Jade moved into Ms. Peterson's house in January 2013.
They lived there for about five months.
They moved out on May 13th.
Initially, the rent was $400 due on the first of the month.
Later, they agreed to pay $200 every two weeks.
This change was due to schooling.
The Disputed May Rent Payment
Ms. Peterson claims she did not receive the $200 for May 1st.
Ms. Cowdy insists they paid the first half of May's rent.
She says she was supposed to pay the second half when everything escalated.
Judge Judy asks if Ms. Cowdy has proof of payment.
Ms. Cowdy says they asked for receipts but never received any.
Ms. Peterson's daughter, Ms. Audrey, confirms they never gave receipts.
The Puppy Incident
Judge Judy then asks about a puppy.
She wants to know when the defendants brought a puppy home.
Ms. Peterson says it was the week of May 5th or 6th.
This was after the disputed May 1st rent payment.
Judge Judy implies that if they paid the rent, they might have felt entitled to bring a puppy home.
The Confrontation During Move-Out
On May 13th, Ms. Audrey found Ms. Cowdy packing.
Ms. Audrey demanded the rent.
She also brought up the 30-day notice requirement.
Ms. Audrey called her mother, Ms. Peterson.
Ms. Cowdy called her partner, Jade.
Ms. Audrey noticed things missing from shelves.
She took a laptop from a table and moved it to her side of the house.
She says she wanted the rent.
Ms. Cowdy claims Ms. Audrey took their property.
The situation escalated into screaming.
Ms. Peterson tried to give the laptop to Jade outside.
Ms. Audrey claims she remained inside, being yelled at.
She says she was told to punch someone in the face.
Both Ms. Audrey and Ms. Cowdy heard Ms. Peterson scream from outside.
They both ran out.
Ms. Peterson told Ms. Audrey to go back inside and lock the door.
Ms. Audrey claims she was thrown back.
She says Ms. Cowdy braced herself in the door and body-bumped her.
The police then arrived.
The Arrest and Police Report
Ms. Audrey was arrested.
She claims the arrest was based on a false police report.
She says the report stated she went inside the house and was threatened with a knife.
However, other reports stated she never entered the house.
Ms. Audrey claims her conviction for battery was overturned on appeal.
She states it was not domestic violence.
Judge Judy is not interested in the details of the arrest.
She says it was already handled in a criminal court.
The Missing Opera Glasses
Ms. Peterson claims her irreplaceable opera glasses were stolen.
She says they were obtained in England.
She believes they were pawned.
She claims to have a photograph of the opera glasses.
She also has before-and-after pictures of the empty shelf.
Judge Judy asks Ms. Cowdy and Jade if they pawned opera glasses.
They deny pawning anything in the last two years.
Ms. Peterson states she knows they were pawned across the street.
Judge Judy Demands Proof of Pawning
Judge Judy asks for concrete evidence.
She wants a surveillance camera recording from the pawn shop.
She also asks for a copy of the pawn receipt.
She says she would compare the signature on the receipt to the signature on the answer form.
Ms. Peterson says the pawn shop did not have anything.
She claims they went through everything.
She also states the pawnbroker is a customer of her shop.
Judge Judy dismisses "empty places" as insufficient evidence.
The Counter-Claims
Ms. Cowdy brings up a counter-claim.
She mentions being fired from the bakery.
She calls it a retaliatory firing after the incident with Ms. Audrey.
Judge Judy says she would have fired her too.
She explains she wouldn't have Ms. Cowdy and Ms. Audrey working together.
Ms. Cowdy also claims property was left behind.
She lists baking supplies and spatulas.
Judge Judy dismisses these items as not significant enough for her court.
Ms. Peterson mentions an assault committed by Ms. Cowdy on Ms. Audrey.
Judge Judy asks if a police report was filed.
Ms. Peterson says no.
She explains it was a mutual agreement not to file a police report.
Judge Judy dismisses this claim as well.
Watch the Full Judge Judy Case Below
This case has many twists and turns.
See how Judge Judy handles the conflicting stories.
Scroll down.
Press play.
FULL VIDEO
CLICK HERE TO WATCH THE FULL VIDEO
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3JTDRhq0_UY
CLICK HERE TO WATCH THE FULL VIDEO
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s06MbtPJeNo
