Judging by his pristine appearance, wearing a vintage suit and thin tie, it's as if he's transported from a Time Tunnel. Goodness knows he looks more like a law student from the early 60s. I'm not knocking him, but his attire brings back memories of days when young men were gentlemanly and well-kept with clean haircuts and pressed suits. He has exceptional qualities for a man of his age bracket, thanks to his parents, who reared him to become an upstanding young man.
Absolutely! Very polite and professional. Will have to wait to see how this ends but my gut feeling is he is at wrong/equally at wrong because if he's going to cross traffic like that, it's his responsibility to make sure it was safe to do so. IE, if I was turning left and some a-hole was impatient and decided to pass me on the left side going the wrong direction to get around me but I still attempted the turn and hit them, it would be my fault because the way wasn't clear. Happened to someone I know. Just one of those crazy traffic rules that makes you shake your head.
Plaintiff was prepared, clear, concise, answers questions directly. One of the best plaintiffs there is. Although I am not sure if he would win But he definitely is one of the best plaintiffs we’ve had in JJ. JJ never had once to cut him off due to irrelevance
Its about the context. "Did you hit him with a hammer?" "Basically" is different then "Do you always take this road to get home?" "Basically." I mean... you either hit him with the hammer or you didnt lol But in this case... its about how often he does it, not wether he did it
Not sure if the plaintiff will win, but it seems clear to me that the defendant was trying to bypass traffic by driving in a lane he wasn’t supposed to merge into yet in order to make a left.
Yep he got in the turning lane way to far back. That's why the law states not to ride middle lanes purposely for situations like this not to happen. I feel the plantiff is in the right.
@@casual35you can't ride turning lanes the defendant got over entirely to early because he was impatient and rode the turning lane. The plantiff should have had clear and safe enough room to turn out and not be struck because that's the only space and area he had available to him
Both at fault. Plaintiff shouldn't have made a left in rush hour, he needs to make sure every lane is clear before he goes across. Even if other drivers stopped to let him go , it is his responsibility to ensure the last lane b4 he turns left is clear as well. He can't just assume all are clear, plus defendant shouldn't have driven in that lane for that much distance prior to actually turning..he was trying to cheat traffic by using that lane is like a clear fast lane instead of waiting in line like the other drivers..so 50 50 fault
@@tedpella2944 children rarely stand up straight with their hands crossed behind their backs, look straight forward speak up and address people as mam. Just stop now, you're being too much
@StevenDoh yes they Do. You think this kid does this all the time? No, he does it when he knows it's an important occasion. Just like many other kids. I'm sorry your children failed and need to be military trained for basic politeness LOL
@@tomy4453 I live in California, no idea where they had this accident but not I am sure it isn't much different. CA DMV Handbook, from their site page 18: "Use the center left turn lane to prepare for and make a left turn or U-turn. It is not a regular traffic lane or passing lane. You may only drive for 200 feet in the center left turn lane."
@@DivusMagus I caught that, too. There's a misunderstanding happening, you can cross a solid yellow line, you can't drive long distance in a median. Just like you found in the DMV Handbook, good job!
After being T-boned in 2020 for someone not stopping at a stop sign. This is exactly why I do not cross over traffic to go the opposite way... Nor do I let in others cuz they're waiting for traffic to bypass. They do not have the right of way, that's why he should've just waited until eastbound traffic cleared
Exactly. He probably assumed the 3rd lane was clear and it wasnt. Most people dont check. They just drive out. Which is why I always slow down when I see other cars stopped.
I’m sorry that happened to you! I’m so SICK of people who think stop 🛑 signs are optional! I see it in my city every dang day, mostly it’s younger drivers. I’m always on my kids, nieces and nephew’s to make sure they stop at every stop sign.
Yep. Or go around the block. May take an extra minute or two but a lot safer. See this everyday. Pull out from a parking lot across 3 lanes and try to turn left. And many times the idiot has to wait for traffic going the way he wants to and blocks the other lanes.
@@darlenefraser3022 U-Turns at the lights where I live are illegal; unless there is a U-Turn sign. And as for solid yellow lines it is not illegal to cross over them but if you do and get into or cause an accident it is considered careless driving.
The defendant was utilizing the "turn lane" as a driving lane. There is a reason the solid yellow line ends and doesn't continue all the way until the intersection. Any other time an officer would see this they could give a citation. I think anything worthy of a citation would immediately put you at fault.
This is something I have to go through all the time living in Pittsburgh. The white line is where the turning lane starts. The median lane is the median lane. People always drive in the median it makes me so angry.
What I am picturing is that the center lane is pavement that continues on and on in case somebody wants to make use of it to turn left into some other driveways before the intersection. But I am on the wavelength of the plaintiff, that you should not be in that lane to make a left at the light until you are closer to the intersection and it makes sense to me that this point of entry would be where that line has a gap. In other words, I wouldn't deem it lawful to be in that center lane from WAAAAAY back in order to bypass all the people in gee-dee way. I think you would have to be stuck waiting until you reach a certain point where you can tell you have an opening to go into the lane for turning left. I haven't driven on an American road in years, but that's how I remember it and I think most of the traffic rules are the same.
It seems like the plaintiff cut across 3 lanes of oncoming traffic. Instead of just merging into the CLOSEST lane like you are supposed to do when coming out of a parking lot. This is dangerous.
Two wrongs don’t make a right, or a left in plaintiffs case. He made a left turn against traffic into a lane that was obstructed ( he couldn’t see) by traffic. Don’t think plaintiff is going to win this one .
The Defendant was using the turning lane as a driving lane. He entered the median prematurely due to traffic, waaaay back before the lane even opens up for people turning left. He was in the lane 575 feet before he technically should have been, I don't understand why JJ isn't getting it. It's like driving on the shoulder of a freeway before it actually turns into an exit, just to avoid waiting. It doesn't jibe with the natural flow of traffic.
@@earth0128 Then you would be making a right turn onto the road in this situation.. I figure in order to get a drivers license one must be able to go thru the Swindon Roundabout 3 times successfully.
@@earth0128 Like in the province Ontario, Canada. The city of Toronto is a challenge. Of course no where near what London is. We added roundabouts several years back and 99% of drivers are idiots using them. They cannot even negotiate a single lane roundabout. When drivers complain I show them a picture of Swindon and say try this.
I'm seeing a misunderstanding, you can cross a solid yellow line, like the plaintiff was doing. You can't make a driving lane out of a median, like the defendant was doing. At least not for more than a short distance.
NO. Median lane is NOT a solid line. It is always marked for making turns IMMEDIATELY into the driveways of the businesses/plazas along the road on each side. That way the thru-traffic doesn't have to stop. You CANNOT drive straight in this lane as the Defendant was doing. You CANNOT use this lane to merge back into normal traffic as the Plaintiff was doing. That is the rules of the road according to the Highway Traffic Act in Ontario (I know because that's how they try to fail people on the driving test immediately as you leave the testing centre for the exam). When traffic is busy you cannot pull out and wait in the middle lane until the lanes behind you let you merge in. CANNOT. So they are BOTH AT FAULT.
The guy shouldn’t have been in that middle lane until he could’ve entered at the break. He was in the lane way too early, I see it every day, shoot I’ve probably done it too. This is why I don’t go left if I can’t clearly see the middle lane is clear. This might be a case of they are both in the wrong though. The plaintiff was really prepared!
That's how I got my new truck. I T-boned them as they turned into my lane and I was going straight in a regular lane. Thank God I have dash cams! Caught all of it. Bastard had NO INSURANCE 😡 Sued him ! But I have a new SUV... and a new car note 😵💫😂
At the end of the day, the plaintiff has a duty to clear lanes visually before moving. Those cars letting him out aren't doing it. My sister was almost killed in this same setup. She was at fault.
I got yelled at by my driving instructor when I waved someone to cross the street. “WHO MADE YOU A TRAFFIC AGENT?!?!” That taught me a very important lesson. I try to not wave people through when they can’t see. I become responsible. I would not have blocked the plaintiff but I would have avoided eye contact. Not not business. I probably would have honked, though, if I saw it was dangerous.
imagine that instead of the defendant having to go down the center lane and go to the light that he was actually going to turn left into the parking lot across the street from where the plaintiff was exiting. that means he still would have hit the defendant's car, but that the defendant wouldn't have gotten cited for illegal lane use
The Defendant was used the median lane for quite a long distance before the solid line stopped where they are supposed to go into the left turn lane....at the same time, the plaintiff to have to turn left with 2 lanes of oncoming west bound traffic and the solid line median lane is pretty questionable too....I think they were both at fault - hope she throws this one out....
That’s what a median lane is for. Left turns to get in easier than waiting for four+ lanes of traffic to clear. It also would minimize accidents because that’s a lot of stuff to pay attention to and to be aware of and seeing clearly isn’t as easy when there are two extra lanes involved It’s not to bypass stopped traffic to get to a left turn lane 500m or whatever ahead.
I’ve seen so many of the audience members in so many cases. The lady behind the plaintiff with the big hair is a regular, as was the red-haired lady in the previous case (who ALWAYS sits in clear camera shot). Only us regular-watchers would notice this 😅😁
Police report stated that the defendant's vehicle came to a stop 200 feet from the accident. Plaintiff also said he was travelling at 20 mph. Math doesn't check out
Basically the defendant got impatient with the stop and go traffic during RUSH HOUR and decided to ride the middle lane all the way down to get into his turning lane. So he's a reckless driver.
To be fair, the plaintiff had to cross that line to take a left out of that parking lot. The defendant had to cross it further down when it opens into a turning lane which the plaintiff said earlier was 575 feet away.
Looks very risky to hope there's no cars moving in THREE lanes of traffic (during rush hour) before pulling out and trying to turn left. At the very least, the plaintiff is 50% responsible for the accident.
Who raised this young man?I want to meet them and shake their hand for raising such a fine young man,well spoken,nice looking,prepared,have a job.I am 37 and I have seen alot of young people around,not everyone is like that,not most,not even close.
Based on the photo and the diagram both the plaintiff and the defendant are at fault. The defendant didn’t want to wait behind the cars going straight because he needed to go left so he illegally drove in the median lane to get to left turn lane/light (happens all the time in LA). However the plaintiff crossed into the median lane, a lane that seems to be lacking the yellow dashed lines which would allow the defendant to legally turn into while waiting for clear traffic to merge beyond that lane into his direction of traffic. If the median lane did have a dashed line with a solid line then technically the defendant would be entirely at fault.
I agree that they are both 50% responsible. Any driver exiting a driveway and entering a roadway, must yield to traffic on the main road. Most cars just drive up without checking each lane they are passing. The defendant, shouldn’t have been in that lane and should have waited until he was closer to the left turn lane. They are equally at fault for the accident.
Plaintiff did yield to regular traffic ( main road traffic made room to let him through). Defendant was most likely using the median lane as a regular lane so he didn't have to wait in the long line of traffic in one of the 2 regular lanes. Had he stayed in the regular lanes (and stopped with the traffic in the other lane), he would not have hit the Plaintiff. Defendant is 100% in the wrong. Also, if the law in the Plaintiff and Defendant's area states that you can only move into the left turn lane at a specific distance from actual turn lane (for example 350 ft), and Defendant was outside of that distance, then Defendant is doubly in the wrong.
Defendant was trying to “ride the median” and bypass traffic, that’s not what that lane is for, it’s mainly for emergency vehicles and for people trying to turn across traffic, it’s not an actual lane you can just ride down to the next red light
I, again, disagree with the Judge....... the older guy had no business driving down the median lane..... he crossed over solid lines to get there..... and hit the kid ...........
Why not just turn right into the flow of traffic instead of inconveniencing three lanes of traffic? Hoping they will all work together so that you can make that awkward left turn , to save what : 45 seconds from your busy day?
plaintiffs fault.... case closed. 2reasons,,, you cannot make a left until safe... and second... it is your responsibility to merge onto a lane safely... defendant was already in the lane
He did n't explain it correctly. Judy probably knows anyway. What the defendant did is illegal, he darted out of traffic and crossed the solid line to where no one is supposed to drive. To be legal he has to wait until the he reaches the point where it becomes a broken line. People cause accidents all the time like that. A woman hit me like that, and I received a a $40,000.00 settlement on top of my car being replaced. However the young man should have merged into the second lane furthest from him as he was also going illegal into the median.
Defendant probably shouldn't have been riding down the median lane for that long of a distance, but you also don't just cross through traffic lanes when you can't see what's coming.
I’d have to see the real road but it seems that it is a shared left turn lane. In which case it is NOT a travel lane and the Defendant should not have been there.
Both are wrong, plaintiff should not have crossed a closed line, and defendant should not have driven there. Same solid line, for non to cross, neither plaintiff neither defendant. Seems simple but will wait on part 2 etc.
does JJ not understand what medians are used for? the defendant was clearly trying to skip traffic to get to his destination sooner instead of waiting till he could legally go into the turn lane to get to freddies, and the median is meant for what the plaintiff was doing. maybe JJ is just setting a trap i dunno but she seems as it is in part one not to get what a median is used for and what the plaintiff was up to
That lane is absolutely able to used for turning. The line is a side line with a dash line meaning you can use it. I actually got marked down on my driver's test for waiting for the line to end.
that plaintiff will go great places in his life... well spoken, polite and very professional.
Judging by his pristine appearance, wearing a vintage suit and thin tie, it's as if he's transported from a Time Tunnel. Goodness knows he looks more like a law student from the early 60s. I'm not knocking him, but his attire brings back memories of days when young men were gentlemanly and well-kept with clean haircuts and pressed suits. He has exceptional qualities for a man of his age bracket, thanks to his parents, who reared him to become an upstanding young man.
He’s cute
@@αρτιαννα You know what? Same here🤭
He's every HR department's fan hahahahahah very well spoken & a treat to the eyes
@@αρτιαννα He's smoking hot. His lips are especially _fine_
The plaintiff came prepared, well spoken
Good looking too
Presenting well.. so far 😂
@@earth0128lol
Absolutely! Very polite and professional. Will have to wait to see how this ends but my gut feeling is he is at wrong/equally at wrong because if he's going to cross traffic like that, it's his responsibility to make sure it was safe to do so. IE, if I was turning left and some a-hole was impatient and decided to pass me on the left side going the wrong direction to get around me but I still attempted the turn and hit them, it would be my fault because the way wasn't clear. Happened to someone I know. Just one of those crazy traffic rules that makes you shake your head.
Logic is dumb, though
Plaintiff was prepared, clear, concise, answers questions directly. One of the best plaintiffs there is. Although I am not sure if he would win
But he definitely is one of the best plaintiffs we’ve had in JJ. JJ never had once to cut him off due to irrelevance
The bar is low in society y’all are easily impressed by anything
oh brother 🙄@@Lenasevilla-yb4ei
@@CarMiNe6361😂😂😂
@@Lenasevilla-yb4eino one said anything about society. JJ participants are not representative of the broader public
And he is yummy!!!
I’m surprised JJ didn’t get upset about the defendant saying “basically” 😂
Its about the context. "Did you hit him with a hammer?" "Basically" is different then "Do you always take this road to get home?" "Basically." I mean... you either hit him with the hammer or you didnt lol But in this case... its about how often he does it, not wether he did it
Jejeje, I caught that too!
Lmfao same
lol exactly what my thought was. I was expecting her to tell him = Not basically; basically is a filling word
Not sure if the plaintiff will win, but it seems clear to me that the defendant was trying to bypass traffic by driving in a lane he wasn’t supposed to merge into yet in order to make a left.
That’s definitely the case. I think it’s unfortunate because the plaintiff just can’t explain it well for Judy to understand 😭
I don't think that matters. The plaintiff can only proceed if it is safe to do so. Traffic stopping for him is nice, but he takes all the risk.
Yep he got in the turning lane way to far back. That's why the law states not to ride middle lanes purposely for situations like this not to happen. I feel the plantiff is in the right.
@@casual35you can't ride turning lanes the defendant got over entirely to early because he was impatient and rode the turning lane. The plantiff should have had clear and safe enough room to turn out and not be struck because that's the only space and area he had available to him
@@blackbutterflytarot8071 Clearly you don't get it.
Defendant was traveling in a non travel lane. Totally at fault.
Both at fault. Plaintiff shouldn't have made a left in rush hour, he needs to make sure every lane is clear before he goes across. Even if other drivers stopped to let him go , it is his responsibility to ensure the last lane b4 he turns left is clear as well. He can't just assume all are clear, plus defendant shouldn't have driven in that lane for that much distance prior to actually turning..he was trying to cheat traffic by using that lane is like a clear fast lane instead of waiting in line like the other drivers..so 50 50 fault
That’s true. However, the plaintiff was about to also drive in the lane too soon.
This why I don't like to make left turns unless I have a green arrow or light.
exactly
💯
I don’t think I would make that turn either unless there was no traffic in the lane that had to stop. That’s a dangerous turn.
Damn the kid would make a good lawyer
He is well on his way
There is a stated limit to how far back you can enter a turn lane otherwise people will abuse it to avoid slow traffic
Love the way the plaintiff speaks. He sounds so educated.
Not very well educated. Sorry to burst your bubble.
Traffic law in my state is you can go into a turning lane 300 feet before the turn. Dude was on it over 500 feet before the turn
Give the plaintiff whatever he wants 😍
not how the law works 🙄
I want the plaintiff to give me what I want...😍
This kid seems like he was in ROTC or something. Hes very formal, hands behind his back. Clear and polite. Definitely had some sort of training
My kid is like that, never was in training. If your kid needs to be in training for basic politeness, something is wrong.
@@tedpella2944 children rarely stand up straight with their hands crossed behind their backs, look straight forward speak up and address people as mam. Just stop now, you're being too much
@StevenDoh yes they Do. You think this kid does this all the time? No, he does it when he knows it's an important occasion. Just like many other kids. I'm sorry your children failed and need to be military trained for basic politeness LOL
@@StevenDohchildren/teens have circumstantial politeness. This isn’t uncommon.
The plaintiff is well prepared. Seems like he would do well in a courtroom.
How could the plaintiff not cross that line? Unless it was "no left turns'
Can't have it both way; can't say defendant can't cross a solid line but plaintiff can. LOL
@@tomy4453you can cross it if you are trying to use it as a median. You can't use it as a full lane to get to the end of the street.
@@DivusMagus Feel free to cite the statute stating that.
@@tomy4453
I live in California, no idea where they had this accident but not I am sure it isn't much different.
CA DMV Handbook, from their site page 18:
"Use the center left turn lane to prepare for and
make a left turn or U-turn. It is not a regular traffic lane or passing lane.
You may only drive for 200 feet in the center left turn lane."
@@DivusMagus I caught that, too. There's a misunderstanding happening, you can cross a solid yellow line, you can't drive long distance in a median. Just like you found in the DMV Handbook, good job!
After being T-boned in 2020 for someone not stopping at a stop sign. This is exactly why I do not cross over traffic to go the opposite way... Nor do I let in others cuz they're waiting for traffic to bypass. They do not have the right of way, that's why he should've just waited until eastbound traffic cleared
Exactly. He probably assumed the 3rd lane was clear and it wasnt. Most people dont check. They just drive out. Which is why I always slow down when I see other cars stopped.
I’m sorry that happened to you! I’m so SICK of people who think stop 🛑 signs are optional! I see it in my city every dang day, mostly it’s younger drivers. I’m always on my kids, nieces and nephew’s to make sure they stop at every stop sign.
@@SweetheartbabezSometimes people can’t see what is in the center lane if there is a truck or SUV.
Not sure where JJ is going with the “you were crossing the same solid line.” You are allowed to cross a solid in order to make a turn!
Hey there!! How are you feeling
the plaintiff is cute as a button BUT!!! he was trying to be a well spoken lawyer a bit too mucho! lol it made me laugh!
1:30 I would just join the westbound traffic and make a u-turn at the light. I can’t imagine waiting for passage every day after work.
Yep. Or go around the block. May take an extra minute or two but a lot safer. See this everyday. Pull out from a parking lot across 3 lanes and try to turn left. And many times the idiot has to wait for traffic going the way he wants to and blocks the other lanes.
Going around the block is right. A U-Turn at the lights during rush hour traffic is totally insane.
MESGIDIOT, you are sounding like an idiot, for many multiple lane intersections, do not allow U-Turns.
@@darlenefraser3022 U-Turns at the lights where I live are illegal; unless there is a U-Turn sign. And as for solid yellow lines it is not illegal to cross over them but if you do and get into or cause an accident it is considered careless driving.
@@garfieldsmith332where in the US is that
Mr . DAVIS SUCH A HANDSONE MAN 😊
He's just a kid!
He's only interested in his "roommates"
I literally scrolled through looking for the comment that would say that.... lol he does have a natural easiness on the eyes. He is very attractive.
@@lisainger6751 In her defence, he's 25.
@@Corefriedrich_ Naw... your post isn't creepy at all. Don't let anyone tell you otherwise.
Plaintiff was definitely prepared!
He knew he wasn't coming to the beach that day. 😉😉
@@DianaPrince777😅
@@DianaPrince777right 😂👏🏾
He’s saying yes Man and Ma’am I peeped 🧐🤦🏾♂️😂
So well educated, I love how he puts his hand on his back while explaining, that is impressive. 😊👏🏻
Judging by the defendant's eyes, he might have been a little more than inattentive.
😂😂😂😂😂 It's highly probable
😂😂😂😂😂 It's highly probable
Yass Daily dose of Judy!
Hey there
Is that you on photo
The defendant was utilizing the "turn lane" as a driving lane. There is a reason the solid yellow line ends and doesn't continue all the way until the intersection. Any other time an officer would see this they could give a citation. I think anything worthy of a citation would immediately put you at fault.
This is something I have to go through all the time living in Pittsburgh. The white line is where the turning lane starts. The median lane is the median lane. People always drive in the median it makes me so angry.
The plaintiff automatically wins, he’s cute.
Very very cute
I thought it was just me who felt he should win automatically.
Where’s part 2?
They get more views if they stall.
Takes 20-30 minutes for parts to come out
@@karlaruter3221Genuine question, why is that?
What I am picturing is that the center lane is pavement that continues on and on in case somebody wants to make use of it to turn left into some other driveways before the intersection. But I am on the wavelength of the plaintiff, that you should not be in that lane to make a left at the light until you are closer to the intersection and it makes sense to me that this point of entry would be where that line has a gap. In other words, I wouldn't deem it lawful to be in that center lane from WAAAAAY back in order to bypass all the people in gee-dee way. I think you would have to be stuck waiting until you reach a certain point where you can tell you have an opening to go into the lane for turning left. I haven't driven on an American road in years, but that's how I remember it and I think most of the traffic rules are the same.
And I'm not so sure Judge Judy is getting that, but anyway, we shall see in the next segment.
I looked this up to and it's actually CHINDEN Blvd, so it was erroneously labelled CHILDEN.
Handsome Young Man🥰
Both men wanted to immediately establish that they worked (full-time), so that Judge Judy would see them in a good light.
The Pee car LOL ... aaa ... I'm an idiot 😂
I've been in a similar accident. We were both responsible for the accident. Wonder how this one plays out...
0:30 / "And who do you live with" 🙄 ... Has nothing to do with this case !
It seems like the plaintiff cut across 3 lanes of oncoming traffic. Instead of just merging into the CLOSEST lane like you are supposed to do when coming out of a parking lot. This is dangerous.
Two wrongs don’t make a right, or a left in plaintiffs case. He made a left turn against traffic into a lane that was obstructed ( he couldn’t see) by traffic. Don’t think plaintiff is going to win this one .
The Defendant was using the turning lane as a driving lane. He entered the median prematurely due to traffic, waaaay back before the lane even opens up for people turning left. He was in the lane 575 feet before he technically should have been, I don't understand why JJ isn't getting it. It's like driving on the shoulder of a freeway before it actually turns into an exit, just to avoid waiting. It doesn't jibe with the natural flow of traffic.
To me both at fault. Defendant travelling in part of the lane when not supposed to; and the plaintiff not making sure the way was clear.
Glad I'm in the UK 😅
@@earth0128 Then you would be making a right turn onto the road in this situation.. I figure in order to get a drivers license one must be able to go thru the Swindon Roundabout 3 times successfully.
@@garfieldsmith332 lol Swindon nit so bad, the real test is London!
@@earth0128 Like in the province Ontario, Canada. The city of Toronto is a challenge. Of course no where near what London is.
We added roundabouts several years back and 99% of drivers are idiots using them. They cannot even negotiate a single lane roundabout. When drivers complain I show them a picture of Swindon and say try this.
I've never seen somebody use both buttons on a jacket before.
The plaintiff is smoking hot. He looks right. I haven't watched the whole case yet but, JUDGEMENT FOR THE PLAINTIFF IN THE AMOUNT OF $5000!
I'm seeing a misunderstanding, you can cross a solid yellow line, like the plaintiff was doing. You can't make a driving lane out of a median, like the defendant was doing. At least not for more than a short distance.
NO. Median lane is NOT a solid line. It is always marked for making turns IMMEDIATELY into the driveways of the businesses/plazas along the road on each side. That way the thru-traffic doesn't have to stop. You CANNOT drive straight in this lane as the Defendant was doing. You CANNOT use this lane to merge back into normal traffic as the Plaintiff was doing. That is the rules of the road according to the Highway Traffic Act in Ontario (I know because that's how they try to fail people on the driving test immediately as you leave the testing centre for the exam). When traffic is busy you cannot pull out and wait in the middle lane until the lanes behind you let you merge in. CANNOT. So they are BOTH AT FAULT.
Defendant seems to be of the "I do not care what I pay for the damage I cause" people.
Saturday JJ crew!
Here 🍷
Yurrrr
Hear here! 📢
We in here!!!!😂
Happy Saturday 🎉
The guy shouldn’t have been in that middle lane until he could’ve entered at the break. He was in the lane way too early, I see it every day, shoot I’ve probably done it too. This is why I don’t go left if I can’t clearly see the middle lane is clear. This might be a case of they are both in the wrong though. The plaintiff was really prepared!
What a Prince Charming. 😳🙈
That's how I got my new truck. I T-boned them as they turned into my lane and I was going straight in a regular lane. Thank God I have dash cams! Caught all of it. Bastard had NO INSURANCE 😡
Sued him ! But I have a new SUV... and a new car note 😵💫😂
Rush hour madness 🤯
Lmao everybody jocking the kid but not realizing the line was solid. 50/50 responsibility so far. Let’s see how this unfolds. 🍿
At the end of the day, the plaintiff has a duty to clear lanes visually before moving. Those cars letting him out aren't doing it. My sister was almost killed in this same setup. She was at fault.
I got yelled at by my driving instructor when I waved someone to cross the street.
“WHO MADE YOU A TRAFFIC AGENT?!?!”
That taught me a very important lesson. I try to not wave people through when they can’t see. I become responsible. I would not have blocked the plaintiff but I would have avoided eye contact. Not not business.
I probably would have honked, though, if I saw it was dangerous.
What’s up JJ crew. Enjoy the long weekend for those off on Monday!
imagine that instead of the defendant having to go down the center lane and go to the light that he was actually going to turn left into the parking lot across the street from where the plaintiff was exiting. that means he still would have hit the defendant's car, but that the defendant wouldn't have gotten cited for illegal lane use
What exactly does Judge Judy think a median lane is for?
Yeah, isn’t the median lane for turning?
What do you think a median lane is for, elvickRULES? A walkway?
Shut the hell up
Judge Judy is very beautiful and very intelligent and the best judge ever
The plaintiff is very polite
The Defendant was used the median lane for quite a long distance before the solid line stopped where they are supposed to go into the left turn lane....at the same time, the plaintiff to have to turn left with 2 lanes of oncoming west bound traffic and the solid line median lane is pretty questionable too....I think they were both at fault - hope she throws this one out....
That’s what a median lane is for. Left turns to get in easier than waiting for four+ lanes of traffic to clear. It also would minimize accidents because that’s a lot of stuff to pay attention to and to be aware of and seeing clearly isn’t as easy when there are two extra lanes involved
It’s not to bypass stopped traffic to get to a left turn lane 500m or whatever ahead.
fargocheef, Judges do not throw cases out. Duh!
@@trekgirl65 Okay I meant DISMISS, Duh!
Does anyone know where I can find entire episodes? Trying to find the one my husband was in
Plaintiff looks and sounds like a budget Shawn Mendes
I’ve seen so many of the audience members in so many cases. The lady behind the plaintiff with the big hair is a regular, as was the red-haired lady in the previous case (who ALWAYS sits in clear camera shot). Only us regular-watchers would notice this 😅😁
🍪
Where is part 2
Takes 20-30 minutes for parts to come out
After part 1.
@@lisainger6751 not available now, so where do I find it? Smarty pants.
4:15 no yellow line. When it's zoomed in there's an unbroken yellow line.
Police report stated that the defendant's vehicle came to a stop 200 feet from the accident. Plaintiff also said he was travelling at 20 mph. Math doesn't check out
I love those man hands
Plaintiff's fault all the way!! He came out of a parking lot into traffic to cross a solid line to make a left. JJ was point on.
My favorite time of dayyyy🌚
Hey there What's popping
That picture.😬😬😬😬😬😬😬😬😬😬😬😬😬😬😬😬😬
I hate when people do that! They think they can drive in the middle lane like idiots!
Basically the defendant got impatient with the stop and go traffic during RUSH HOUR and decided to ride the middle lane all the way down to get into his turning lane.
So he's a reckless driver.
Plaintiff is cute as hell, oh Lordy. 👀🥵
Plaintiff is cute as hell!
He’s a good plaintiff, but we’ve seen far better plaintiffs with hardcore, clear evidence of liability.
To be fair, the plaintiff had to cross that line to take a left out of that parking lot. The defendant had to cross it further down when it opens into a turning lane which the plaintiff said earlier was 575 feet away.
Looks very risky to hope there's no cars moving in THREE lanes of traffic (during rush hour) before pulling out and trying to turn left. At the very least, the plaintiff is 50% responsible for the accident.
Yeahhh I'd much sooner go way out of my way by turning right and taking a left at a light, that just seems too risky
Who raised this young man?I want to meet them and shake their hand for raising such a fine young man,well spoken,nice looking,prepared,have a job.I am 37 and I have seen alot of young people around,not everyone is like that,not most,not even close.
Based on the photo and the diagram both the plaintiff and the defendant are at fault. The defendant didn’t want to wait behind the cars going straight because he needed to go left so he illegally drove in the median lane to get to left turn lane/light (happens all the time in LA). However the plaintiff crossed into the median lane, a lane that seems to be lacking the yellow dashed lines which would allow the defendant to legally turn into while waiting for clear traffic to merge beyond that lane into his direction of traffic.
If the median lane did have a dashed line with a solid line then technically the defendant would be entirely at fault.
I agree that they are both 50% responsible. Any driver exiting a driveway and entering a roadway, must yield to traffic on the main road. Most cars just drive up without checking each lane they are passing. The defendant, shouldn’t have been in that lane and should have waited until he was closer to the left turn lane. They are equally at fault for the accident.
Plaintiff did yield to regular traffic ( main road traffic made room to let him through). Defendant was most likely using the median lane as a regular lane so he didn't have to wait in the long line of traffic in one of the 2 regular lanes. Had he stayed in the regular lanes (and stopped with the traffic in the other lane), he would not have hit the Plaintiff. Defendant is 100% in the wrong. Also, if the law in the Plaintiff and Defendant's area states that you can only move into the left turn lane at a specific distance from actual turn lane (for example 350 ft), and Defendant was outside of that distance, then Defendant is doubly in the wrong.
The plaintiff sounds just like Shawn Mendes!!
My addiction while eating my lunch
Hey there How are you
What's popping up
Around 5:09 PM lol
The plaintiff is soooooooo gorgeous
He kind of look like Jason Bateman
Well-mannered Plaintiff!
Defendant was trying to “ride the median” and bypass traffic, that’s not what that lane is for, it’s mainly for emergency vehicles and for people trying to turn across traffic, it’s not an actual lane you can just ride down to the next red light
I, again, disagree with the Judge....... the older guy had no business driving down the median lane..... he crossed over solid lines to get there..... and hit the kid ...........
Why not just turn right into the flow of traffic instead of inconveniencing three lanes of traffic? Hoping they will all work together so that you can make that awkward left turn , to save what : 45 seconds from your busy day?
plaintiffs fault.... case closed. 2reasons,,, you cannot make a left until safe... and second... it is your responsibility to merge onto a lane safely... defendant was already in the lane
Thats called a suicide lane where i live, snd its only to be used for turning. You cannot drive thru it like the defendant did.
Why does it feel like Judy is giving the Plaintiff a hard time?? She seems to have already made her mind up he is in the wrong?!
She has all the case information ahead of time
They both look stoned.
Part 2 me plz😂
He did n't explain it correctly. Judy probably knows anyway. What the defendant did is illegal, he darted out of traffic and crossed the solid line to where no one is supposed to drive. To be legal he has to wait until the he reaches the point where it becomes a broken line. People cause accidents all the time like that. A woman hit me like that, and I received a a $40,000.00 settlement on top of my car being replaced. However the young man should have merged into the second lane furthest from him as he was also going illegal into the median.
Plaintiff looks and sounds like Shawn Mendes
Defendant probably shouldn't have been riding down the median lane for that long of a distance, but you also don't just cross through traffic lanes when you can't see what's coming.
Hmmm. I was taught.you cannot.drive down the suicide lane.
I’d have to see the real road but it seems that it is a shared left turn lane. In which case it is NOT a travel lane and the Defendant should not have been there.
Judge Judy savage
Both are wrong, plaintiff should not have crossed a closed line, and defendant should not have driven there. Same solid line, for non to cross, neither plaintiff neither defendant. Seems simple but will wait on part 2 etc.
does JJ not understand what medians are used for? the defendant was clearly trying to skip traffic to get to his destination sooner instead of waiting till he could legally go into the turn lane to get to freddies, and the median is meant for what the plaintiff was doing. maybe JJ is just setting a trap i dunno but she seems as it is in part one not to get what a median is used for and what the plaintiff was up to
Random but the plaintiff wearing a suit feels weird...lol
Jealous
That lane is absolutely able to used for turning. The line is a side line with a dash line meaning you can use it. I actually got marked down on my driver's test for waiting for the line to end.