The defendant rubbed me the wrong way in her exit interview when she said that canceling/rescheduling a wedding isn't that big of a deal compared to everything else caused by the pandemic. That's not something you get to decide for someone else. And they never claimed that their loss was more than anyone else's; they justifiably just wanted their money back.
Because the couple got their money back, which is paid by People Court and the venue owner got to keep the deposit. So they both got their money, which is cool.
The defendant was so sideways shady at the end and Doug, bless him, rose to the challenge. I fell off my chair when he said in total deadpan, "what a delightful way to feel..."
I feel bad for the bride, I can empathize, my own paternal Baba (Grandma) passed away exactly one week before our wedding. We had to go directly from the funeral luncheon to have my husband and the bestmen fitted and pick-up their suits. (We were married 36+ years ago, however the memories remain) We had hoped she would hang on, but it wasn't meant to be. My consolation was that I knew she was no longer in pain, and she was able to watch it all with my Gida (Grandpa) from above! Miss You Baba & Gida. 💞
@@michelehemlokhexwhite4310 Aww ... Thank You Darlin'! We were married 36+ years ago now, and it definitely altered the emotion surrounding our wedding. I had a close relationship with my Baba, so I felt her near all that day, we acknowledged her at the reception, she was very much there in spirit.💕
@@dellahicks7231 I was very close with my Nan (maternal grandmother), too. I'm convinced she sent me my son ❤. My mum passed 3 days before Christmas last year, and listening to her 'between worlds' talking about those passed she could see in the room in the days before she died... there's more out there than we know. I asked her to send me birds, and the morning she died, as we were traveling home, a huge flock of pigeons descended on us and begged for food! Then, when we got home, 3 people called within 24hrs with baby bird rescues for me to care for (I usually get one a month). It was wild. All the best to you and your partner. Wow that's a long, fulfilling marriage!
@@michelehemlokhexwhite4310 My apologies Michele, I will edit my comment to clarify. Yes memories may not be as strong as the years go by, however they certainly do stay with us!
When a contract is cancelled due to 'force majeure', then you have to refund in full, you might offer a rescheduling but since covid lasted 2 years and is actually still on-going, then a full refund is due...
but what is with the wife still being called by her chinese last name ? isnt a wife supposed to have the same last name as the husband ? and if they have a son , he will look asian and have identy problems because he will have a dad that does not look asian . i have seen this and its not good .
@@elizabethg0809 It's not normal cancellation. If cancelled because of storms, earthquake, fire, flood, .... and what ever you can add to the insurance will be covered. Any way, I feel sorry for businesses (Businesses need to pay rent, workers salaries) workers who got laid off and customers who lost money because of planning wedding, graduation,... because of pandemic.
@@OneMamaToAnother Event insurance is for the CUSTOMER, not the business owner. It's like when your purchase insurance for an airline flight. It covers your cost, it doesn't pay the airline.
@@so_many_women_so_little_ti2833 You're either referring to property insurance or event insurance with that description. Neither covers a business owner's loss due to customer cancellations.
Just b/c other couples put off their wedding to another date doesn’t mean they have to. She (defendant) was totally wrong & shouldn’t have had to gone to court to give their money back.
@@imsickoflife1651 Good for you. However, cheap weddings are not an indicator of a lasting marriage. Check the divorce statistics and you will find many of those people started out just like you and your husband. Life happens. Just because you start out with no debt doesn't mean it will stay that way, especially adding kids to the mix. Blessings on a continued happy marriage 👩❤️👨!!!
5 or 6k is still "pretty *in*expensive" says who? The person getting that money? that's almost like someone saying the same thing about a fricking coffin that's gonna be in the ground and doing nothing...it's not like it even keeps the bugs out~
I would have said with her being a business owner she would have lost a lot of income as well, but she even stated every other event rescheduled so she actually didn't lose out as much as many others did. I'm glad they won, maybe they can take that money and apply towards a honeymoon.
That was the contract. For the venue only. Couple had to do all else, catering, flowers, etc themselves. Typical venue only contract. They didn’t want to compromise at all. The defendant was willing to work with them. The pandemic wasn’t her fault either.
@@vadim7590 Hard earned = as in giving the plaintiffs their money back, not the lazy ranch owner. The comment stated it clearly, how could you miss that??
These cases just keep rolling in after the pandemic. It's unfortunate that the Defendant lost out on the venue being booked to completion, but as JM stated, this was not their fault.
How nice it must be to charge a "nonrefundable" deposit knowing that you don't have to give the money back even under unforeseen circumstances. What a great way to make money.
The plaintiffs cancelled because their relatives couldn’t travel. The defendant was essentially saying that the plaintiffs could have been married there (up to 200 guests) if they’d used a minister from the church. So I don’t understand why the ranch owner is financially burdened. She has to pay bills and I don’t really agree with the interpretation that the contract was cut-and-dry in favor of the plaintiffs.
They could be married there with up to 200 guests at the time of filming, not for when the contract stated. The defendant was not able to uphold her end of the contract, so the judge rightfully ruled against her. It's her own contract that worked against her and the judge advised her on how to not put herself in that position again. And if the only couple who wanted their money back was the one she gave a heavy discount to, then she's not out that much, especially since they were planning on renovating the place already and are now able to charge more due to those renovations.
What caught the defendant up was her own clause in the contract that the judge suggested she remove. The contract said that the rental fee was based on 150 people being able to attend the event. Essentially, $2700 = 150 people. 0 people = $0. The guests were not able to attend that day, so she does not get to keep their money. What she was describing for the 200 people was the present day regulation, not what was happening when the couple was married which the judge also called her out for. For example, if there are certain regulations that are in place on Monday that change on Wednesday, on Friday you can't say that I could've used Wednesday's regulations on Monday.
Force majeure is a French term that literally means “greater force.” It is related to the concept of an act of God, an event for which no party can be held accountable, such as a hurricane or a tornado. However, force majeure also encompasses human actions, such as armed conflic
My wife lost the price of a round-trip international ticket over it. She scheduled a month before the restrictions were announced. The airline provided a voucher to fly later, but it expired months before the destination country opened up again. So the airline did not lose anything, they still got the full amount unlike the defendant here.
Being married isn’t really about how big of a wedding they have. Most of the people that I’ve known to be married for a long time (40 years, or more) didn’t have a big wedding. We’ve been married 41 years, and no wedding!
These losing merchants kill me with the response, "I'm happy they're getting something..." so if that's the case, why don't they, her in this case, just return the money? She was just trying to "save face." I love how the judge said, "You're going to lose this case..." 😊 (I added the comment below to someone's comment when it was said that the judge was in essence, wrong & caused a lot of businesses to lose their business. This is nonsense.) The judge did correctly. The Pandemic caused a lot of changes and if people couldn't get the services they paid for, those businesses shouldn't be allowed to keep the money NOR FORCE people to accept their services at a later date. The law is the law. If a service can't be provided when needed then the consumer is suppose to have the money returned. Period. If you were buying milk to drink for the week and some major thing happened where you couldn't, do you want to then, at a much later date, pick up that now no-needed milk and try again? 🤔
@@stephaniehowe0973 it's no longer a pandemic status. Doesn't mean you can't get it. You can still get the flu or herpes too, doesn't mean those are a pandemic. Learn definitions.
@@stephaniehowe0973 Covid in some form has always been out there. The pandemic was the wide spread of Covid. I think OP meant the pandemic (wide spread) aspect of Covid has ended. But yes you’re right people are still getting Covid.
Milian is wacky??? Govt policy made it impossible to perform!!! that wedding on that date. The ower would have been fined, if she violated the covid meeting restrictions!!!!!! They should have rescheduled or sold/give the credit they got to another couple. When I did wedding photography, if a couple canceled, they got credit(no refunds). They could use the credit(deposit) or give it to someone or sell it to someone. I would usually have 2 couples cancel per year, the reason was they decided to use a more expensive photographer!!!( i have had many lawyers as customers, they all accepted my contract and terms,).
The bride didn't fulfill her side of the contract by bringing 150 people for the wedding. The wedding planner offered another day and time for the bride to have the wedding and was accommodating to them. The wedding planner obviously spent money preparing and rushing the repairs and organising the wedding which they chose not to have so the planner should have gotten paid. The bride blames her grandmother as the reason that she couldn't have done the wedding on another day, but this is not the wedding planners fault to be psychic to know when the grandmother will die or not. And it was not the planners fault to know that the pandemic would occur. But the bride and groom knew that the pandemic was happening in february and march 2020 when it was a global factor that all countries were shutting everything down. The bride still could of had the wedding even if her grandmother died and they did have their wedding on the same date without their grandmother. I think the bride and groom decided to do the wedding cheap without their grandmother otherwise the grandmother would have been there on their actual ceremony with the priest in the middle of nowhere . which they did without the grandmother. So the grandmother factor was not even considered in their own ceremony when she was still alive as she did not die before the wedding date she died after their wedding date. The bride was told that it was non refundable in the contract. So its non refundable and they agreed to it and not get their money back.
The Plaintiff fulfilled their part of the contract by paying in full. The defendant's business was no longer allowed to offer a max 150-person venue for the planned wedding on the 24 April 2020 date listed on the contract due to mandatory COVID lockdown so the defendant had to breach. There was nothing in the contract about the Plaintiff having to accept an alternative date 6 months or 1 year later if the defendant could not comply for whatever reason.
@@randys6220 no the bride breached the contract. Yes she paid in full, and the wedding planner was still able to accommodate her even when there was a lockdown. The bride breached contract by not bringing 150 people to her own wedding , which is not the fault of the wedding planner. The bride got a discount and the wedding planner did offer her the venue and did not cancel on the bride , the bride cancelled on herself, she breached the non refundable contract. The bride wanted the 150 people to attend but could not provide that. The amount that the bride agreed to was just for the venue, not for the amount of people who showed up to cater for. So the defendant did her diligence and the bride did not.
@@JK-jj9ko No the wedding planner was not still able to accommodate them. The Governor of California declared a State of Emergency and signed a directive for lockdown with comments from the Public Health Director: "To protect public health, I as State Public Health Officer and Director of the California Department of Public Health order all individuals living in the State of California TO STAY HOME or AT THEIR HOME OF RESIDENCE except as needed to maintain continuity of operations of the federal critical infrastructure sectors. Exceptions were necessities as food, prescriptions, and health care". Your statement that the wedding planner was "still able to accommodate" does not make sense since a stay-at-home order was in effect. It is ridiculous to think the wedding planner can just tell them to ignore the governor's order and just come anyway. Yeah, right. That would open up the plaintiffs AND the wedding planner for possible litigation if someone got sick with COVID and died.
@@randys6220 yes the planner accomodated them for them to choose another date . it's not the planners responsibility if someone died or will die. In january 2020 the world knew a pandemic was occurring and still up till march they were going ahead with the wedding knowing that other countries where shutting everything down. And its not true that her family could not go to the USA because donald trump allowed people from other countries to enter USA until September 2020 look at the facts because i did and i know millions of people still entered USA because trump never closed the borders.
The defendant deemed she made money for renting the venue, and doesn’t want to lose that profit. She wants the plaintiffs to reschedule, which the plaintiffs don’t want to- perhaps partially because the grandma is no longer around. They are insistent on not rescheduling, so she should give them their refund. She really should have done that without having been sued. If there was no pandemic, and they cancelled for no reason, the defendant would have had to mitigate her damages and show loss.
no hope for the defendant. Judge Milian ALWAYS finds for the plaintiff in covid cases. She's damaged a LOT of businesses. i think the govt should be sued for all the damage those lockdowns caused
The judge did correctly. The Pandemic caused a lot of changes and if people couldn't get the services they paid for, those businesses shouldn't be allowed to keep the money NOR FORCE people to accept their services at a later date. The law is the law. If a service can't be provided when needed then the consumer is suppose to have the money returned. Period. If you were buying milk to drink for the week and some major thing happened where you couldn't, do you want to then, at a much later date, pick up that now no-needed milk and try again? 🤔
@@vivoyeur Never said it wasn't a correct judgement lol. Just stating what I thought from the beginning. Obviously you have to uphold a contract. I've just seen a lot of cases where people were out their money because the contract read differently. Most of the time people don't receive their money back when given an option to reschedule so it was surprising to see a case where they actually did.
@@kittyfan 🤣🤣🤣 did you really just say "she damaged a lot of businesses" as if the judge was the one that created covid 🤭. She's ruled against businesses who couldn't not fulfill a contract.
@@ruhernan78 NONE of the businesses could fulfill their contracts at the time....the govt demanded that everything be shut down. MANY biz's offered another time, extras etc. but ALL are forced to refund their NON refundable deposits. Not their fault....it was the govt's fault. Judge Milian ALWAYS finds for the plaintiff....even though their non refundable deposit would not be refunded if the plaintiff backed out for some reason. Many judges ruled the same way....and many businesses were lost because of it, because THEY couldn't work, and had to repay all their customers. ps 41% of the businesses that went bankrupt were owned by Blacks.
Many couples were caught in this situation during Covid . I know some couples who had to shift their wedding more than twice due to lockdown . Feel sorry for them .
The defendant's accent seems so forced and fake, some of her words come out with no accent and then she catches herself and goes back with the accent. * all businesses, big and small, should give back deposits or reschedule whatever the customer decides. It is the customers choice if they have to take a business to court for this there should be a penalty to the business for not doing what they should.
@@mikebastoni4490 She said their budget was "really tight" at $10,000.00, but then found the defendant's venue at $2,700.00. That is definitely not a money problem unless she was going to have an expensive gourmet restaurant to cater the distance which was not even discussed at all.
JM got this one wrong. Defendant was on,y providing the venue, not the wedding. Plaintiffs were to provide the wedding themselves. Just another entitled couple using the pandemic to screw over an honest business. Weddings bring out the worst in people. Classic Bridzilla and Groomzilla here. They went ahead with a private ceremony so they didn’t need to have a wedding any longer. Now they got their money back for something in the end they just didn’t want to do any more.
The defendant rubbed me the wrong way in her exit interview when she said that canceling/rescheduling a wedding isn't that big of a deal compared to everything else caused by the pandemic. That's not something you get to decide for someone else. And they never claimed that their loss was more than anyone else's; they justifiably just wanted their money back.
She says she's glad they got their money back? If she's glad, then why did they have to take her to court to get it?
Because the couple got their money back, which is paid by People Court and the venue owner got to keep the deposit. So they both got their money, which is cool.
@@trust1952 and the lady got an appearance fee too
Exactly! She's full of 💩
I’m so tired of these businesses thinking they can keep money they didn’t earn
That is one of the cutest couples I’ve ever seen.
Completely agree!
The little kiss at the end
The defendant was so sideways shady at the end and Doug, bless him, rose to the challenge. I fell off my chair when he said in total deadpan, "what a delightful way to feel..."
I feel bad for the bride, I can empathize, my own paternal Baba (Grandma) passed away exactly one week before our wedding. We had to go directly from the funeral luncheon to have my husband and the bestmen fitted and pick-up their suits. (We were married 36+ years ago, however the memories remain)
We had hoped she would hang on, but it wasn't meant to be.
My consolation was that I knew she was no longer in pain, and she was able to watch it all with my Gida (Grandpa) from above!
Miss You Baba & Gida. 💞
That must have been tough. All the best ❤
@@michelehemlokhexwhite4310 Aww ... Thank You Darlin'! We were married 36+ years ago now, and it definitely altered the emotion surrounding our wedding.
I had a close relationship with my Baba, so I felt her near all that day, we acknowledged her at the reception, she was very much there in spirit.💕
@@dellahicks7231 I was very close with my Nan (maternal grandmother), too. I'm convinced she sent me my son ❤. My mum passed 3 days before Christmas last year, and listening to her 'between worlds' talking about those passed she could see in the room in the days before she died... there's more out there than we know. I asked her to send me birds, and the morning she died, as we were traveling home, a huge flock of pigeons descended on us and begged for food! Then, when we got home, 3 people called within 24hrs with baby bird rescues for me to care for (I usually get one a month). It was wild.
All the best to you and your partner. Wow that's a long, fulfilling marriage!
@@dellahicks7231 amazing how these memories stay with us. I assumed you meant your marriage was during the pandemic!
@@michelehemlokhexwhite4310 My apologies Michele, I will edit my comment to clarify.
Yes memories may not be as strong as the years go by, however they certainly do stay with us!
If the defendant really felt that way about what she said at the end of the case then why didn't she give them their money back?
When a contract is cancelled due to 'force majeure', then you have to refund in full, you might offer a rescheduling but since covid lasted 2 years and is actually still on-going, then a full refund is due...
So sad to hear about "Grandma" may she be in your hearts forever!
Yes
The newlyweds are just disgustingly in love…❤❤
Aww leave them. I sincerely hope they last!!!
🤣
@@jcymngo” Disgustingly in love” is actually positive phrase. 😊
Lol. I was thinking that they’re “cheesing” waaayyy too much. We all know that only lasts for so long. But glad for them
but what is with the wife still being called by her chinese last name ? isnt a wife supposed to have the same last name as the husband ? and if they have a son , he will look asian and have identy problems because he will have a dad that does not look asian . i have seen this and its not good .
So Douglas just sitting in a room with 3 screens lmao easy check
The ranch owner should get event insurance to cover herself for unknown situations.
Insurance does not cover customer cancellations or refunds 😂 it doesn’t subsidize businesses.
@@elizabethg0809 no, but event insurance does cover things like storms, acts of God, pandemics etc.
@@elizabethg0809 It's not normal cancellation. If cancelled because of storms, earthquake, fire, flood, .... and what ever you can add to the insurance will be covered.
Any way, I feel sorry for businesses (Businesses need to pay rent, workers salaries) workers who got laid off and customers who lost money because of planning wedding, graduation,... because of pandemic.
@@OneMamaToAnother Event insurance is for the CUSTOMER, not the business owner. It's like when your purchase insurance for an airline flight. It covers your cost, it doesn't pay the airline.
@@so_many_women_so_little_ti2833 You're either referring to property insurance or event insurance with that description. Neither covers a business owner's loss due to customer cancellations.
Heartwarming wedding story actually. Sweet to see people really in love.
Just b/c other couples put off their wedding to another date doesn’t mean they have to. She (defendant) was totally wrong & shouldn’t have had to gone to court to give their money back.
10k for a wedding?? This is why I wanna get married at a drive thru in Vegas 😂
10K for a wedding is actually quite reasonable considering the rings, dress, venue, cake, and food for all the guests.
@@Childfree334 listen I wish I could have paid 10,000. I’m paying way more 😢
Our wedding had 2 guests & was under $100 in Vegas. It’s been almost 20 years. We went on a month long honeymoon & started marriage without debt! 💙
@@imsickoflife1651 Good for you. However, cheap weddings are not an indicator of a lasting marriage. Check the divorce statistics and you will find many of those people started out just like you and your husband. Life happens. Just because you start out with no debt doesn't mean it will stay that way, especially adding kids to the mix. Blessings on a continued happy marriage 👩❤️👨!!!
@@theycallmedopeness Yes, weddings are not cheap, especially with a lot of guests. Wishing you and your future spouse all the happiness😊
5 or 6k is still "pretty *in*expensive" says who? The person getting that money? that's almost like someone saying the same thing about a fricking coffin that's gonna be in the ground and doing nothing...it's not like it even keeps the bugs out~
The husband looks a lot like actor Scott Grimes. He even sounds a lot like him too!
She wasn't generous as she purported herself to be. She had to be brought to court.
It was upto the plaintiffs to accept a partial refund or reschedule
@@Kaelioscope92 👆🏾👍👍👍
@@ygpwnxd_xd752 LOLOLOL
@@Kaelioscope92 Actually, it wasn't.. Not accotding her own contract
It is only right, they get their money back.... makes her look greedy.
The pandemic was out of our control, so why not give the plaintiffs their hard earned money back…
I would have said with her being a business owner she would have lost a lot of income as well, but she even stated every other event rescheduled so she actually didn't lose out as much as many others did. I'm glad they won, maybe they can take that money and apply towards a honeymoon.
Hard earned as in letting someone use the ranch without doing anything for the wedding?
That was the contract. For the venue only. Couple had to do all else, catering, flowers, etc themselves. Typical venue only contract.
They didn’t want to compromise at all. The defendant was willing to work with them. The pandemic wasn’t her fault either.
@@vadim7590
Hard earned = as in giving the plaintiffs their money back, not the lazy ranch owner.
The comment stated it clearly, how could you miss that??
@@olderandwiser5916 yeah.. they need to re-read it a few times lol
I always wondered what happened to Miss Bliss after she left Bayside.
Now that was funny!!
🤣
She started a potato ranch.
These cases just keep rolling in after the pandemic. It's unfortunate that the Defendant lost out on the venue being booked to completion, but as JM stated, this was not their fault.
How nice it must be to charge a "nonrefundable" deposit knowing that you don't have to give the money back even under unforeseen circumstances. What a great way to make money.
The judge is so beautiful!
liar
When she was Younger!
@@glenncurley680 MUCH MUCH younger
@@kyoto32001 Geez. She was nearly 60 when this was filmed (now 61).
Yes she was. She is looking old now. She looks much older than she is.
yes, an unpleasant story, because of the pandemic, many people have suffered.
Doug was definitely a little sweet on the defendant. 😂
The plaintiffs cancelled because their relatives couldn’t travel. The defendant was essentially saying that the plaintiffs could have been married there (up to 200 guests) if they’d used a minister from the church. So I don’t understand why the ranch owner is financially burdened. She has to pay bills and I don’t really agree with the interpretation that the contract was cut-and-dry in favor of the plaintiffs.
They could be married there with up to 200 guests at the time of filming, not for when the contract stated. The defendant was not able to uphold her end of the contract, so the judge rightfully ruled against her. It's her own contract that worked against her and the judge advised her on how to not put herself in that position again.
And if the only couple who wanted their money back was the one she gave a heavy discount to, then she's not out that much, especially since they were planning on renovating the place already and are now able to charge more due to those renovations.
What caught the defendant up was her own clause in the contract that the judge suggested she remove. The contract said that the rental fee was based on 150 people being able to attend the event. Essentially, $2700 = 150 people. 0 people = $0. The guests were not able to attend that day, so she does not get to keep their money.
What she was describing for the 200 people was the present day regulation, not what was happening when the couple was married which the judge also called her out for. For example, if there are certain regulations that are in place on Monday that change on Wednesday, on Friday you can't say that I could've used Wednesday's regulations on Monday.
Force majeure is a French term that literally means “greater force.” It is related to the concept of an act of God, an event for which no party can be held accountable, such as a hurricane or a tornado. However, force majeure also encompasses human actions, such as armed conflic
They are all lovely people.
I had this same issue. Was out my no refundable deposit on alot of stuff.
My wife lost the price of a round-trip international ticket over it. She scheduled a month before the restrictions were announced. The airline provided a voucher to fly later, but it expired months before the destination country opened up again. So the airline did not lose anything, they still got the full amount unlike the defendant here.
😂 My wedding date was April 1st
I would have given the money back just out of principle. You didn’t earn the money. Period.
Being married isn’t really about how big of a wedding they have. Most of the people that I’ve known to be married for a long time (40 years, or more) didn’t have a big wedding. We’ve been married 41 years, and no wedding!
It’s so hard to watch these lawsuits. The defendants are desperately trying to keep their businesses alive.
Lass from Leeds (yorkshire Bradford etc). That's an accent that is hard to melt.
Thanks. I was wondering where she was from.
i’m so tired of people thinking we care about their marriages. the truth is we ALL are annoyed by your frivolous events that no one wants to attend.
I’m glad they are getting something lol then u should have given it back from the start lol
10:03 mark Some people put in the word pandemic, we haven’t had a pandemic since the Spanish flu… It’s crazy!”
OH IF SHE ONLY KNEW 😩
5-6k is inexpensive?!?! My God I'm poor 🤦🏼♀️
These losing merchants kill me with the response, "I'm happy they're getting something..." so if that's the case, why don't they, her in this case, just return the money? She was just trying to "save face." I love how the judge said, "You're going to lose this case..." 😊
(I added the comment below to someone's comment when it was said that the judge was in essence, wrong & caused a lot of businesses to lose their business. This is nonsense.) The judge did correctly. The Pandemic caused a lot of changes and if people couldn't get the services they paid for, those businesses shouldn't be allowed to keep the money NOR FORCE people to accept their services at a later date. The law is the law. If a service can't be provided when needed then the consumer is suppose to have the money returned. Period.
If you were buying milk to drink for the week and some major thing happened where you couldn't, do you want to then, at a much later date, pick up that now no-needed milk and try again? 🤔
BUT THEY STILL HAD THEIR WEDDING!! Come on Judge...
At the beginning of the pandemic the judges were ruling for the people at the end of the pandemic judges started ruling for business.
What End?
My daughter had it last month.
My niece this week
@@stephaniehowe0973 it's no longer a pandemic status. Doesn't mean you can't get it. You can still get the flu or herpes too, doesn't mean those are a pandemic. Learn definitions.
@@stephaniehowe0973 Covid in some form has always been out there. The pandemic was the wide spread of Covid. I think OP meant the pandemic (wide spread) aspect of Covid has ended. But yes you’re right people are still getting Covid.
@@PhoenixForceTravelAgency
Its still Rampant w Hospitalizations up here.
Corona is a type of virus it has been around
@@stephaniehowe0973 true but rampant wouldn’t be classified as a pandemic though.
They are suing about the ranch and she didn't bring pictures?
He must want to seal that deal ASAP. LOL
Do you see how old he looks compared to her? Creepy.
The Defendant reminds me of Madonna a bit!
The defendant is clearly greedy and thoughtless. Good grief. I would think twice before using her services.
Californias long term shut down did more damage than good.
plaintiff is SOOOO pretty!!
He looks okay.
@@randys6220 the female one you dolt. she's beautiful
Milian is wacky??? Govt policy made it impossible to perform!!! that wedding on that date. The ower
would have been fined, if she violated the covid meeting restrictions!!!!!! They should have rescheduled
or sold/give the credit they got to another couple.
When I did wedding photography, if a couple canceled, they got credit(no refunds). They could
use the credit(deposit) or give it to someone or sell it to someone.
I would usually have 2 couples cancel per year, the reason was they decided to use a more expensive
photographer!!!( i have had many lawyers as customers, they all accepted my contract and terms,).
🤬 Another virtual episode!
Lmao my birthday is April 3rd
Hope you had a great birthday, and I wish you the best for the next one.
🕊 *♫ Love Is In The Air ♫* 🕊
My city shut down on Fri the 13th, this one made me curious as to when it happened in other areas...
I live in Rural Maine.
That was about it here.
They the kids from school went home on the 13th I believe.
By Monday that was it.
The bride didn't fulfill her side of the contract by bringing 150 people for the wedding. The wedding planner offered another day and time for the bride to have the wedding and was accommodating to them. The wedding planner obviously spent money preparing and rushing the repairs and organising the wedding which they chose not to have so the planner should have gotten paid.
The bride blames her grandmother as the reason that she couldn't have done the wedding on another day, but this is not the wedding planners fault to be psychic to know when the grandmother will die or not. And it was not the planners fault to know that the pandemic would occur. But the bride and groom knew that the pandemic was happening in february and march 2020 when it was a global factor that all countries were shutting everything down.
The bride still could of had the wedding even if her grandmother died and they did have their wedding on the same date without their grandmother.
I think the bride and groom decided to do the wedding cheap without their grandmother otherwise the grandmother would have been there on their actual ceremony with the priest in the middle of nowhere . which they did without the grandmother. So the grandmother factor was not even considered in their own ceremony when she was still alive as she did not die before the wedding date she died after their wedding date.
The bride was told that it was non refundable in the contract. So its non refundable and they agreed to it and not get their money back.
The Plaintiff fulfilled their part of the contract by paying in full. The defendant's business was no longer allowed to offer a max 150-person venue for the planned wedding on the 24 April 2020 date listed on the contract due to mandatory COVID lockdown so the defendant had to breach. There was nothing in the contract about the Plaintiff having to accept an alternative date 6 months or 1 year later if the defendant could not comply for whatever reason.
@@randys6220 no the bride breached the contract. Yes she paid in full, and the wedding planner was still able to accommodate her even when there was a lockdown. The bride breached contract by not bringing 150 people to her own wedding , which is not the fault of the wedding planner. The bride got a discount and the wedding planner did offer her the venue and did not cancel on the bride , the bride cancelled on herself, she breached the non refundable contract. The bride wanted the 150 people to attend but could not provide that. The amount that the bride agreed to was just for the venue, not for the amount of people who showed up to cater for. So the defendant did her diligence and the bride did not.
@@JK-jj9ko No the wedding planner was not still able to accommodate them. The Governor of California declared a State of Emergency and signed a directive for lockdown with comments from the Public Health Director: "To protect public health, I as State Public Health Officer and Director of the California Department of Public Health order all individuals living in the State of California TO STAY HOME or AT THEIR HOME OF RESIDENCE except as needed to maintain continuity of operations of the federal critical infrastructure sectors. Exceptions were necessities as food, prescriptions, and health care". Your statement that the wedding planner was "still able to accommodate" does not make sense since a stay-at-home order was in effect. It is ridiculous to think the wedding planner can just tell them to ignore the governor's order and just come anyway. Yeah, right. That would open up the plaintiffs AND the wedding planner for possible litigation if someone got sick with COVID and died.
@@randys6220 yes the planner accomodated them for them to choose another date . it's not the planners responsibility if someone died or will die. In january 2020 the world knew a pandemic was occurring and still up till march they were going ahead with the wedding knowing that other countries where shutting everything down. And its not true that her family could not go to the USA because donald trump allowed people from other countries to enter USA until September 2020 look at the facts because i did and i know millions of people still entered USA because trump never closed the borders.
$10k is tight budget?
For a wedding, YES it is. The rings💍, the dress, the venue, flowers, decorations, the cake, and the food. For all that, $10K is a bargain.
Gail is so beautiful
They should get their money bakc the defendant didnt provide them anything..never used it so she doesnt get to keep it.
The defendant deemed she made money for renting the venue, and doesn’t want to lose that profit. She wants the plaintiffs to reschedule, which the plaintiffs don’t want to- perhaps partially because the grandma is no longer around.
They are insistent on not rescheduling, so she should give them their refund. She really should have done that without having been sued.
If there was no pandemic, and they cancelled for no reason, the defendant would have had to mitigate her damages and show loss.
And probably wanted to get married fast because she wanted to have a green card from the future husband
I really thought in the beginning that the defendant would win given that she gave them an option to reschedule.
no hope for the defendant. Judge Milian ALWAYS finds for the plaintiff in covid cases. She's damaged a LOT of businesses. i think the govt should be sued for all the damage those lockdowns caused
The judge did correctly. The Pandemic caused a lot of changes and if people couldn't get the services they paid for, those businesses shouldn't be allowed to keep the money NOR FORCE people to accept their services at a later date. The law is the law. If a service can't be provided when needed then the consumer is suppose to have the money returned. Period.
If you were buying milk to drink for the week and some major thing happened where you couldn't, do you want to then, at a much later date, pick up that now no-needed milk and try again? 🤔
@@vivoyeur Never said it wasn't a correct judgement lol. Just stating what I thought from the beginning. Obviously you have to uphold a contract. I've just seen a lot of cases where people were out their money because the contract read differently. Most of the time people don't receive their money back when given an option to reschedule so it was surprising to see a case where they actually did.
@@kittyfan 🤣🤣🤣 did you really just say "she damaged a lot of businesses" as if the judge was the one that created covid 🤭. She's ruled against businesses who couldn't not fulfill a contract.
@@ruhernan78 NONE of the businesses could fulfill their contracts at the time....the govt demanded that everything be shut down. MANY biz's offered another time, extras etc. but ALL are forced to refund their NON refundable deposits. Not their fault....it was the govt's fault. Judge Milian ALWAYS finds for the plaintiff....even though their non refundable deposit would not be refunded if the plaintiff backed out for some reason. Many judges ruled the same way....and many businesses were lost because of it, because THEY couldn't work, and had to repay all their customers. ps 41% of the businesses that went bankrupt were owned by Blacks.
So many lives were ruined by this forced closure.
So many lives were saved through public health measures.
Many couples were caught in this situation during Covid . I know some couples who had to shift their wedding more than twice due to lockdown . Feel sorry for them .
They sued because the dude wants to show off his much much younger wife. ajajajajaja 😂
This is such a creepy comment. Like who even notices something like that 😳🤣 I think they sued… to get… their money back.
My exact thought!
@@jenelizabeth7822 even I got what the person was talking about, you're the only one here who took it to a dark place. weird
hey he paid good money for her
@@decentamerican7156 , you know he did. lmbao 🤣😂
They're so cute
Why does she keep mentioning a church? Their friend married them. It sounds like that was always the plan. Not everyone is a christian.
Sick test 36
The defendant's accent seems so forced and fake, some of her words come out with no accent and then she catches herself and goes back with the accent.
* all businesses, big and small, should give back deposits or reschedule whatever the customer decides. It is the customers choice if they have to take a business to court for this there should be a penalty to the business for not doing what they should.
Shame on you blondie😛
The defendant is beautiful
Not really
@@mikebastoni4490 I'm sure you're not really handsome either.
She is old and Im 72. I couldnt imagine having sex with someone that old.
@@travis8665 I’m aware she’s older, she’s still pretty. Sounds pretty predatory coming from a 72 year old man. I’m sure women think the same about you
Crazy warrior 76
This cancel was due too money problems not due too covd19 they could have used it for another time
No money problems were mentioned. They already paid in full.
@@randys6220 first thing she said money was tight
@@mikebastoni4490 She said their budget was "really tight" at $10,000.00, but then found the defendant's venue at $2,700.00. That is definitely not a money problem unless she was going to have an expensive gourmet restaurant to cater the distance which was not even discussed at all.
@@randys6220 I'm willing to say 150 wasn't showing up either so money was a problem
This defendant unfortunately breached the contract entirely based off the facts in this case.
Since when do you enforce the facts of the case?! 🤔
Dirty elk 34
another pandemic show
Alive friend 47
She's made interest on their money all this time.
exactly next time she's at Burger King she'll be able to super size it.
5000-6000 to rent ranch for ONE day?! 😖ouch
Cruel elk 18
My birthday is April 4th..i got married April 8th....
April is the best month lol (random)
Are you still married?
I got married on april 2nd. That didn't last.😂😂
her accent is all over the place.. 🥴
It’s mostly northern English mixed up with a false American
JM got this one wrong. Defendant was on,y providing the venue, not the wedding. Plaintiffs were to provide the wedding themselves. Just another entitled couple using the pandemic to screw over an honest business. Weddings bring out the worst in people. Classic Bridzilla and Groomzilla here. They went ahead with a private ceremony so they didn’t need to have a wedding any longer. Now they got their money back for something in the end they just didn’t want to do any more.
Shes pretty
Cute mechanic 15
Wow JM looka like she is tired in the 1st case...little to no make up or lashes...poor thing...
That accent. Not real!
came to the comments section LOOKING for this comment!!
her accent is all over the place.. NZ.. SCOTTISH.. BRITISH.. AMERICAN.... BRGGHHHHH....
that happens when they've been in this country for a while, comes out like half & half and not sounding right, well known thing. nothing odd about it
Not real on that accent!!
The defendant is smoking hot
Cold snow 74
Short brother 89
millennials.....
10k is not a tight budget 🤣
For a wedding that big it is!
@@ninaalcantar4148 yeah I def made that comment before I heard how many guests. My bad.
Alive friend 47