A bizarre case took an awkward turn of events when one woman decided to turn zoom court proceedings into a slanging match with the judge. Apparently, the woman is suing a man for standing her up on a date and causing her 'emotional distress.' During the court session, the judge tried to reason with the lady, but the lady only took it as an insult to her intelligence.
Woman Sues Date For $10,000 After He Fails To Show Up On Date: 'He Lied!'
A bizarre case was reported where an argument broke out between a judge and a woman who is suing a man for standing her up on their date leading to 'emotional distress.'
QaShontae Short is suing Richard Jordan for $10,000 for intentionally inflicting emotional distress after he failed to turn up for a date they had planned.
Short, who lives in Michigan, filed the suit back in 2020, stating that Jordan ‘did not show and left on her mother's birthday and her mom had just passed away’ - she says that his actions deliberately hurt her.
Things took a weird turn when the case appeared in court via zoom meeting and ended up with Short having a slanging match with Judge Herman Marable Jr.
As the case proceeded, Jordan says he believed the case would ‘be thrown out’ before saying the whole thing was a waste of the judge’s time.
In footage of the court proceedings, Judge Marable replies to Jordan: “The problem is this: if you think it should be dismissed, you need to file the appropriate motion. You need to file a motion to ask for that.”
To which Short interjects: “In that letter, he lied and then that's what brought forth the perjury. It was never perjury in the beginning, it was perjury in his response.”
Judge Marable tells Short: “Well you can't say... listen, he has the right to put whatever is in the answer.”
Short replied to say she wasn’t saying that he couldn’t, following which the judge hit back: “You can't add another count because you don't like or disagree with what is in his answer!”
The judge then asks her if she knows what perjury is, and things get even more heated as Short shouts over him as he speaks.
As if things didn't get awkward enough during the case proceedings, Short goes on to accuse the judge of ‘insulting her intelligence’, to which he explains: “You have to lay your complaint out, you have not. It's not about that, I don't think you understand what perjury is.”
Short continues: “Please, do not insult my intelligence. Do not do that, do not do that as if I do not understand what the word perjury means. If it's a criminal offence then I'll move it.”
Marable: 'Well, ma'am, it should not have been filed in district course if you want intentional infliction of emotional distress.”
Not happy with how the case was panning out, Short asks about transferring the case to circuit court before repeatedly asking: “Are we done here?”
In the end, Judge Marable orders the case to be moved to a circuit court. Short now has 56 days to pay the costs for a transferred case or the case will be dismissed.