01x64 - Wedding Planner Drama

[bunniefuu]

You hired the defendant
as a wedding planner.

Correct.

[Judge Judy]
Prior to the wedding, she quit.

- That's not true.
- I have facts.

Did you have a written contract?

- We did not.
- We were good friends.

- I just took her word.
- That's a bad idea.

- That's correct.
- Don't tell me I'm correct.

I'm always correct.

[announcer] This is Judy Justice.

[theme music playing

[announcer] Jennifer Perry
is suing her former friend

and wedding coordinator, Carla
Williams

for a refund
for wedding planning services

and the cost of decorations.

[Kevin] Court come to order. All
rise.

Have a seat, please.

[Kevin] Hello, judge.

Case 1104, Perry versus Williams.

- Thank you.
- You're welcome.

[Judge Judy] Ms. Perry,
you hire d the defendant

as a wedding planner
for your daughter's wedding.

- That's correct.
- You had known her before.

We used to be coworkers
about 20 years ago.

We did have a friendship
outside of work. Yes.

[Judge Judy] Tell me when your
daughter's wedding was scheduled.

- June 12th of 2021.
- So it took place?

- It did.
- That's your daughter.

[Jennifer] No.
She wasn't able to travel today.

[Judge Judy] Okay. In what month
did you hire the defendant?

November 29th of 2020.

- Did you have a written contract?
- We did not.

[Judge Judy] Is there any reason why
you did not have a written contract?

- This is your business.
- That's correct.

And according to you, you've been
in this business for a long time.

- That's correct.
- [Judge Judy] Do you have a contract

- with other clients?
- Yes, ma'am.

[Judge Judy] And is there any reason
why you didn't have a contract

- with the plaintiff?
- I did.

Well, because Jennifer and I
are...well, we were good friends

and um I just took her word,
so and that's why we weren't...

That's a bad idea, Ms. Williams.
Of course, this is business.

- Yeah, exactly.
- And if this is your business,

- you're supposed to have a contract.
- Correct.

And you're supposed to have a
contract.

You signed a venue
for your daughter's wedding?

Correct.

[Judge Judy] Did you have a
contract?

- Yes, ma'am.
- Did you have a caterer

- for your daughter's wedding?
- I believe so.

My daughter coordinated that with
her father, but I believe so.

So, her father paid for the
caterer?

Correct.

[Judge Judy] I have to assume
there was a contract.

- Unless you...her father does...
- I would assume so as well.

- I think you're correct.
- [Judge Judy] What did you pay for?

- I paid for Carla's services.
- [Judge Judy] Just a second.

- Okay. What else?
- I paid for the decorations.

What else?

I helped with the bachelorette
party.

- That I don't care about.
- Um primarily, Carla's service...

[Judge Judy] I wanna know...Ms. Perry?

Yes.

[Judge Judy]
Exactly what did you pay for?

- [Jennifer] I paid a lot.
- You paid for the decorations.

- Correct.
- [Judge Judy] Which were according

to what I read, maybe a couple
of hundred bucks.

What I paid for through Carla.
Yes, ma'am.

[Judge Judy]
Was a couple of hundred bucks.

And the defendant's services
were $1,100.

- Yes, ma'am.
- [Judge Judy] How many people

- were at the wedding?
- Close to a hundred.

- Was there a dinner?
- There was.

- At a venue?
- Yes.

- [Judge Judy] With music?
- DJ.

- [Judge Judy] DJ.
- Uh-hmm.

- Cake?
- Yes.

[Judge Judy] So, your contribution
to this was $1,100.

I'm just setting it clearly
and you were supposed to provide

the wedding planner who would do
the arrangement for flowers,

who would arrange for a DJ.

Okay. So it is your claim

that while you paid her $1,100,

which I don't think you deny
that she paid you $1,100.

- Correct.
- [Judge Judy] Prior to the wedding,

you claimed she quit. The defendant
says that you fired her.

- That's not true.
- That's what I'm here to find out.

The total cost
that Ms. Williams quoted you

for her services was how much?

- The number changed.
- [Judge Judy] Just a s...

how much was the last number

she quoted you for the job?

- $1,100.
- [Judge Judy] No. That's wrong.

That's not true.
Be careful what you say

'cause at this point,
we're not in a good place.

She said she quoted you $3,882.

[Jennifer] That was never
provided to me.

Never, never have I seen that number.

- This is the first time...
- [Carla] That's not true.

[Jennifer] ...I'm hearing of that
number.

[Judge Judy] Okay. Very good.

So, you tell me the number

that she quoted you
to do the entire job.

The entire job was $750

and then it was going to be
an additional $100

t-to rent a love table that she had.

As we proceeded on,
she tacked on an additional $230

to cover the rental of additional
items that my daughter wanted to use.

Collectively, we came up at $1,100
to which she has been paid fully.

[Judge Judy] Now, in going over
what she was going to do,

one of the things
that she was going to do

was to hire a DJ that I assume

the bride's father was going to pay
for

or were you supposed to pay
for the...just...

okay, very careful what you say to me
because right now, Ms. Perry,

you're doing that lilt
from foot to foot

which makes me a little
uncomfortable.

- Okay. Sorry.
- [Judge Judy] Do you understand?

- Yes.
- No, it's an uncomfortable thing

because you're trying
to get where I'm going,

which is not an easy place to get to

because I have five children,

all of whom have been married
at least once

and planned weddings
and know what wedding planners do

and what their function is.

So, I've had experience.

- Understood.
- [Judge Judy] And the country

is pretty much the same.

Ms. Williams' problem
is she runs a business

and she didn't do a contract,
a written one.

- Can I speak?
- [Judge Judy] So what I asked you

was very simply as part
of your arrangement

with your ex-husband
who was paying for the wedding.

- He was paying for some of...
- [Judge Judy] Who was just...

he was paying
for the vast majority of the wedding.

- That's not true.
- [Judge Judy] According to you

because he was paying
for a hundred people for food.

[Jennifer] I said
for the caterer, correct.

For the...for the...he paid for the
food.

- The caterer.

- [Judge Judy] He paid for the venue.
- No.

The, the venue was paid for
by the groom's parents.

Okay. So, the groom's parents
paid for the venue.

- Uh-hmm.
- [Judge Judy] Your ex-husband paid

- for the food for a hundred people.
- Okay.

And you're, you're telling me

that your total responsibility so far

was the $1,100 that you paid
to the defendant.

- Yeah.
- [Judge Judy] And my question

- to you was...
- That's not my entire responsibility

- but that was the obligation...
- My question...no, my question to you

was as part of your responsibility
with the wedding planner,

she was going to acquire a DJ.

- Which would need to be proved.
- [Judge Judy] Stop. Just listen.

My question is who was
supposed to pay for the DJ?

- That discussion did not take place.
- [Judge Judy] Just a...

oh, I'm not believing you at all.

- I'm not believing...
- Why is that?

[Judge Judy] Why, why is that?
Because this whole case revolves...

put your hand down. This whole case
revolves around the DJ

- and a problem that I'm just...
- [Jennifer] That's correct.

Don't tell me I'm correct.
I'm always correct.

Except when she says I'm not correct.

You may not consider it a meeting,

but when you bring things over
to her house

and discuss with the event planner
where you want these...

[Jennifer] That was a friend,
not a meeting.

I'm...don't, don't try
to talk over me, madam.

[theme music playing]

[announcer] Jennifer Perry claims
her former friend

and wedding coordinator,
Carla Williams,

owes for a refund
for wedding planning services.

Carla is countersuing
for breach of contract,

lost wages, and defamation of
character.

[Judge Judy] Okay.
So, if you were supposed to pay

for the DJ as part of your
responsibility for this wedding,

as part of the wedding planning
thing,

and what happened here
is that the groom's aunt,

they said, we could get the DJ for
free.

- So, we're not going to use her DJ.
- And I'm sorry...

[Judge Judy] That puts me
in one category of my head.

If you were supposed to pay for the
DJ

and s... clearly, somebody
is supposed to pay for the DJ

'cause this wedding was pretty
well-planned out, Ms. Perry.

The groom's family
was paying for the venue.

The bride's father
was paying for the caterer.

- Yes, ma'am.
- You were supposed to pay

- for certain decorations...
- Uh-hmm. Correct.

[Judge Judy] ...and wedding planning.
In that package,

were you also supposed
to pay for the DJ is the question?

We were sharing responsibilities
for the finance.

- [Judge Judy] No, no, no.
- So, it wasn't agreed upon.

They didn't come to me
and say, here's the DJ.

I asked you who was supposed
to pay for it?

It-it would have been deter...
I would have been happy

to pay for the DJ if that's who
she would've collected.

[Judge Judy] Okay. Fine. Very good.
Then I'm gonna deal with this case...

I'm gonna deal with this case
on a very simple basis.

I'm gonna deal with it
since you have no written contract

on a quantum meruit basis.

On what month were you hired,
month and year?

November the 29th, 2020.

[Judge Judy] When, according to you,

were you told your services
were no longer necessary?

The day of rehearsal, she told me
my service was no longer available.

- [Jennifer] That's...
- [Judge Judy] No, just a second.

- May 18th, 2021.
- Can we agree on a date

either of being fired
or quitting on May 18th, 2021?

- Yes, we can.
- [Judge Judy] Great.

Between November 29th, 2020,

December, January, February,

March, April, and half of May,
five and a half months,

tell me what you actually did
in furtherance

of the arrangement
that you had with the plaintiff.

I prepared pipe and draping
which they ordered

two pipe and draping for the bride.
I have pictures

- that I can show you.
- [Judge Judy] I'd like to see it.

- Can I see?
- [Jennifer] And, Your Honor,

she did not ask
the bride what she want...

[Judge Judy] Great.
Don't...just a second. Just a second.

Don't speak.

I am now ruling on this case
based upon how much time

and what she actually did

during that five and a half-month
period.

- [Jennifer] Understood, ma'am.
- [Judge Judy] To absorb $1,100

and if it fixed a reasonable hourly
to her expertise,

I'm gonna figure out whether or not

she is entitled to keep because I
think

that the arrangement you had with her

was to pay substantially
more than $1,100.

But since she doesn't have
that in writing anywhere,

if she did any work,
you don't get your money back.

- You understand that?
- That's not what she stated to me.

[Judge Judy] Just a second. I don't
care what she stated to you, that's

- why you're here in court today.
- Understood. Agreed.

[Judge Judy] Very good.
So you're here in court today

to determine the worth of her work

for five and a half months
and whether or not she used up

that $1,100 in work that she did for
you.

Okay. May I see it, please?

Okay. Was this done specifically
for her wedding?

- Her daughter's wedding. Yes, ma'am.
- [Judge Judy] Okay.

- Did you send her pictures of this?
- She-she saw th-that picture

in your hand.

[Judge Judy] Did you discuss
what they wanted either with her

or with her daughter
about what color she wanted?

- Did you have those conversations?
- Yes, ma'am. Yes, I did.

Are these the flower arrangements
that you did for the wedding?

[Carla] Yes, ma'am.

[Judge Judy]
Are these her daughter's color?

Yes, ma'am.

[Judge Judy]
Did you send her these pictures?

Yes. She saw pictures.
She even saw it in person.

Tell me when she saw them personally.

It was in uh November when we met up.

It was also in December 'cause
I met up wit' 'em several times.

How many times did you meet
with them in December?

- It was maybe two or three times.
- [Judge Judy] Where?

- [Carla] Um at my home.
- Who was present?

Uh Jennifer and her daughter.

Were these made up of fresh
flowers?

[Carla] No, those were not. Those
were silk flowers for the wedding.

[Judge Judy] Silk flowers that you
own

that you arranged in order
to show her and her daughter?

- That's-that's correct.
- [Judge Judy] Okay.

Who told you what the colors were,
blue and white?

[Carla] Jennifer and her... uh
and Alexa, her daughter.

[Judge Judy] Okay.
So, what you do is you take

- the color scheme of the bride.
- Of the...that's correct.

- [Judge Judy] And create this?
- That's correct.

So these blues were bought
just for this wedding?

- [Carla] That's right.
- [Judge Judy] Okay.

How much money did they cost?

With that big bundle there,

that was about $400
because flowers are...

- silk flowers are very expensive.
- Who paid for those?

- I did.
- Did the plaintiff reimburse you

for those?

[Carla] No, ma'am. They belong to
me.

[Judge Judy] But these were purchased
in this box for her wedding?

- [Carla] That's correct.
- Ma'am, that's not true.

I actually had provided Carla
with the flowers

that I had purchased
for Alexa's wedding.

That is not for Alexa's event
exclusively.

[Carla] Th-the flowers that Jennifer
bought for her daughter,

you know, those wooden...
the flowers they're wooden,

they were on a skinny stem
and they really...they really...

- It's what the bride wanted.
- [Judge Judy] Don't speak.

And they're very, very sk... uh small,
they're wood.

Those are the flowers that Jennifer
provided and when I saw

those flowers, I said, "Jennifer,
these are not going to work.

If we're gonna use these flowers,
we're gonna have to add

some of the flowers that I have
because if we want it to look full,

those little s-flowers
are not going to look appropriate."

[Judge Judy] Did you return those
to the plaintiff?

- The ones that she brought the...
- Yes, she picked those up.

- Yes, ma'am.
- Okay.

Careful with me, very careful.

Did you give to the defendant

a certain number of flowers
that you purchased?

- Yes, ma'am.
- Did she return them to you?

- Yes, ma'am.
- [Judge Judy] You didn't purchase

- any of these flowers.
- [Jennifer] That's correct.

- That is not what...
- [Judge Judy] Don't speak.

- The answer is no.
- No.

[Judge Judy] Next question,

who did the flowers
for your daughter's wedding?

- I did.
- [Judge Judy] Personally?

- Personally.
- So, you did the arrangements

- for your daughter's wedding?
- Yes, ma'am.

[Judge Judy] I'd like to see
a picture of it.

- Okay.
- Of the flower arrangements.

- [Jennifer] Okay.
- [Sarah] If it makes a difference

for your judgment for how much
she gets paid by the hour,

I know her complaint says
that she's been working for 12 years.

The LLC was incorporated in 2018.

- [Judge Judy] Uh-hmm.
- So, she must have had

some sort of business
prior to this design company.

[Judge Judy] Uh-hmm. Uh-hmm. Right.

[Sarah] I found the one of...
a photo of Alexa's bouquet.

[Judge Judy]
I'd like to take a look at both.

[Sarah] Sure.

[Judge Judy] I'm not talking
about your daughter's flowers.

I'm talking about
the flowers for the table.

Oh, I'm sorry.
We were discussing bouquets.

[Judge Judy] No.
We weren't discussing bouquets.

- Did I ever use the word bouquet?
- No.

[Judge Judy]
I never used the word bouquet.

Here you go. Oh, sorry.

[Judge Judy] Okay.

So on the head table, you had a nice
s-something of flowers,

reasonable,
and then you went for the tables,

y-you went on the cheap side.

- No, that is what my...ma'am...
- [Judge Judy] Sure. Oh, sure, you

- did.

- ...that is what my daughter wanted.
- [Judge Judy] Sure you did.

You went on the cheap side.
Okay. I got it now.

[Jennifer] Those were the items
that my daughter had picked out. That

- was the display that she wanted.
- [Judge Judy] Yeah. Fine. Very fine.

The expectation
of the wedding coordinator...

Very, very good. Listen,
I wanna explain something to you.

I got this whole thing.

I got the whole thing.

She spent a time putting together
items, meeting with you.

She met with you and your daughter.

I would guesstimate,
guesstimate at least four times,

- probably more.
- It was more than that.

- No. It was three. Three maximum.
- [Judge Judy] Probably...

- No, that's not true.
- [Jennifer] That is true.

- Did she come to the venue?
- Yes.

She came to the venue
on February 23rd.

[Judge Judy] Just a second. Just a
second. Is that the fourth time?

- [Jennifer] No.
- [Judge Judy] You're telling me

that you met with her twice?
Just a second. You see,

let me tell you why I don't believe
you 'cause other than the fact

that you're getting red.

Let me tell you why, because she met
with you once on the 29th.

- [Jennifer] No, no.
- And then what you are telling me

is she met with you once

between November
and the time she went to the venue

when she had this kerfuffle with a DJ
who was the aunt of the bridegroom.

So, if that's what you're telling me,
I'm telling you, I don't believe it.

Did she ever tell you that she had
a small budget because Alexis,

that's her daughter's father
was not contributing to the wedding?

- Yes.
- Why did you tell her that?

- That's not true.
- It was true at the time.

I'm gonna have to introduce you
to the truth.

[theme music playing]

[announcer] Jennifer Perry has
accused wedding coordinator Carla

Williams, of canceling her services
three weeks before the wedding.

Carla claims Jennifer breached
their contract and defamed her.

Okay. So now you wanna sit back

and think about how many times
you met with Ms. Williams

on this event after you first met
with her

on November 29th, 2020.

There was no meeting
on November 29th, 2020.

- I sent her a text message...
- [Judge Judy] I said, how many times

did you meet with her

after November 29th, 2020?

Think about it.

- Two.
- How many times did you meet

with the plaintiff
after November 29th, 2020?

It was about eight to ten times we
met eh-because we met...

we met the ven... at the venue three
times.

- No.
- [Judge Judy] Okay.

You met at the venue three times.

Do you remember when you went
to the venue?

Um I don't remember the exact date,
but I know we went out

and it was in February
because that was the first time

I had to go look at the venue
so that I can get an idea of what,

what exactly that they wanted.

Okay. So that's one.

We also met in March.

Where did you meet in March?

We-we met at the venue again.

- [Judge Judy] Who was present?
- Uh Jennifer and her daughter,

- Alexa. We also met in April.
- Where?

Um, well, we was in a car together
'cause we went over to Illinois.

Um it was a company that was selling
a lot of the uh supplies that

uh the coordinators or banquet owners
have.

So, I mentioned it to Jennifer
that we can go over there

and look at a couple items
for the wedding.

So we were all three in the car
together in Jennifer's c-car.

Okay. And how long
did you spend there?

Uh we was there for about an hour.

You have any recollection of that,
madam?

- I do.
- [Judge Judy] Okay.

When else did you meet?

And then we also met um at the
rehearsal.

Okay. And she never came
to your house,

so she looked at these pictures
via...

- [Carla] No.
- She looked at these...

[Carla] J-Jennifer had been to my
house several times. So...

- As friends.
- [Judge Judy] Just...don't speak.

'Cause I don't...what I'm telling
you is I don't believe your story

that you met twice, do you
understand?

I do.

[Judge Judy] I didn't believe it
when you said it

and now, I'm positive that you met
more than twice.

- Okay.
- [Judge Judy] After the road trip,

was the only other time
that you met at the rehearsal dinner,

- that you met?
- No, we met several times

'cause Jenni... brough... Jennifer
brought some items to my home

um that she uh wanted at her
daughter's reception which was items

that she wanted to be put on the
grass because the wedding ceremony

- was outside.
- [Judge Judy] Okay.

So, how many times did she bring
items to your home?

She came four times.

Does any of that sound familiar to
you?

- Yes.
- Very good. Your claim is dismissed

- for your $1,100.
- [Jennifer] Ma'am, can I...

- No, your claim...
- [Jennifer] No.

[Jennifer] I would like to speak.

Your claim is...
your claim is absolutely...

Well, I wasn't allowed to interrupt.
I'd like to present my side of the

case. She's saying hearsay. I have
facts.

On November 28th is the date
that we went over to the venue.

I actually told her about the sale.

- Provided it to her.
- [Judge Judy] So, just a second.

I don't care. You have no case.

I don't believe
that you met with her twice.

You may not consider it a meeting...

- [Carla] Uh-hmm.
- ...but when you bring things over

to her house and discuss
with the event planner

- where you want these...
- That was a friend, not a meeting.

[Judge Judy] And don't,
don't try to talk over me, madam.

You had a limited responsibility.

You had someone who trusted you
with whom you were friendly with,

- who had no contract with you.
- [Carla] Uh-hmm.

And you paid her
a de minimis amount of money.

So I didn't believe that based upon
all of this that you only met with

her as according to you, two times.
Is that what she said?

- Yes.
- Two times.

But then when we go back
to what you did, in fact, take her

time. She went...don't speak.

She went with you.

I don't care if you went with your
daughter. It's your wedding.

- [Jennifer] She needed a ride.
- She...don't speak.

I don't care who drove.

She went with you in her capacity
as a wedding planner

to look at items for the venue.

You may not consider that work,

but that's work.
That's what she does for a living.

But she has [indistinct] in
Victoria.

[Judge Judy] Do not speak, just
listen.

So, since I don't have a written
contract.

[Carla] Uh-hmm.

[Judge Judy] And since I don't
believe

- that you met only twice.
- Correct.

[Judge Judy] I am paying her by way
of quantum meruit

because I believe that she met
with you closer to 10 times.

- Uh-hmm. Correct.
- [Judge Judy] Not two.

- Not two. She...I...
- I have evidence of the times

- that we met.
- [Judge Judy] Just a second. I'm

speaking. You don't remember a lot
until your recollection is refreshed.

- Wow.
- [Judge Judy] Now, we're gonna get

- to the counterclaim.
- She's trash.

She's got a counterclaim.
Don't move yourself.

Just listen.
Her counterclaim is money owed

for breaching the agreement.
Forget it.

- Next time, put it in writing.
- Okay.

[Judge Judy]
Lost wages and defamation.

So, what I'm gonna hear
is the defamation part of your case.

- Correct.
- If you want a contract,

you're a businessperson,
put it in writing.

- Do you understand?
- Yes, ma'am.

Great. Now,
let's hear about the defamation.

Okay. After Jennifer fired me,
she went on to...

[Judge Judy]
After you no longer work together.

- We worked...yes.
- I didn't get to...I don't need to

know whether you quit or whether she
fired you as a result of this 'cause

That actually matters.

Whether you fire her or she quit,
it doesn't make a difference.

- She was the one...
- [Judge Judy] Don't speak.

I'm done with your case.

Now, I'm gonna find out
whether or not you defamed her.

Now, I would just like to see
w-what it is that you claim

she said about you publicly
to defame you.

- [Carla] Yes.
- [Judge Judy] Let me see it.

She posted, "Never do business here.

I've been friends with her,
helped her with an event,

helped her prepare a baby shower.
That's just unfortunate.

But I am bearing the financial loss
with three weeks until the wedding."

- She posted that?
- Yes.

[Judge Judy] It's not defamatory.
Anything else?

She's also on Instagram telling
people don't use my business.

- She's false. She don't...
- [Judge Judy] She's allowed...

just a second. She's allowed to do
that.

- That's her opinion.
- [Carla] Uh-hmm.

Did she ever tell you in the initial
conversation that she had,

which is something that you put
in your complaint?

This is just a point of interest for
me. Did she

ever tell you that she had
a... when she called you in November

of 2020 that she had a small budget
because Alexis,

that's her daughter's father,
was not contributing to the wedding?

Yes.

[Judge Judy] Did you ever tell her
that?

- I did.
- Why did you tell her that?

- That's not true.
- It was true at the time.

- You don't have...
- [Jennifer] I have one more daughter

You don't have a case...
you don't have a case for defamation.

I'm gonna have to introduce you
to the truth.

- It will be a nice first meeting.
- I have the truth, ma'am.

Thank you very much. We're done here.

[Kevin] Court is adjourned.

Unfortunately, she lied,
but she was more believable.

I was trying to be a good friend
and give her a family discount.

She told me that she would just
give me back my money.

I've been truthful with her.

I been, you know, there to help
for whatever way she needed,

but this would happen, so.

It's very upsetting to lose a
friendship of over 20 years,

but, it happens.

It's a terrible situation because it
could have went a better way

but, you know, she chose it this way
so this is what happens.

[Sarah] That defendant seemed
pretty professional,

despite the fact that she didn't have
a written contract

in this instance for her business.

But otherwise, she seemed to have
all her ducks in a row.

She had all her evidence laid out.

She knew what she had done
for the plaintiffs and their wedding.

You go back to it's so much easier
if you have a written contract.

If you outline
what your basic agreement is,

- especially the cost.
- [Sarah] Uh-hmm.

And what is going to be part of that,

you're protected.
It really helps everybody.

So, if you take away anything from
this is, if you're in a business,

whether it be friend, relative,
neighbor,

if you have something
that has a cost involved to it,

put it in writing.
Anyway, this a good case.

- [Sarah] Yeah.
- And you should keep that card

in case you need her. She sounds like
a very reasonable wedding planner.

I might.

[announcer] Want justice?



[theme music playing]