That's the whole point of MORAL court. The D is not legally obligated because the P WAS A FRIEND and didn't have the D sign promissory notes month after month for 2 years. The D IS NOT A FRIEND. He is a selfish jerk. I hope the P woke up after hearing what everyone said and threw his butt out and found a true friend. I don't know what's happening to people's morals in the world these days.
People are so shallow. Why is everyone taking the plaintiff side in this case? The ONLY reason why he is trying to get some money is because he learned of how much the defendant makes. The D has a good job so now he wants to try to mooch off of it by bringing up the past two years - although there was never ANY agreement about the D reimbursing him for the rent. If the salaries were reversed and it was the plaintiff making $7000+ and the D making about $1500, opinions would be different.
That's the whole point of MORAL court. The D is not legally obligated because the P WAS A FRIEND and didn't have the D sign promissory notes month after month for 2 years. The D IS NOT A FRIEND. He is a selfish jerk. I hope the P woke up after hearing what everyone said and threw his butt out and found a true friend. I don't know what's happening to people's morals in the world these days.
Ydaspit 2 months ago
People are so shallow. Why is everyone taking the plaintiff side in this case? The ONLY reason why he is trying to get some money is because he learned of how much the defendant makes. The D has a good job so now he wants to try to mooch off of it by bringing up the past two years - although there was never ANY agreement about the D reimbursing him for the rent. If the salaries were reversed and it was the plaintiff making $7000+ and the D making about $1500, opinions would be different.
zion653 3 months ago
The Defendant is a selfish piece of CRAP! He is NOT a friend. He is a (L)USER! (As well as a CHEAPSKATE!)
kalmanizer 8 months ago 2