UD case for non payment of rent.
UD case for non payment of rent. Def. brought habitability defense. Def. lied in court and Judge apparently believed him. Def. offered little to no proof of allegations. Judge ignored Plf. evidence and ruled for the Def. Defendant was very personable and an excellent liar, but Judge should have considered the evidence. Withholding of rent comes with some responsibilities. Judge did not address this or challenge the lack of evidence. When challenged by Plaintiff, Defendant claimed that a receipt was probably at home. Judge accepted this. Decision had no information other than “Judgment for the defendant“ Defendant still not paying rent months after trial and any alleged issues were addressed. Now, there will be more losses and a new trial. After years on the bench, it appears that Hon. Judge Umeda hears mostly small claims matters. I am honored to submit his first review on The Robing Room.