Every episode of “JUDGED by Matt Walsh” is filled with tricky situations that require careful consideration, but luckily the wise judge has the patience and wisdom to rule fairly on each and every case — even for strange cases involving air mattresses and magicians.
Up first, Angelia Cobbs came to court to sue her younger sister, Paige, for what she’s calling unacceptable behavior.
The plaintiff explained how Paige moved with her from their home state of Arkansas to Texas to help with housework and to help care for Cobbs’ two children while she worked a second job. The plaintiff described her sister as a “party girl” who agreed to come help, but then decided to “party every day” instead.
“She agreed to pay half the rent, however, she did not do that,” Cobbs said of her sister.
The plaintiff went on to accuse Paige of breaking her promise and also breaking her air mattress. Judge Walsh asked how long Paige was sleeping on the air mattress, and Cobbs said it was about two months.
The judge said that was an important detail. “That’s a long time to be on an air mattress,” Walsh observed. “Doesn’t every air mattress break after it’s been used three times?”
He then recalled the tragic tale of visiting a friend and being forced to sleep on an air mattress, which deflated around him in the middle of the night. “I could have suffocated,” Judge Walsh said. “I was tangled up in it, crying for help.”
The bailiff was next tasked with reading the lengthy text exchange between the two sisters. Cobbs said she was suing her sister for three months of rent and for a replacement air mattress.
Next, it was defendant Paige Lacy’s turn to tell her side of the story in what the judge describes as a “classic mooching case.”
Lacy said she had just finished college and was a schoolteacher when she moved to Texas to help her sister with the kids, not watch them full-time. As for the partying, the defendant said she didn’t go out every night, but did party “every other weekend” because she’s “fun.”
“She’s just mad because she’s lame,” Lacy said of her sister.
The defendant said she did help with her sister’s kids frequently but not all the time, mentioning that the kids were “bad.”
Finally, it was time for Judge Walsh to deliberate. “We’ve all sat here for what feels like four and a half hours listening to this tale and at the end of it, I have absolutely no idea who was wrong and who was right,” the judge begins before handing down a verdict perfectly fitting the situation. Tune in to episode 9 to find out the result.
Next, Judge Walsh was presented with a case involving a magician’s code of conduct.
Plaintiff Jason Michaels, a self-described professional magician, began by performing a card trick for the courtroom. He took an assortment of playing cards, showed they had random numbers, then blew on them to reveal they spelled out the name of the show, JUDGED.
“That’s pretty impressive,” Walsh said.
Michaels explained how he came up with his own magic trick and published it for a profit “after a couple of years of honing it and perfecting it.”
“Would you say that you turn tricks for a living?” Judge Walsh asked.
“You would say that, yes,” the plaintiff replied while laughing.
Michaels said he was performing for a client alongside the defendant, whom he hired to be in the show. That’s when the defendant Mark Brown decided to perform the trick that Michaels previously sold.
Judge Walsh asked what the problem was since technically Michaels sold him the trick “fair and square.”
“There’s an unwritten rule in the magic community that if several magicians are performing in the same show, if you have the creator of the trick on the show, and then you have someone else on the show who has purchased the trick, the general practice is that the person who purchased the trick will defer to the person who created the trick,” the plaintiff explained. “Because that person wouldn’t have said trick without the creators.”
The plaintiff explained how he was suing Brown for the $1,000 he paid a videographer to document the show.
Next, the defendant had a chance to tell his side of the story, explaining how he purchased and performed the trick but changed the premise enough to make it his own. He said he was not aware of the magician’s code of conduct prior to doing the trick.
Brown said it was a different trick with a different premise and ending, but simply used the same props. Judge Walsh allowed both magicians to demonstrate the trick in question.
The plaintiff proceeded to do a card trick using an oversized folded “cootie catcher” which narrowed down the judge’s playing card choice. Michaels correctly identified the card Walsh had picked at random.
Next, it was Brown’s turn to perform a version of the same trick. For his turn, he wrote down a variety of different foods in a notebook and started flipping through them. Judge Walsh flipped open the notebook to the word “banana,” which he was not pleased about.
Brown then used the same style of oversized cootie catcher and started asking questions to determine which food it was. He correctly identified the selected food as a banana.
It was finally time for the judge to deliberate.
“Mr. Brown, you have come before this courtroom accused of breaking one of the unwritten rules of magician hood. This is a serious charge. The magician code of conduct is deeply important to each magician. It’s all he has because he doesn’t have friends or a social life. But, Mr. Brown, this is also what it means to be a man,” the judge begins.
“To be a man is to respect the rules and customs of your people, to act with integrity and dignity, to respect the law, whether it’s a law written in stone or in the heart of each man or each magician,” Walsh continued before delivering the verdict.
Tune in to this week’s episode of “JUDGED” to find out the result, and be sure to check out next week’s cases, including feuding friends who fought following a vacation and former roommates who had a unique division of living spaces.
