"I think it's so ridiculous.." --- The ridiculous part is that the plaintiff waited FIVE YEARS to come to court!😐

I'm just going to say that age and ignorance is NOT a defense.

She killed me when she actually read "porperly" instead of just correcting it 🤣

The plaintiff even admitted she was in the left lane that means she was in the passing Lane and most likely driving far too fast for a donut

No self-reflection on the part of the plaintiff. I guess it wasn’t too important when she waited five years. C’mon man.

Plaintiff SAID she was on the left lane... Clearly she was negligent with the spare tire 🤦

I've seen people drive on a donut for weeks 😂

I suspect this young lady had to pass a few tire shops on the way home. There's no reason to deal exclusively with your dealership to get new tires. Above and beyond that she was going to Volvo due to noise that she didn't associate with that tire. Which makes me think she is perfectly happy to continue driving on that tire because she was prioritizing other noise over going to a tired shop asap

Her ignorance is amazing. You can’t go over 35 on a spare.

My question is after hearing the noise why did she not stop and call them back and tell them what was going on so that they could return and fix the problem. She continued to drive the vehicle with the noise. That has nothing to do with age as one of the excuses her mom was giving, it's just common sense.

Anytime you have a tire change of any kind or reason, you should always double check your tire after a few miles to make sure all lugs are tight, errors can happen.

I think they didn’t tighten up the bolts right, but since she didn’t call them back, and then 3 days later the accident happened, so everyone’s questioning, what did she do in those 3 days…..so she lost. Btw, why in the heck wait 5yrs to sue?!

the issue is that, even if it’s on the company, she was negligent in multiple ways (ie: admitting she was in the left lane, driving a car after it made a weird noise & not even bothering to just check the donut). even if she wasn’t negligent, it would be hard to prove but she and her mom admitted that she didn’t know what to do in the situation. while you should know this before being allowed to drive, you can call someone or google it on a phone to know what to do. unfortunately she learned an expensive lesson & hopefully the company learned as well if they didn’t tighten it properly.

"she was just a young person making poor decisions"... Mom:"I didn't think anything was wrong*... Acorn and tree

Any INTELLIGENT driver knows you don't drive around on the replacement donut!

I hate parents that make excuses for their children..."oh she was 21 ....." the judge "Your not 21"....... The judge got to the point

Defendant is so clear, calm, and persuasive.

The way she reads the typos😂😂 "porperly"

The way the judge purposely read “porperly” in that report knowing it should have been properly lol

A donut is still a tire and the only way it came off was because they didn’t tighten it properly. The defendant tried to slick give an explanation of why it wasn’t tightened and the plaintiff had a letter from the shop saying exactly the reason why.

You're supposed to drive about 45 miles an hour with the doughnut on for a very short period of time

The tire still shouldn't come off even if it's a donut. I understand it's bursting but coming off that this means the lug nuts not tight enough in my opinion

"and then i have my life put at risk but its not his fault." -Not everything bad that happens to you in life is someone else's fault. 21 y.o. with this kind of thinking? Need to grow up and start taking responsibility.

The wheel bolts were obviously not tightened properly or it wouldn't' have fallen off, unless we're to believe that she loosened them and then drove it so that she could sue them.

I love how she keeps blowing off the questions the judge asks her. She is very ignorant. She should have gotten a new tire right away. Like JM said, it's a temporary fix.The donut could be malfunctioning. Oh mom is a mechanic now. Ignorant people. Glad they lost.

The year it happened is crazy she’s taking them to court now. But seriously I’ve driven on a donut for I think a month. Lol This is why I think the judge was a bit off on this one.

This is most certainly a result of not tightening the nuts correctly. Even a spare tire needs to have the correct torque on the wheel nuts. There is nothing wrong with keeping a donut tire on for 3 days. As long as you follow the specifications of the donut tire. This is 100% the defendants fault

Oh come on. This mom needs to encourage her daughter to grow up and take accountability. I had this same experience when I was 18- I drove to the closest place humanly possible. I know literally nothing about cars. But the roadside assistance TELLS YOU to go right to a shop. She's a whiner 5 years later.

Even if the donut was driven for the 3 days she claimed it was parked, the bolts should not have come off. At most she should have gotten was a flat. For a wheel to pop off, that comes from the bolts being loose.

Should have been a split judgment. The donut should never fall off.

Even if she could prove it was their fault, she absolutely would not have gotten the over $3k she was suing for... you can only collect damages up to the value of your cars worth and there is NO WAY her car is worth that!

The nuts weren't tightened properly and therefore slowly loosened further until the wheel come off. Saying that why didn't she ring AAA while the car was parked at her home or even ask a family member or neighbour, or as the Judge said check the wheel herself, it isn't rocket science to check if a nut is loose. Roadside assist could even come out, she tells them the noise started after the wheel was changed, the first thing they would do is check how the wheel was put on.

who cares how old she is. if you're going to drive, you should know what potential problems there could be and common sense goes a long way.

Girl you were driving in the left, fast, lane. This is solely on you.

No way in hell is a spare going to just fall off a car, unless it wasnt tightened.

Embarrassing that the mother somehow thinks that because the daughter is young and didn't know that could somehow translate into a lawsuit ... If you leave meat on the counter instead of refrigerating it and then cook it, the meat could be rotten. Will she sue the grocery store?

I put mine on myself and drove on it for weeks until I was able to repair it 🤷🏾‍♀️

21 years old and can’t change a tire ?? Doesn’t know what a donut is ?? Disregarding loud noise coming from vehicle and continuing to drive ?? Wow is all I can say

The person who changed the tire didn't tighten the bolts enough. Same thing done to me, when I had a business do a seasonal tire change for me. Horrible sound on my way home (two minutes) - before I got home I stopped and called the shop, they said come back, I did. When I parked in their lot I went to the right rear tire and I could tighten every single bolt on the tire with my hand. All three of the other summer tires were fine. The guy who changed my tires looked like he'd just had a new one ripped for him by the manager as he apologized to me. She was a fool to keep driving though. She should have figured out - using her brain - that the brand new sound had something to do with the tire just changed. I think they are 50/50 responsible for the damage - except for the three day lapse and her driving it again. Was there no one around in her life who would have had the sense to go to the car and check the 'donut' and see if it was causing the sound? She's kind of clueless. But the guy citing cars speeding by is no excuse not to properly tighten the lug nuts.

You can tell by the look on her face when the defendant mentioned driving during the three day time period that it's true.

The owner of the tow seems to know nothing about towing.

So that experts isnt an expert but the people who put the loose tire on in dark in the fast lane are right. Thats crazy. She knows good and well she would not react that way if it was one of her young daughters. The judge is FOS some rulings.

I've driven with a donut for three months a couple of times. If a mechanic surmises what happened--his professional opinion should be respected. That was definitely shoddy workmanship This judge always leans toward the owner.

I have always been under the impression that when there are Doughnuts, the Cops will get involved!!🍩🍩🍩🍩🍩😎

She isn’t any smarter for waiting 5 years to sue than when she’s 21 with the donut.🤣😂🤣😂

The judge always asks for expert testimony, now she got it and ignored it. Weird.

Driving on a donut DOES NOT make it fall off. I drove on a donut for a week. They have to put it on properly,

The judge is always asking for evidence from an expert, and when a Volvo expert WRITES his down notes from his inspection, the judge minimizes it saying "a little note from Volvo", like it was something written on a 1x1 sticky note?!

At 21 she should’ve just googled it smh. The defendant had the smoothest and shortest defense. Good job!

Twenty six years old and still needs mommy to help her fight her stupid case. What a big baby she is.

WTF I’m a mechanic and this was definitely the defendants fault. The donut is temporary Yes but it wasn’t torqued right. If this was normal for donuts to do this DOT wouldn’t allow ppl to use them. The judge was wrong in this case I have customers that ride on donuts for weeks the only thing that should’ve been a issue is the donut has less thread so it will wear a lot faster if you drive for a while but shouldn’t come off.

plaintiff also stated she was driving in the left lane on her way to Volvo. No one drives at 40 MPH on the left one. This is the rated speed for donuts so she must have been driving way too fast.

This was a BS ruling. Makes me more even want to watch.

I think defendant's company was responsible for the donut falling off and the damage to the car. Plaintiff lost because she waited too long to get it fixed. There's no reason you have to go to Volvo for a tire; any tire store can get you one same day. On another note, JM is constantly telling litigants that they should have gotten something in writing from a professional, and here this plaintiff has something in writing from a professional and JM says he was "guessing" and totally disregards it. The numbering of times JM contradicts herself in these cases is really surprising.

Sometimes the Judge makes bad decisions on cases. She wants experts to write a statement but when she gets the statement she dismisses it. I believe it wasn't tightened up enough. She should have been compensated. But she shouldn't have driven on it.

Plantiff lost because she never contacted the company to check the noise coming from the tire. She admits in court that she doesn't know the rules of driving with a donut. She continued to drive it after admitting she knew something was wrong. She admitted to driving it in the high speed lane. Her car is a hoopdie, she could have gotten the tired replaced anywhere else but waited and drove there. That's why she lost. So I dont understand why everyone is up in arms over her losing?

She said she was driving the speed limit. It clearly says on warning labels that the tire will fail If driven over 45 mph

Plantiff needs money for the casino, groceries, clothes, partying 🤣🤣🤣And after FIVE YEARS here's where she's at 🙄

One of the few times that the plaintiff actually has a letter from the dealer stating that the tire was improperly installed and the judge still ruled against her. Go figure.

Oh please… I’ve driven with a donut tire on for months lmao

First, who drives on a donut for 3 days (I don’t believe for one second it was parked for 3 days), especially after it was making a “funny sound”?! Not only that, she then drives it on the freeway/parkway?! The audacity of the plaintiffs. Lastly, age and ignorance is not a defense. Yes, it may be unfortunate, but all that means is an expensive lesson & no one else is required to pay that but her.

she went to the donut place, dunkin donuts to fix her tire 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

Mom saying she’s only 21…. At 21, I was married, with a child, living in a foreign country. You can’t figure out that if your car is making noise after a tire change you shouldn’t keep driving it? I get choked when people say age because you shouldn’t drive, then. If you’re not responsible or have enough life experience when things go wrong, then get off the road.

ACCOUNTABILITY is the word of the day

these cases annoy me because people don't know what they don't know....

This is crazy so what's the point of the donut if I can't drive it 5 miles to a shop

Defendant was not even there when all occurred. He just knows what the employee said. So wrong.

Harvey is right. She could’ve mitigated her damages even if it was their fault.

So here it is. I'm a certified automotive and heavy duty mechanic as well as marine engineer. 25 years certified. The tow truck driver should have first checked the air pressure in donut spare. They are typically rated at 60psi and NO ONE CHECKS THEM REGULARLY. next when he installed the lug nuts, he should have torqued the nuts with a calibrated torque wrench to factory spec. Last he should have walked around the whole car checking the other pressures as well. Not rocket science . I've never had a tire come off my whole career. Cheers friends.

She admitted driving “the speed limit” if she was going 55 she obviously doesn’t know that donuts are not meant to go that fast.

I believe she drove that car. He's not a good witness..he's focusing on the wrong issue..they always tell you to get to a tire shop immediately..he never said that..he kept talking about the danger to him..she would have lost with any judge..her mother didn't help help her case..they both acted clueless.

Those donut tires are made for emergency use only, not to go down the road at 60 mph, is this woman crazy.

Defendant knows his thing. She is just money hungry

The plaintiff admitted that she hurried home so she was probably going over the speed limit of the spare

She got this wrong. I'm a mechanic and sometimes I think I need to pivot to accident attorney. The limits everyone is talking about with temporary spare tires is mostly based on the tread performance limitations. It's not designed for use above certain speeds because of heat build up and stopping/maneuvering performance. It's a safety hazard in itself but not from falling off the car. The rim itself is bolted to the hub like a normal wheel. IT SHOULD NEVER EVER FALL OFF or fail in any way shape or form. It was 100% improper installation (lug nuts not tightened) by the tow truck company. The oval or egg shaped holes are exactly what happens when the lug nuts are loose. If the tread separated from the rim, I'd say tough luck. Think about it folks. When you have a blowout, you don't lose the entire wheel. The tow company hand tightened the nuts but forgot to torque them down. The problem simply got worse over time. Tow company is disgusting. They know it was their fault. Literally no different than getting a tire replaced at a shop and it completely falling off a few days later.

The defendant has one of the best backgrounds for this show!

Ya I think this was wrong. It was lose when she was going home per the testimony. And yes if you have ever seen a wheel that was not tightened correctly you know it. The wheel does not loosen on its own if properly tightened.

The defendant would have had a stronger case if she didn’t say the car was making noise from the onset

MM is completely wrong here! A wheel that is tight does not just loosen up and fall off.

We didn't have money to buy a tire new or used. Drove to work and back home for 4 days on a doughnut. So hey I say wasn't put on properly . I don't think JM made a right decision. But she's the judge

How fast was she driving? a donut is only good to drive at 50 mph. going over that is dangerous.

The apple didn't fall too far from the tree.

I think it’s the tow company’s fault. Period. He admitted to them doing botched jobs just to hurry off the turnpike for their safety but didn’t think about the customer’s safety. SMH he clearly admitted on national tv. A donut should not just pop off period. Unless u are being really negligent. I don’t care if u drive it 50 miles.

She definitely waited too long to file but that aside, a donut when installed properly doesn't just fall off or any of the assumptions the judge made . I cringe with every auto related case she rules on...

Hopefully this will teach plaintiff you can’t go around just pinning sh!t on other people, let alone 5 years later. Next time drive the car home and tow it to dealership the next day.

New Jersey is weird about towing on the Turnpike.

Rule of 45. Donut should not be driven for more then 45 miles and driven under45 mph also should be placed on rear of vehicle if possible

I disagree with the verdict. That tire could’ve killed that lady and then I’m positive the case would then be criminal. So Oftentimes proof is asked of the plaintiff in order for it it go in their favor ..she had it, directly from the Volvo dealership yet she still lost??? How? I’m glad she’s ok.

Plaintiff is so ridiculous

I understand the girl is young and may not be aware,but you CANNOT drive on a donut tire the same as you would a regular tire. They’re made to go straight to the repair shop, nowhere else. Then she waits 3 DAYS??? Duh!!

Bye girl … hit up the tire shop get a tire for 50 bucks.

lol she drove that car for those 3 days. The first thing I do when I get a car is replace that donut with a real spare. The things are worthless

Ok, but it’s still the company’s fault if the tire was making noise, they didn’t put the doughnut on right. But, she still should have told them immediately when the car started making noise. I’m thinking she waited 3 days because that was all the appointments they had. I don’t agree with the judgement!

THEY BROKE HER CAR!

I have drove on a donut for weeks while delivering newspaper they did not put the tire on right or check the pressure

Plaintiff put others at risk with her negligent behavior. The installer did not tighten the rim properly but the plaintiff kept driving with rim noise. Both plaintiff and defendant are negligent.

I agree with the judgement. If she is so “young” not to know what to do with the sound, did she know you aren’t suppose to go over 25 mph.

So she was 21 years old… who cares? At 21 she should have enough experience to know when to pull over. She should know how to change a tire too, it’s not rocket science. There’s instructions in the car for how to do it.

Driving is a privilege, and all drivers are expected to be aware of the responsibilities that come with driving, no matter his or her age. This includes being knowledgeable of how a car should be maintained, to include the purpose and drivability of donut tires.

Judge def got it WRONG