Hot Bench Season 5 Episode 4 Outrageous Landlord?!; Dog Takes Bite Out of Plumber

Hot Bench season 5 episode 4, titled "Outrageous Landlord?!; Dog Takes Bite Out of Plumber," presents two different cases that will put Judge Tanya, Judge Patricia, and Judge Michael to the test. The first case features a couple who claims their landlord has unfairly charged them for damages to their apartment. The second case involves a plumber who was bitten by a dog while on the job and is now seeking compensation for his injuries.

In the first case, the plaintiffs, a couple, claim that their landlord has falsely charged them for damages they did not cause in their apartment, including a hole in the wall and a broken kitchen drawer. They argue that they have been model tenants and that the landlord is simply trying to take advantage of them. The landlord, on the other hand, insists that the damages were caused by the plaintiffs and that they are responsible for paying for them.

As the judges hear both sides of the case, they are presented with conflicting evidence and testimonies. Judge Tanya questions the landlord's motives and wonders whether he has a history of unfairly charging tenants for damages. Meanwhile, Judge Michael points out that the plaintiffs have not provided any evidence that they did not cause the damages in question.

In the second case, a plumber is seeking compensation for injuries he sustained after being bitten by a dog while on the job. The plumber argues that the dog's owner knew the animal was aggressive and did not do enough to prevent the attack. He claims that the injuries he sustained have prevented him from being able to work and provide for his family.

The dog's owner, however, argues that the plumber was trespassing on their property and that the dog was merely protecting its territory. She argues that the plumber was not authorized to be on the property and that he should have known better than to enter without permission.

As the judges hear both sides of the case, they are presented with conflicting evidence and testimonies. Judge Patricia questions whether the dog's owner took enough steps to keep the animal under control and wonders whether the plumber could have reasonably known that he was trespassing. Meanwhile, Judge Michael points out that the plumber may have been negligent in his approach and should have been more cautious when entering a potentially dangerous property.

Throughout the episode, the judges will have to weigh the evidence and testimonies presented to them in order to make a fair and just ruling. They will need to consider the legal precedents in each case and come to a decision that balances the interests of all parties involved. With tensions high and emotions running strong, the judges must use their expertise and judgment to determine the outcomes of these two complex cases.