When Edith Moltry was told she had to vacate her apartment after her building was sold to a new landlord, Shannan Speed, she was already under immense pressure. Being a Section 8 tenant, the rush to find a new home was overwhelming. But by the time Edith reached the courtroom, her simple request for her security deposit had turned into a chaotic $1,500 lawsuit filled with finger-pointing and “dueling crutches.”

The Scam That Cost a Deposit

Edith’s first claim was a bold one: she wanted her landlord to pay for a $500 internet scam. In her desperation to move quickly, Edith’s son had found a “perfect” apartment on Craigslist. Pressured by what she felt was constant “harassment” from Shannan to vacate, Edith wired $500 through Western Union to a complete stranger.

Predictably, the money vanished. Edith argued that because the landlord “rushed” her, the landlord was responsible for the loss. The judge was stunned. “Do you take no personal responsibility for anything?” the judge asked, quickly shutting down the idea that a landlord is liable for a tenant’s decision to send money to a stranger on the internet.

The “Switcheroo” Theory

The drama then shifted to the security deposit. Shannan, the landlord, claimed she was keeping the money for damages—specifically, a missing toilet. Shannan and her witness (both surprisingly arriving on crutches) argued that the high-end “Kohler” toilet originally in the bathroom had been replaced by a cheap, 1997 model before Edith moved out.

“Who would switch a toilet?” the judge asked, baffled. Shannan insisted she could “smell a switcheroo,” but she lacked the one thing the court required: proof. Without a receipt or an affidavit from the previous owner, her “hunch” about the porcelain throne was tossed out. The judge noted that the footprint of the toilet on the floor was identical—there was no evidence of a secret plumbing heist.

Cats, Love, and a Final Verdict

The final conflict involved a scratched front door and a broken attic ladder. While the landlord asked for a staggering $900 for a broken wooden rung and $1,500 for a new door, the judge applied some common sense.

Edith actually admitted her cat had scratched the door. In a moment of courtroom levity, Edith explained that her indoor cat was simply “looking for love” from the neighborhood strays outside. The judge, finally seeing a piece of honesty, decided that while $1,500 was an absurd price for a door, some damage did exist.

The Decision: The judge dismissed the $500 scam claim and the “toilet mystery” entirely. Of the $1,000 security deposit, she allowed the landlord to keep $250 to repair the cat-scratched door. She ordered Shannan to return the remaining $750 to Edith.

In the end, Edith walked away with most of her money, the landlord went home to fix her “beautiful” bathroom, and everyone left with a valuable lesson: always keep your receipts, and never wire money to a “prince” or a “landlord” on Craigslist.