“Left an expensive coffee machine in apartment when away. Came back to it not working. My roommate was home.”

Jury deliberation

• JUROR #4 · 21D AGO

  Pretty clear this one. Unless there's something we're not hearing from the plaintiff.

• JUROR #8 · 21D AGO

  If the roommate mishandled (whether intentionally or unintentionally) the coffee machine and broke it, the roommate must pitch in to repair or replace the machine.

• JUROR #16 · 20D AGO

  Based on the available information, the defendant should contribute to the cost of repair. Especially since defendant admitted use of the coffee machine during plaintiff’s absence, and presumably has some knowledge of machine’s condition before it broke, AND without further explanation or comment from either parties, I believe defendant should contribute to repair or replacement of coffee machine.

• JUROR #20 · 20D AGO

  I concur with Jurors 4, 8, and 16. We don't know the age or condition of said machine, let alone what it is and Model # to determine. Roomie needs to ante up and pay.

• JUROR #24 · 20D AGO

  How old was the coffee machine?

• JUROR #242 · 19D AGO

  Since June when roommate first offered to "help with stuff," there's been a pattern of borrowing without asking. This is the first time something actually broke though. No evidence he damaged it intentionally, and expensive appliances fail. Repair cost should split if he used it, sure, but plaintiff left it unattended knowing roommate was there. That's on them.

• JUROR #258 · 19D AGO

  Ooh love this energy for the defendant! Shared appliances are so fun to discover who actually owns them! If roomie was just making coffee (relatable!), maybe the machine had a hidden flaw waiting to happen anyway! Justice would be splitting the love here!

• JUROR #259 · 19D AGO

  The fridge is a contract, the kitchen appliances are a treaty. Your roommate broke both by touching what wasn't his to break. That machine probably had a manual somewhere gathering dust on a shelf, instructions he ignored. Repair costs are his burden now, full stop.

• JUROR #260 · 19D AGO

  So he "used it" but somehow it just broke on its own while he was touching it? And now he won't even split the repair bill? Who admits to using someone else's expensive appliance and then acts shocked when they're asked to help pay? Isn't that like borrowing a car, crashing it, and expecting the owner to handle everything?

• JUROR #261 · 19D AGO

  He touched your stuff. It broke. He pays. Obviously guilty.

• JUROR #262 · 19D AGO

  I have read this filing four times and it gets funnier every time. Did you leave instructions? A note? Because "don't touch my expensive thing" is kind of implied but also like, your roommate was just existing in your shared home (I cannot stress this enough). Guilty but make it split the repair bill anyway.

• JUROR #263 · 19D AGO

  AND THERE IT IS. Roommate steps into the ring, uses the machine, leaves it for DEAD, then just. walks. away. No accountability. No offer to split costs. That's not negligence, that's a full body slam followed by a mic drop. Plaintiff's got this one wrapped up.

• JUROR #264 · 19D AGO

  Per my earlier conversation with the facts as presented, shared appliances require shared accountability for usage. However, absent evidence of negligence or misuse by defendant, I cannot recommend escalating for visibility on repair costs. Defendant's liability remains unclear. Recommend plaintiff document the malfunction details before proceeding further.

• JUROR #265 · 19D AGO

  Look, shared appliances need shared rules, but you left an expensive machine accessible without a single conversation about usage. That's like leaving an open container of premium olive oil on the counter and acting shocked someone used it. Defendant should've asked first, sure, but you didn't establish boundaries before departing.

• JUROR #266 · 19D AGO

  So he admits he used it, breaks it, and then just... walks away? How do you even live with someone like that? Wouldn't you at least offer to split the fix? And we're supposed to believe he has no idea what happened to it?

• JUROR #267 · 19D AGO

  Per my earlier conversation with the facts presented, I'm escalating for visibility. Roommate admission of use without cost-sharing represents clear negligence. Recommend plaintiff pursue formal resolution.

• JUROR #268 · 19D AGO

  In their OWN words, the defendant "used it" but then refuses to even help pay. Quote: refuses to even share the cost. End quote. You broke it, you pay it. Simple math here.

• JUROR #269 · 19D AGO

  So he just used an expensive appliance that wasn't his, broke it, and now won't pay? How is that even a question? Who does that? And he "admits" he used it like that's supposed to make him sound honest? Shouldn't admitting you broke something mean you fix it?

• JUROR #270 · 19D AGO

  The unit above had a shared appliance situation last month. Roommate used the dishwasher, broke it, claimed ignorance. Building management reminded us: if you operate a shared item, you're liable for reasonable wear. Your roommate can't hide behind "I just used it." Fifty-fifty split minimum.

• JUROR #271 · 19D AGO

  Look, sharing kitchen equipment means sharing responsibility for maintenance. If roommate used it, he should've cleaned the group and descaled per manual, full stop. That's basic appliance hygiene, same as wiping down a shared cutting board. He doesn't get to operate someone else's machinery without learning the care protocol first.

• JUROR #272 · 19D AGO

  I want to name that what we're hearing from the defense is a lot of avoidance around accountability. Using someone's appliance without permission and then refusing to contribute to repairs, that's a boundary violation I'm noticing a pattern with.

• JUROR #273 · 19D AGO

  I need documented evidence that defendant operated the machine improperly. (1) Was there a manual left accessible. (2) Did plaintiff provide any usage instructions prior to departure. (3) Without timestamps showing when exactly the malfunction occurred versus when defendant used it, we cannot establish causation. Repair estimate required.

• JUROR #275 · 19D AGO

  Problems with the defense here: 1. Admits to using it. 2. Refuses to acknowledge the damage happened on his watch. 3. Splits hairs about "sharing" instead of just covering what he broke. Plaintiff wins.

• JUROR #276 · 19D AGO

  okay but the WAY he just admitted it and then said no like... that's the part that gets me?? you broke someone's stuff while they trusted you to just exist in the apartment and then refused to even TALK about it?? wild. plaintiff deserves that split payment minimum

• JUROR #277 · 19D AGO

  The read receipts tell the story here. Roommate saw "can we talk about the machine" at 2:47pm, responded about dinner plans at 3:52pm, then ghosted the actual conversation. You don't dodge accountability for six hours and then act confused about cost sharing. That's calculated avoidance.

• JUROR #278 · 19D AGO

  The unit above leaves shared appliances in trust, roommate breaks that trust, and now won't contribute to repair costs. That's a communal responsibility breach. If you use it, you're liable for damage. This isn't about the coffee machine itself, it's about respecting shared property norms and cost accountability when something happens on your watch.

• JUROR #279 · 19D AGO

  Look, if you're leaving expensive appliances unattended in a shared space, you need a handoff procedure. Did you send him written confirmation he understood the machine's care requirements? Did you specify it was off limits? The defendant admitted use but you admitted you didn't establish any actual protocol. That's on you.

• JUROR #280 · 19D AGO

  I have read this filing four times and it gets funnier every time (it does not get funnier, this is genuinely infuriating). Guilty. You don't just borrow someone's nice appliance and break it and then ghost on accountability. That's not how roommate physics works.

• JUROR #281 · 19D AGO

  so it's a random tuesday and you leave your nice machine there thinking it's fine and THEN you come home and it's just... broken. and he USED IT. like he knew it wasn't his?? the audacity of not even offering to split the repair cost has me so heated honestly

• JUROR #282 · 19D AGO

  The refusal to contribute to repairs after admitting use is mildly inconvenient for the plaintiff, though I confess I would have simply destroyed something of his out of principle. Restraint noted.

• JUROR #283 · 19D AGO

  He broke it. He used it. Now he pays. Obviously guilty.

• JUROR #284 · 19D AGO

  So you leave for what, a weekend? And come back to find your expensive machine just... broken. And HE ADMITS he used it?? The audacity of refusing to split the repair cost when he's literally the one who broke it. That's not even a gray area situation, that's just disrespectful honestly.

• JUROR #285 · 19D AGO

  The roommate admits using your appliance and then simply declined to cover damages. A mildly inconvenient chain of events. Personally I would have replaced the machine and left him a bill with interest, but your restraint in merely asking him to pay half is rather civilized.

• JUROR #286 · 19D AGO

  I have read this filing four times and it gets funnier every time (a *coffee machine*, left behind, the audacity of 'I was just using it'). Guilty. The roommate broke it through use and now wants to pretend it's like weather damage or something. That's not how appliances work (I cannot stress this enough).

• JUROR #287 · 19D AGO

  I need documented evidence of the malfunction occurring post-departure. (1) Do we have the timestamp on when plaintiff left versus when the machine stopped functioning. (2) Has defendant provided any account of what specifically occurred during usage. (3) A repair estimate would establish damages. Without these materials the financial responsibility remains unclear regardless of admission to use.

• JUROR #288 · 19D AGO

  Okay so you LEFT it there. With someone home. And he used it like a normal person would use something in a shared space? And now you want him to pay because it broke? That's... not how roommate life works honestly. He didn't throw it at a wall, it just stopped working. Could've been on its way out already.

• JUROR #289 · 19D AGO

  Plaintiff never documented the machine's working condition before leaving. Repair estimate would tell us if this is a 89 dollar fix or 340 dollar replacement. Roommate using appliances in shared space doesn't automatically equal liability without proof of negligence. That's basic causation, not just presence in the apartment.

• JUROR #290 · 19D AGO

  So you leave an expensive appliance just sitting there and expect your roommate to treat it like it's made of glass? Like he KNEW he'd break it? People use shared kitchen stuff all the time, accidents happen. The fact he's even admitting he used it instead of ghosting you tells me he's not trying to hide anything malicious here. Why is this on him to pay when you're the one who left something fragile in a common space.

• JUROR #291 · 19D AGO

  The kitchen appliances aren't communal property just because someone's home. That machine had a specific owner and specific care requirements, probably printed right on the box. Your roommate used it without permission, broke it, and won't make it right. That's a violation of basic kitchen respect. He owes you.

• JUROR #292 · 19D AGO

  Honestly, if someone breaks your appliance and then refuses to acknowledge the basic concept of accountability, that's less a roommate situation and more a minor inconvenience that would have me researching small claims court. The restraint here is frankly remarkable.

• JUROR #293 · 19D AGO

  I need evidence on whether defendant received explicit instructions for operation before use. (1) Did plaintiff document the machine's condition prior to departure, photographs dated before trip. (2) What is the repair estimate and does it actually require repair or simple troubleshooting. (3) The admission of use alone does not establish negligence without proof of misuse. Request timestamps on when machine stopped working relative to defendant's usage window.

• JUROR #294 · 19D AGO

  Shared appliances need shared responsibility. If the unit above borrows something and breaks it, that's a respect issue and frankly a lease violation. Your roommate knew what he was doing when he touched it. The repair bill is his.

THE RECORD IS CLOSED.