Anyone who’s watched ‘Judge Judy’ over the years knows her opinions and verdicts are quick, decisive and humorous. Her lightening speed delivery is due partially to the time constraints of TV programming. But it also comes from her years on the bench after being appointed judge by NYC’s Mayor Ed Koch in 1982. That success in the Big Apple gave her a nationally award-winning TV contract, which has experienced an unheard-of 20-year run, attracting 10 million viewers daily — while earning her a salary more than other day-time talk show host.
Soft Spot for Spot
However while achieving a solid reputation as a no-nonsense, tough-as-nails adjudicator, it appears Judith Susan Blum Sheindlin has one soft spot. She’s a sucker for furry pets, particularly man’s best friend.
This has been proven out over the years. But no where was this more clearly demonstrated than in an episode appropriately titled: “Paw and Order.”
Every dog has its day . . .
This show featured two individuals both claiming to be the rightful owner of one dog named: “Baby Boy.”
The woman who was currently in possession of the pup insisted she legally bought the dog from someone selling him on the street. The plaintiff, on the other hand claimed he was Baby Boy’s true owner. His case was predicated on the dog being taken from him and sold without his permission. He understandably wanted his pooch back.
The wise judge who could have gone the biblical route by dividing the dog in half — took another tact to arrive at her verdict. Instead of relying on any further testimony from the two would-be pet owners, she quickly determined this case was up to the dog.
Asking the court clerk to bring Baby Boy into the courtroom, she immediately commanded: “Put the dog down.” What came next was a perfect ending. Our four-legged friend immediately ran into the arms of the plaintiff wagging his tail excitingly.
This is all Judge Judy needed. Seconds later she made her ruling in favor of the plaintiff, and Baby Boy's rightful owner.
This edited video clip which went viral in 2017, even though this case was 5 years old, shows how pets not only tug at the heartstrings of Judge Judy, but also the public at large. It's definitely a case for the law books, don't you think — if not the New Testament?
Primary Source: PeoplePets