Writing Shotgun

WHEN IT’S OVER …

Theo DouglasTue. October 23
 

What happens after you sue someone in small claims court and win? Do you get your money? Do you ever see them again? If you’re Long Beach landlord Nancy Downs–and you’ve sued your former tenant Star Harris, the answers are “No” and “Yes” respectively.

Harris, of course, is the lady suing a Long Beach 7-Eleven franchise over a slip-and-fall accident she says she suffered at the store in 2004.

But in early 2006, Harris applied to rent an apartment from Downs in the architecturally significant corner building at 505 E. Broadway. She was accepted, and all was well until June 1, 2006–when according to court records, Harris stopped paying the rent.

She was served an eviction notice June 15–but according to a June 28, 2006, letter Downs wrote to the Los Angeles Superior Court, “[Harris] called the next day and threatened [building manager Tanya Sample] and myself . . . . She stated at this phone call that things were missing from her unit and that she could see no signs of a break in [sic].”

Harris tells The District that Sample broke into her apartment and took some jewelry. Court records show that on June 21, 2006, Harris sued Downs in Long Beach small claims court, and that on June 26, 2006, Harris filed papers seeking a restraining order against Sample.

Downs says that in court, things got even stranger–and not merely because Harris, as is her wont, was representing herself. “She did everything she could do in the corridor of the courthouse before we went on, to try to instigate me and egg me on,” Downs says. “It was one of the worst experiences of my life and I’ve been doing this for 25 years.

“She stalked me and stalked me,” Downs says of Harris’s behavior as the case played out. “She is by far one of the most violent people I’ve ever met. I believe that she was capable of anything.”

Harris denies trying to provoke Downs outside the courtroom, and says she never stalked her former landlord.

“People will say anything they want to say,” Harris says. “There’s really nothing there to dig up. I’m an educated, intelligent black person whom they pre-judged.”

And when it was over, they judged her: in July 2006, the court ordered Harris to pay Downs $1,778.30 in back rent, “daily damages” and attorney’s fees. In August 2006, a Long Beach small claims court judge ruled that Downs didn’t owe Harris any money, as a result of Sample’s alleged theft from her apartment.

Downs says she’s never been paid a dime.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , ,

RELATED

COMMENTS

  1. 1

    Fascinating story! And not only because you’ve managed to turn Nancy Downs into a victim! I tune into the District website on a daily basis looking for more of the Star Harris saga like it’s a favorite soap opera.
    What I hope to see in upcoming episodes:
    What does ACORN (Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now) think of favorite daughter Star Harris now that the District has dug up all the dirt? Do they have any comment? Are they still backing her?
    And, when are you going to tell us what’s on the 7-11 surveillance tape? It would be a great twist if after all the false claims and lawsuits leveled by Star Harris—she turns out to be a victim in this case. Too far fetched? Why? It happened to Nancy Downs.
    Keep it up, kids! Loving it so far!

    [report]

    Posted By Selfish Causes on October 24th, 2007 at 9:07 am

     

  2. 2

    Good call, Selfish Causes @ Nancy Downs.

    [report]

    Posted By Ellen on October 24th, 2007 at 1:41 pm

     

  3. 3

    Hey Selfish Causes…. I seen the ACTUAL video…. It’s COLD BLOODED…. watch the video and we’ll chat from there…..

    GOOGLE:::: star harris vs. 7- eleven
    YOUTUBE::: 711star

    Have a Great TODAY…..

    p.s. u 2 Ellen :+}

    [report]

    Posted By Google It!!! Star Harris vs. 7- eleven on October 24th, 2007 at 5:25 pm

     

  4. 4

    to whom it may concern, sometimes, negative attention, is better than none, as in the case of star harris vs. 7eleven. in truth see youtube/711star or myspace/ is justice for sale? it’s ok to make the victim and those concerned, the ” bad “guy’,the question must be, why? why? was a woman allowed to be left for dead, and no one helps, the veteran, nor the woman, nor the b.s. computer engineering/ and presently, law school.simply this is corporate corruption at is,s finest. you bring all of the animals to a zoo, don,t you? don.t hate the woman that say,s no. as a matter of fact, this mom say’s hell no, and if lawsuits are what this system understands, then like the 60,s with the panther,s we shut things down, we did stand off,s and yes, some of them may have been displaced due to one not wanting to live in uninhabitable housing..write what you will. i,m a motherless child and any attorney willing to perform the duties that are prescribe prescribed, please call. i,m tired, not incapable..god has been the attorney, and he will help an attorney win. oh yes, an appeal process in this high profile case will be more than a big gulp. remember, winnie mandela, jane pittman, rosa parks, they fought, some were homeless for years in their plight. so, bring your gossipers, and those wanting 2 minutes in the press. be careful, they can turn on you.. the dvd say,s what the , oh my goodness,your,e kidding, oh no.. now that my name is being connected with numerous things just know that after foster placements and chil victimization, i,ve forged ahead of my diversities/ m.a. human relations/ b.a. administration of justice. and that my dear is why they are mad, they never did want us to read….. right?

    [report]

    Posted By The Don on October 24th, 2007 at 7:05 pm

     

Leave a Reply

DISCLAIMER: We do not screen comments in advance, but we do reserve the right to delete or edit any we find inappropriate. Please note that commenters are free to use whatever name(s) they choose.

 

© 2007-2008 Seven Days Publishing LLC.