Thomas Campbell Jr. told the court that, on the night he left the home he shared with Pamela Turner, he wanted only to get out. Months later, that rushed departure had become a courtroom dispute over a king-size bed, a washing machine, a 75-inch television, an iPad Pro, and a phone placed in the trash.
This was not a criminal prosecution. It was a civil property dispute shaped by the collapse of a 14-year relationship, an approaching move, conflicting accounts of an argument, and the difficult question of what belongs to one person after years of living as a household.
A 14-Year Relationship Reaches the Courtroom
The case was identified as Campbell v. Turner. Thomas Campbell Jr. sued his ex-girlfriend, Pamela Turner, alleging that she had wrongfully taken his personal property. Pamela filed a counterclaim, alleging harassment, emotional distress, and damage to her phone.
The court heard that Thomas and Pamela had been in a committed relationship for 14 years and had lived together. They did not have children together. Pamela had four children, aged 23, 22, 20, and 15, while Thomas had one child. Thomas worked as a long-distance truck driver.
The home they shared was being sold, and they had been advised to vacate it by the end of April 2024. The deadline meant they were separating while their living arrangement was already ending.
Pamela also said she had not known Thomas was legally married to someone else for the first 11 years of their relationship. She continued living with him for at least three more years. The case ultimately turned on whether the disputed items were separate property, gifts, or shared household purchases.
The Argument and the Move
Thomas testified that he had been away on the road before the relationship deteriorated. After returning home, he woke one night and discovered that Pamela was not in bed. He found her in another room on the phone and believed she was speaking with another man. An argument followed.
When asked about the date, Thomas identified April 23, 2024. Pamela acknowledged that an argument had occurred, but her counterclaim referred to April 18, 2024, and she said she had a police incident report. The transcript therefore contains two different dates for the phone-related incident; the disagreement over the date was not resolved in the testimony presented.
Pamela alleged that Thomas broke or threw away her Samsung phone before leaving the house. She later said Thomas’s sister called and told her to retrieve the phone from a garbage can. Thomas initially denied throwing it away, but later acknowledged that he had put it in the trash.
After leaving, Thomas went back out on the road. When he returned, he said Pamela and the children had left the home and taken much of the property with them. Thomas argued that a number of those items belonged to him because he had paid for them. Pamela’s position was that some were gifts and that she and Thomas had jointly paid for other household items.
Why the Property Became Contested
Thomas listed the property he wanted addressed by the court: the king-size bed the couple had shared, a washer and dryer, a 75-inch television, children’s bedroom furniture, several other televisions, a freezer, a stereo, and an iPad Pro.
Pamela acknowledged taking the children’s bedroom furniture because some of the children lived with her. When asked who had paid for it, she said both of them had. The same answer applied to the king-size bed. Because Pamela had contributed to the bed, Judge Judy did not treat it as property Thomas exclusively owned.
Thomas was also asked why he had left some items behind if he believed they belonged to him. He explained that, on the night he left, his priority was getting out of the home. That testimony helped explain how possessions that he later claimed could have remained in the house when Pamela moved out.
The Items Judge Judy Examined
The washer and dryer produced different results. Thomas said he had paid for the washing machine alone. The testimony connected the washer to a 2021 purchase. Thomas explained that the original floor model, delivered in October 2021, had a problem and was returned. He then obtained another machine, which he said cost $1,200.
The dryer was tied to a 2018 Rent-A-Center transaction. Pamela said the couple had both made payments while renting or leasing it. Judge Judy concluded that Thomas owned the washing machine, but not the dryer, because the evidence indicated that Pamela had contributed to the dryer payments.
The 75-inch television was treated differently. Thomas said he purchased it approximately one year earlier and had proof of purchase. Pamela acknowledged that he had paid for it. Thomas said he had bought most of the other bedroom televisions but was willing to let the girls keep theirs.
The iPad Pro became another central point of disagreement. Thomas said it cost $1,403 in April 2021 and that he used it in his truck for his logs. He described it as an item purchased for his own use. He had left it in the home when he departed, however, because he said he was focused on getting away from the confrontation.
Pamela gave the court a different explanation. She said Thomas had bought the iPad Pro for her during a visit to Best Buy, the same store where he obtained the washer. Despite that dispute, Judge Judy ordered the iPad Pro returned to Thomas.
Thomas was living with his brother and expected to return to Florida on November 10, making the property order part of the practical process of rebuilding separate lives.
Pamela Turner’s Phone Counterclaim
The phone claim was separate from the household property dispute. Pamela said Thomas had discarded a Samsung phone and that she had needed another device afterward. Thomas argued that the phone was in his name and that he had paid for it.
Pamela testified that the discarded phone was a government-issued device and that she had not purchased it. Judge Judy asked Sarah to identify the least expensive replacement available. Sarah identified a phone priced at $199.
The court awarded Pamela $199. The amount reflected the replacement figure identified during the hearing, rather than the price of a high-end phone. The award followed Thomas’s eventual acknowledgment that he had put the phone in the trash.
The Ruling and the Pickup Deadline
Judge Judy ordered that Thomas receive three items: the 75-inch television, the washing machine, and the iPad Pro. He did not receive the king-size bed because Pamela had contributed to its purchase, and he did not receive the dryer because Pamela testified that she had helped make the Rent-A-Center payments.
The court did not divide every item accumulated during 14 years of cohabitation. Judge Judy emphasized that this was not a divorce proceeding and addressed only the property supported by the evidence.
Pamela was awarded $199 on her counterclaim for the discarded phone. The court then adjourned.
What Remained After the Judgment
After the hearing, Thomas said he had not received everything he wanted. The item he mentioned specifically was the bed. Pamela said Thomas knew she had to move and had chosen not to help. Thomas said they had an agreement about what she would take and believed she had taken enough of the purchased property.
Their statements showed why the dispute could not be understood through receipts alone. Thomas wanted property he had paid for; Pamela described the move as part of ending a shared household. Both eventually agreed that it was better for them not to remain together.
The court’s final decision was limited but concrete. Thomas was awarded the television, washing machine, and iPad Pro. Pamela received $199 for the discarded phone. The bed, dryer, children’s furniture, and other household possessions were not converted into a complete division of the home.
After 14 years together, the hearing was about property, but also about turning one shared life into two separate ones.
FAQ
What was Thomas Campbell Jr. suing Pamela Turner for?
Thomas Campbell Jr. sued Pamela Turner over personal property he said she took from the home they shared after their relationship ended.
How long were Thomas Campbell Jr. and Pamela Turner together?
The court stated that they had been in a committed relationship for 14 years.
What property did Thomas Campbell Jr. receive?
Judge Judy ordered the return of his 75-inch television, washing machine, and iPad Pro.
Did Thomas receive the king-size bed?
No. Pamela testified that both parties had contributed to the bed, so the court did not award it exclusively to Thomas.
Why did Thomas not receive the dryer?
Pamela testified that both parties had made payments on the dryer through Rent-A-Center. Judge Judy therefore did not treat it as Thomas’s separate property.
How much did Pamela Turner receive for the phone?
Pamela Turner was awarded $199 for the Samsung phone Thomas acknowledged putting in the trash.
What date was set for the property pickup?
Thomas was expected to arrange pickup of the television, washing machine, and iPad Pro by November 15, after his return arrangements to Florida.
