Richard Clock v. Jared + Khassie Joyce
What's This Case About?
Let’s get one thing straight: in the wild, wild world of landlord-tenant drama, you expect rent disputes, maybe a broken dishwasher, possibly a dog that won’t stop barking like it’s auditioning for a horror movie. But suing someone for zero dollars? Not $1. Not $100. Not even a symbolic “you owe me a soda” dollar. We’re talking $0.00. As in, nothing. As in, “I am filing a legal action over an amount that could not physically exist in my bank account.” And yet, here we are, in LeFlore County, Oklahoma, where one man has dragged another couple to court for exactly $0 — and wants the sheriff to throw them out of their home over it.
Meet Richard Clock — yes, that’s his real name, and no, we are not making that up, though it sounds like a character from a noir novel written by a sleep-deprived law student. Clock is the plaintiff, which means he’s the one who filed this lawsuit. On the other side? Jared and Khassie Joyce, a married couple (we assume — they’re listed as co-defendants and share an address, so we’re reading the tea leaves here) living at 606 N Denver Street in Spiro, Oklahoma. They’re tenants. Or at least they were. Or maybe they still are? Honestly, the paperwork is as clear as swamp water, but one thing’s for sure: they’re now officially embroiled in what might be the most absurd eviction case in recent memory. Clock claims they owe him $0 in rent and $0 in costs — that’s right, zero across the board — and yet, despite this miraculous debt-free status, he insists they are “wrongfully in possession” of the property and must be removed. Because… math?
Now, let’s follow the paper trail, because this case is less about people and more about documents. Clock’s filing hinges on a legal action known as forcible entry and detainer — a fancy term that basically means “get off my land.” It’s the standard eviction process in many states, including Oklahoma. But usually, there’s a reason: missed rent, lease violations, turning the living room into a meth lab, whatever. Here? The reason appears to be… vibes. Or possibly paperwork ghosts. The affidavit — that’s the sworn statement Clock signed — says the Joyces owe him $0 for rent and $0 for costs. He even left the blank line after “$0 for ____________” totally empty, like he forgot to fill in the category. “For… uh… existence?” “For breathing on my property?” “For not sending a Christmas card?” We may never know. But the kicker? Clock demanded payment. Of nothing. And then sued when they, presumably, didn’t pay nothing. That’s like sending a bill for free air and then calling a collections agency when the customer doesn’t wire funds.
So why is Clock trying to evict tenants who, by his own admission, owe him absolutely nothing? Well, the plot thickens — or more accurately, the land records get weird. Tucked into the filing is a Correction Quitclaim Deed signed by one Jimmy Cluck (yes, Jimmy Cluck — not a typo, not a gag, just a man who may have spent his childhood enduring poultry-based taunts). This deed, dated 2016, transfers a truly massive amount of real estate — like, “owns half the county” levels of property — to The Jimmy Cluck Revocable Trust. We’re talking multiple lots in Spiro, Arkoma, and Poteau, mobile homes, entire sections of land described with the precision of a treasure map (“thence North 284 feet; thence East 377 feet…”), and enough legal jargon to make a surveyor weep. And buried in that list? A property described as “Lot 1, Block 62, Town of Spiro” — which, according to public records cross-referencing, appears to be the exact location of 606 N Denver Street. The Joyces’ home.
So here’s the million-dollar (or, more accurately, zero-dollar) question: Is Richard Clock even the rightful owner? The deed says Jimmy Cluck transferred the property to his own trust. There’s no mention of Clock. No assignment. No chain of title showing how Clock got the rights. Nothing. It’s like he walked into court, slapped down a form, and said, “I’m in charge now,” without showing his work. And yet, the court accepted the filing. The summons was issued. The Joyces have been ordered to appear on April 1, 2026 — April Fools’ Day, no less — to explain why they should be allowed to stay in a home that, according to the plaintiff, they’re not even behind on rent for.
Now, let’s talk about what Clock wants. He’s not asking for money — not a dime. His demand is purely injunctive relief, which in plain English means: “Kick them out.” He wants possession of the property. No compensation. No damages. Just… eviction. And while $50,000 might be a lot in a case like this, $0 is literally nothing. It’s the legal equivalent of throwing a tantrum and saying, “I don’t want your stupid candy — I just want you to go to your room!” But here’s the thing: eviction isn’t just about rent. It’s about stability. It’s about housing. It’s about whether someone gets to keep a roof over their head. And Clock is trying to pull that roof away — not because of unpaid bills, not because of damage, not because of any tangible harm — but because… well, we still don’t know. Maybe he just really likes the address. Maybe he’s Jimmy Cluck in a wig. Maybe the property is haunted and he thinks the Joyces are feeding the ghost.
Our take? This case is a clown car of legal absurdity. A man is suing two tenants for nothing, claiming they owe nothing, demanding they be removed for no financial reason whatsoever, all while potentially not even owning the property in the first place. It’s like a Kafka novel written by someone who failed Accounting 101. The most absurd part isn’t even the $0 demand — it’s that this made it to court at all. Did no clerk raise an eyebrow? Did no judge mutter, “Wait, he wants to evict them for what now?” And yet, here we are. The Joyces have to hire a lawyer, take time off work, show up to court — all to defend themselves against a debt that doesn’t exist. Meanwhile, Richard Clock gets to play landlord cosplay with the full force of the legal system behind him.
We’re rooting for the Joyces. Not because we know they’re innocent — we don’t — but because no one should have to fight a legal battle over a $0 bill. If Clock wants the property, he should prove he owns it. If the Joyces are trespassing, fine — show the lease, show the arrears, show something. But suing someone for nothing and expecting the courts to treat it seriously? That’s not justice. That’s performance art. And if this case goes to trial on April 1st, we’re half expecting the judge to respond with, “And for my next trick, I’ll make your case disappear.”
Case Overview
- Richard Clock individual
- Jared + Khassie Joyce individual
| # | Cause of Action | Description |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Forcible Entry and Detainer | Dispute over possession of real property |