This entry was posted
on Tuesday, July 7th, 2009 at 12:02 am and is filed under Uncategorized.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
Both comments and pings are currently closed.
June 30th court date didn’t go well, eh?
I don’t think I’d better hang this one on my wall, but definitely in my TOP 3!
We’ve all been there. Once you’ve been practicing long enough, the people who used to draft the POC’s and TG’s in opposition to you become the judges who somehow become bestowed with sage wisdom and sound legal knowledge once they take to the bench– and then tell you your applications are still POC’s and TG’s while their decisions are clear, logical and precise.
You know… there was an actual case (Santiago v. Sherwin-Williams in 1991) in which a defense motion closed by describing plaintiff’s filings as “dreck” (Yiddish for “crap”). Plaintiff’s counsel responded with a Motion to Strike Impertinent and Scandalous Matter that was full of Yiddish terms. Another defense attorney wrote a letter to plaintiff’s counsel, also full of Yiddish, explaining that the attorney who drafted the original motion was a goy (gentile) who didn’t know what the word meant, and offering to replace the word.
Plaintiff’s motion was given the “Motion of the Year Award” for 1991 by state Supreme Court judge in another state (not sure if the award is a real award for humor or a joke).
I agree, definitely in the top 3! During my federal judicial externship back in law school, read numerous submissions to the court that would have been great Courtoon material. Thanks again for making me laugh out loud!
Make that “Courtoons” material…
This pretty much describes the resolution of every Federal case I’ve ever litigated, in a nutshell.
Courtoons © David E. Mills 2008-09: Daily legal cartoons and comics.