NationStates Jolt Archive

now how much fun would the court system be if all the laywers were like these two?

http://www.nationalreview.com/document/document073001.shtml

Before proceeding further, the Court notes that this case involves two extremely likable lawyers, who have together delivered some of the most amateurish pleadings ever to cross the hallowed causeway into Galveston, an effort which leads the Court to surmise but one plausible explanation. Both attorneys have obviously entered into a secret pact — complete with hats, handshakes and cryptic words — to draft their pleadings entirely in crayon on the back sides of gravy-stained paper place mats, in the hope that the Court would be so charmed by their child-like efforts that their utter dearth of legal authorities in their briefing would go unnoticed. Whatever actually occurred, the Court is now faced with the daunting task of deciphering their submissions.

With Big Chief tablet readied, thick black pencil in hand, and a devil-may-care laugh in the face of death, life on the razor's edge sense of exhilaration, the Court begins...

What the?

fuck?

:d

Oh...my...god.

That judge was PISSED. I have never seen something like that and I've lead a LOT of cases. This is what happens when you put a truly incompetant lawyer against a judge with a morbid sense of humor and a finely sharpened wit.

Some more gems from this judge's order:
A more bumbling approach is difficult to conceive — but wait folks. There's More!
...
Despite the continued shortcomings of Plaintiff's supplemental submission, the Court commends Plaintiff for his vastly improved choice of crayon — Brick Red is much easier on the eyes than Goldenrod, and stands out much better amidst the mustard splotched about Plaintiff's briefing. But at the end of the day, even if you put a calico dress on it and call it Florence, a pig is still a pig.
...
Take heed and be suitably awed, oh boys and girls — the Court was able to state the issue and its resolution in one paragraph ... despite dozens of pages of gibberish from the parties to the contrary!
...
After this remarkably long walk on a short legal pier, having received no useful guidance whatever from either party, the Court has endeavored, primarily based upon its affection for both counsel, but also out of its own sense of morbid curiosity, to resolve what it perceived to be the legal issue presented. Despite the waste of perfectly good crayon seen in both parties' briefing (and the inexplicable odor of wet dog emanating from such) the Court believes it has satisfactorily resolved this matter. Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment is GRANTED.
...
In either case, the Court cautions Plaintiff's counsel not to run with a sharpened writing utensil in hand — he could put his eye out.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Oh...my...god.

That judge was PISSED. I have never seen something like that and I've lead a LOT of cases. This is what happens when you put a truly incompetant lawyer against a judge with a morbid sense of humor and a finely sharpened wit.
don't know if the Judge was Pissed, but it certainly was a... er... different. :p

don't know if the Judge was Pissed, but it certainly was a... er... different. :p

ohhh trust me, that judge was mad.

fuck?

*gasp*

Potty mouth!

Oh...my...god.

That judge was PISSED. I have never seen something like that and I've lead a LOT of cases. This is what happens when you put a truly incompetant lawyer against a judge with a morbid sense of humor and a finely sharpened wit.
TWO incompetent lawyers. He was complaining about both the Plaintiff's and the Defendant's counsel. It sounds like he was dealing with what could have been a standard NS General debate. :D I don't know if that makes me feel better about NSG or worse about lawyers, though. ;)

TWO incompetent lawyers. He was complaining about both the Plaintiff's and the Defendant's counsel. It sounds like he was dealing with what could have been a standard NS General debate. :D I don't know if that makes me feel better about NSG or worse about lawyers, though. ;)

Maybe both?