The law is serious business. Mostly. But when a kind soul (known to me only as @ReplevinforaCow) pointed me to the case below, I had a chuckle, and I thought you should chuckle with me:
The entire unabridged report of Denny v Radar Industries 1970 per J.H. GILLIS, Judge:
The appellant has attempted to distinguish the factual situation in this case from that in Renfroe v Higgins (citation omitted). He didn’t. We couldn’t. Affirmed. Costs to appellee.
Have you found a shorter, blunter judgment? If you are a journal nerd (like me) you may enjoy the World’s Greatest Law Review Article found here. Or the World’s Shortest Law Review Article here [shortest_law_review]. Keep reading by clicking the little red button below…
Like what you see? You can subscribe to this blog by scrolling to the bottom of the page, or Follow @amicae1
There are quite a few legal humor sites, such as Bitter Lawyer, Lowering the Bar and Lawhaha (assume a language advisory warning applies to most). But for sustained humorous effort the prize must go to the Legal Blog Watch which draws its Three Burning Legal Issues of the day from the mostly unfunny side of law every day, and spins it into gold (well, at least bronze).
And for something completely different, here is my favorite clip for when I am feeling cross at the govmint. Which is a lot.
Do you have a favorite source of silliness?
amicae1
James Farrell
jeanniepaterson
katgallow
Melissa Castan
Amicae Curiae 
Love those journal articles. And that case! What a crack up.
Oh, those kooky professors & Judges! Although there is a subgenre of lawyers turned comedians. For another day.
There is also a genre of very amusing blog posts specifically regarding the cautionary tale of Rakofsky v the Internet. A couple of my favorites are at this blog by Eric Turkewitz here (complete with Latin maxims you have never seen before) and the series by Antonin I. Pribetic at http://thetrialwarrior.com, particularly on “The Rakofsky Effect”. For those who love completeness, see the entire Compendium at http://blog.bennettandbennett.com/2011/05/compendium-of-rakofsky-v-internet-blog-posts.html
“We though that we would never see
A suit to compensate a tree”
The whole judgment is a short poem.
Fisher v. Lowe (Mich. Ct. App. 1983)
(the headnote is in verse too)
That is how more judgments should be written. For those who have not seen it, look here:
But with the greatest of respect I do think the court cheated a just little by abusing the footnotes to explain their reasoning.
[…] Law is funny, innit? « Amicae Curiae […]
More on Court Jesting & Jolly Justices: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702304453304576391700217502560.html#articleTabs%3Darticle