snopes.com  

Go Back   snopes.com > Urban Legends > Legal Affairs

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 10 December 2007, 03:16 PM
Victoria J
 
Posts: n/a
Judge The World's Weirdest Cases

Not sure they're the weirdest cases but these ones are true. It's noticeable that the stupidest ones didn't get anywhere. And some of them aren't that odd. (Plus it doesn't include the missing pants / dry cleaner case).

There's also this article about Judge James Michael Shull who was recently removed from office by the Virginia Supreme Court, stories of other judges removed from office, and cases of which were decided by tossing coins. Written by the same person.

But if any Australians have any more information about No. 16 I'd be interested - please tell me that not only was that magistrate's decision appealed successfully but that Magistrate was never allowed to hear another case.

Victoria J
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 05 January 2008, 04:09 AM
StrangeOne StrangeOne is offline
 
Join Date: 26 September 2007
Location: Auckland, New Zealand
Posts: 351
Default

Unfortunately not http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/...382047621.html.

But interestingly he lost his job for other reasons. http://www.news.com.au/story/0,10117...1-1702,00.html
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 05 January 2008, 04:21 PM
Richard W's Avatar
Richard W Richard W is offline
 
Join Date: 19 February 2000
Location: High Wycombe, UK
Posts: 26,437
Default

Hey, I learned something! Richard Parker the tiger in Yann Martel's The Life of Pi is named after the victim in case 12...

(eta) Although Wikipedia says he's named after a character in an Edgar Allan Poe story from 1838 that just happened to match the name of the real cabin boy who was actually eaten in 1884; how bizarre. Yann Martel has written an article about it that's meant to be here but doesn't seem to be working, so I can't read it.

Last edited by Richard W; 05 January 2008 at 04:27 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 05 January 2008, 04:26 PM
Chloe's Avatar
Chloe Chloe is offline
 
Join Date: 13 September 2004
Location: Kentucky
Posts: 39,316
Crash

Sadly, the OK case of the judge recently convicted for using a penis pump while presiding over cases is not included.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 05 January 2008, 05:55 PM
Victoria J
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by StrangeOne View Post
Unfortunately not http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/...382047621.html.

But interestingly he lost his job for other reasons. http://www.news.com.au/story/0,10117...1-1702,00.html
Thanks.

I'm really pleased to have more information on that - and to see that it clearly was seen as outrageous (particularly from the way it's referred to in the later article). I'm also extremely pleased to know he lost his job - some people clearly should not be allowed to sit in judgement over others.

(I'd forgotten posting this - and certainly wasn't expecting a response after all this time )

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chloe View Post
Sadly, the OK case of the judge recently convicted for using a penis pump while presiding over cases is not included.
That would have fitted in - a lot of them had a sexual theme. I thought what they were really lacking was the dry cleaners / lost trousers case.

The Weird Cases column is now semi-regular in The Times law section. The most recent seems to be this one about traffic offences.

Victoria J
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 07 January 2008, 04:38 PM
Seaboe Muffinchucker's Avatar
Seaboe Muffinchucker Seaboe Muffinchucker is offline
 
Join Date: 30 June 2005
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 19,028
Glasses

He has the guy who sued G*d, but he missed the man who sued Satan (U.S. ex rel Mayo v. Satan and his staff)

Seaboe
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 07 January 2008, 07:00 PM
Victoria J
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Seaboe Muffinchucker View Post
He has the guy who sued G*d, but he missed the man who sued Satan (U.S. ex rel Mayo v. Satan and his staff)

Seaboe
Suing Satan makes so much more sense...

Actually thinking about it - it really doesn't. If you believe in supernatural interference it makes sense to go directly for God as he's the one in charge. Satan acts within God's remit for him.

Presumably there's still no address to serve papers on either way. And of course no jurisdiction over God in any case.

Victoria J
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 15 January 2008, 09:55 PM
Grendel
 
Posts: n/a
Default

My favourite weird case is one that I actually witnessed. I was sitting in Judge’s Chambers* at New Westminster (a suburb of Vancouver) waiting to have my motion heard when another lawyer brought this motion.

The lawyer was acting for the wife of a man who had committed suicide about a year earlier. It seems that the man was the sole owner of a company that makes a specialized piece of equipment for scuba diving. The company was quite successful and worth a substantial sum. Other than the company, he had no substantial assets that were not owned jointly with the wife. For reasons apparently unknown to the wife, the man had committed suicide in a manner that was not described by the lawyer, but was quite gruesome, and he managed to disseminate the video of his suicide to friends and relatives over the internet. That’s not the weird part. Apparently, two days before he committed suicide, he made a will – valid in all matters of form – leaving his entire estate to his wife on very specific conditions. She was to cause the company to meet all outstanding orders, retain certain accounting documents, and then destroy everything! She was directed to smash, burn or otherwise destroy every computer, drawing, blueprint, tool, die, etc., etc. The will specifically stated that she must be present during the entire destruction process. If she refused to fulfill this condition, the entire estate was to go to a pro-euthanasia society in Oregon.

The man had never seen a psychiatrist while alive, but the lawyer had had a psychiatrist review the suicide video and the will; the psychiatrist said that the man was probably delusional. The lawyer asked the court to set aside the last will in favour of an earlier one, which just left everything to the wife, based on either the psychiatrist’s opinion or on “public policy” grounds, which is lawyer-speak for “I don’t have any particular legal basis for this, but it is the right thing to do.” The court, needless to say, set aside the will.

*For those who don’t know, Chambers is a regular courtroom, but it hears motions on specific issues rather than trials.

Last edited by Grendel; 15 January 2008 at 09:56 PM. Reason: formatting
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 16 January 2008, 05:31 PM
Hip Zu Hip Zu is offline
 
Join Date: 12 December 2006
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 103
Devil Maybe not...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Victoria J View Post
Suing Satan makes so much more sense...

Actually thinking about it - it really doesn't. ....
Especially considering all of the lawyers Satan has at his disposal...
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 17 January 2008, 08:23 AM
Ajay
 
Posts: n/a
Judge

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hip Zu View Post
Especially considering all of the lawyers Satan has at his disposal...
...in which case, it would be perfectly devilish for Satan to tempt someone into sueing him...
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 03:37 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.