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

[StrangeOne]

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

[Richard W]

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.

[Chloe]

Sadly, the OK case of the judge recently convicted for using a penis pump while presiding over cases is not included.

Originally Posted by StrangeOne

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 )

Originally Posted by Chloe

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

[Seaboe Muffinchucker]

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

Originally Posted by Seaboe Muffinchucker

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

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.

[Hip Zu]

Originally Posted by Victoria J

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...

Originally Posted by Hip Zu

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...