Greedy Associates - The FindLaw Legal Lifestyle and Career Blog

Recently in Humor Category

Ever the lightning rod for controversy, former federal judge Richard Posner recently described his vision for lawyer-less civil trials. According to a Chicago Tribune piece, Posner would like to see real litigants go to trial like on Judge Judy.

Not only would he like to see this, he believes that a judge could in fact order parties to go to trial without attorneys. That, because there is no constitutional right to an attorney in civil cases, all it would take is for a "judge who's willing to say 'I'm not going to let either side have any lawyers. ... I don't want to have the case clogged up with lawyers.'" While Posner is known for making wild statements about the legal industry, this one might just be a daydream he failed to realize before stepping down from the bench.

Whether you're a geek, or a nerd, the times sure have changed, for the better. Thanks to the rapid advancements in technology, and the wild success of the geeks and nerds that created the new tech, the stigma attached to belonging to either or both groups has faded. People actually take pride now in being a nerd or geek. There's even a show called Nerd Court.

However, as the terms have lost their pejorative focus, each has begun to be understood a little bit differently. Also, nerds are no longer as thirsty for revenge, and neither are geeks, for that matter. But, we're still not at the point where someone who doesn't self identify as a nerd or geek will accept being called one as a compliment. Also, the related term "dork" still retains a pejorative context.

Two justices out of Florida's Eleventh District, Federal Court of Appeal, have sandwiched a ruling between pop culture quotes from drastically different time periods. The opinion opens quoting Tyrion Lannister, a character from the HBO series Game of Thrones, and closes with one of the more widely known literary quotes from Shakespeare's MacBeth.

What's more is both quotes actually fit the case, Rodriguez v. City of Doral, et. al., rather well. The matter involves the alleged constructive discharge of a police officer for his political support of a candidate for office. On summary judgment, the lower district court ruled that the letter of voluntary resignation the plaintiff submitted to his employer negated the constructive termination claim. The circuit court had a different opinion, and delivered the reversal with style.

The highly anticipated defamation case against John Oliver and HBO brought by Robert Murray and his corporate coal conglomerate has been making headlines since its filing shortly after Oliver aired his segment on the coal baron. Although Oliver was warned that airing the segment would lead to litigation, his team was confident enough in the First Amendment to proceed.

However, while Oliver's segment may have been hilarious, an amicus curiae brief filed by the ACLU of West Virginia in the case may actually be the funniest piece of legal writing in human history.

Wake-Up Call: New Trial Ordered After Lawyer Kept Falling Asleep

Attorney Stanton Levenson gives new meaning to the saying, "you snooze, you lose."

After James Nassida was convicted of mortgage fraud, a federal judge ordered a new trial because the attorney kept falling asleep during the proceedings. How bad was it?

It was so bad the client said he had to nudge the attorney awake every day during the weeks-long trial. It was so bad the opposing counsel had to tell the judge about it in the middle of the trial. It was so bad even the jurors deliberated about it.

It gets better, or worse, depending on your perspective. Here are a few gems from the judge's order granting a new trial:

Want to start a New Wave cover band, performing the greatest hits from Boy George and Flock of Seagulls? Have you always wanted to stick a neckerchief and sleeveless denim jacket and do your best "Born to Run," maybe backed by the F Street Band?

Go for it. Even when you're a millionaire, that cover-band cash could keep rolling in. That was one of the revelations in the White House financial disclosures released last week, which noted that White House counsel Don McGahn made $2.4 million at Jones Day last year, with a few grand on the side coming from the '80s cover band, Scott's New Band.

Clever, subtle, cutting judicial citations are nothing new. The Ninth Circuit's recent opinion halting President Trump's travel ban is a perfect example, full as it was of citations to cases like Ex parte Endo (leading to the end of Japanese internment) and Texas v. United States (halting President Obama's immigration reforms.) There are the sorts of smack downs by way of the Blue Book that make judicial writing a treat.

But there's another, more interesting citation style trending among the judiciary lately: clever, unexpected cites to unexpected, perhaps incongruous, pop culture touchstones, be they 80s sitcoms or horror movie classics.

It's not often that courts provide us with insight into sexual intercourse. But yesterday, the Florida Supreme Court shed some much-needed light on that topic.

If you're looking for some tips into the arts erotic, though, this isn't the case to turn to. (I don't believe such a case exists, but correct me if I'm wrong.) Rather, this is a case of statutory interpretation, one that forced the court to decide whether "sexual intercourse" was limited to good ol' penile-vaginal fornication or covered the gay kind of lovemaking as well.

Miami Lawyer's Pants Literally Catch Fire During an Arson Trial

Lawyer, lawyer, pants on fire!

For real. You can't make this stuff up.

A Miami lawyer's pants literally caught fire in the middle of his closing argument on behalf of a client who was charged with arson. Attorney Stephen Guitierrez noticed that his pocket felt hot, and then saw smoke coming out. He exited quickly, stage right.

"I noticed the heat was intensifying and left the courtroom as quickly as possible -- straight into the bathroom," he told the ABA Journal.

Avoiding perjury can be a tricky thing, especially if you're a high-ranking public official. Whether you're testifying before a grand jury or the subject of a Congressional hearing, you can expect to face hours of probing. It's almost hard not to slip up and misstate a few essential facts, right?

Don't worry, though. If you ever find yourself questioned about secret White House tapes or clandestine talks with your Russian counterparts, we've got your back. Here are three tips and tricks to help you survive even the toughest scrutiny and come out perjury-free.