Some fascinating lines in court rulings this past week. Here are some of my favorites: “At the time of Yarbrough’s hire, the Board knew that this was his first job working with students in a school setting; prior to working at Fernwood (Elementary School), Yarbrough was a bouncer at the Red Diamond Strip Club.” (Wordlow v. Chicago Board of Education)
Bet you can’t guess what this guy did at a school in Chicago. What could go wrong when you hire a guy with experience?
The answer is that he handcuffed a 6-year-old special education student for allegedly taking candy from a teacher.
You can’t let the patrons take advantage of the performers.
“Plaintiff is not required, however, to provide the geographical coordinates for where he composed the work, what he ate for breakfast that morning, or what color underwear he was wearing at the time … unless that is ‘information regarded by the Register of Copyrights as bearing upon the preparation or identification of the work or the existence, ownership, or duration of the copyright.’” (Kaseberg v. Conaco, LLC)
As an intellectual exercise, come up with situations where that information would have bearing.
I think all copyright applications should include underwear color. It sheds light on character.
“Thompson also called Clark Bensen, a consultant and former director of political analysis for the Republican National Committee, who testified that, under the $500 limits, candidates often spend more than they raise. … Considering the analytical flaws in Bensen’s analysis and his own admission that ‘I didn’t do a very sophisticated analysis. … It’s not like I didn’t do it, but I didn’t do it well, shall we say, or completely …’” (Thompson v. Hebdon)
That explains the national deficit.
“Davidson asserts she was wearing slippers while kicking Morgan and therefore could not have injured Morgan.” (Morgan v. Davidson)
I believe this is called the slippery dope defense. I’m picturing martial arts experts being brought in by the plaintiffs.
“Consumers are often forced to travel to New York or California in order to obtain access to the full panoply of wines available from specialized retailers.” (Lebamoff Enterprises v. Rauner)
I have to admit this is a crisis I was completely unaware of: fine-wine-deprived migrants being forced to travel thousands of miles from the State of Illinois. Soon there will be talk of walls and Illinois paying for them.
I’m ashamed of the journalism profession for missing this story.
Finally, there was this passage in an Eighth Circuit ruling in Moore-Jones v. Quick that needs to be in a pitch for an action movie:
” Quick pulled right behind Moore-Jones, turned on his emergency lights at 8:23:27 p.m., sirens at 8:23:35 p.m., and spotlight at 8:23:38 p.m. She decelerated to about 14 miles per hour and pulled onto the right shoulder, past a car that had yielded. The shoulder was narrow, the area unlit and dark. She then pulled back on the road, accelerating to 35-38 miles per hour, her speed for the rest of the pursuit.”
Apparently, she thought she could get away by boring the pursuing officer. In the film version, I’m picturing the cop falling asleep at the wheel and rolling off the road. A huge explosion follows.
In a later scene, the lady with the slippers squares off against the slow driver in a battle that continues through the end of the credits.