Menu
Menu
Browsing Category

the cases

The university described in Scalia’s parenthetical reminds me a lot of the University of Miami, where there was a beast known as “minority life” which consisted of minority fraternal organizations, clubs, events, and a de facto minority dorm.

That was the backdrop for the 0L summer “I am not Tyrone” tirade post.

That was also why I didn’t apply to the minority Big Law summer internship program, which had a prompt akin to “Tell us your victimization story.”

Anyhoot. Back to Conlaw… this week is officially crunch time…

dogs / the cases / Thomson Reuters / Uptown Apartment

Oh, the horror

September 8, 2009
hoarders Minneapolis

I read a lot of animal hoarding and cases at work, but last Sunday I came across a case that was so horrifying that I almost went home.
The case involved the typical hoarding situation: a house stuffed like Noah’s Arc and caked with feces. The description of the house so gruesome however, that I just wanted to speed home, shower, and bleach my entire apartment.

My standards for cleanliness have definitely changed over the past few years. I have a lot of plants, a pet frog, and Harley.

Crumbs, dog hair, and dead leaves are now a fact of life. I clean on a biweekly basis but there is no way to teach the dog to stop shedding, or keep the apartment perfectly sterile.

Only three people have seen my apartment, and they would probably agree that it is relatively clean. But when I read the case last Sunday my kitchen trash was full, the dishes piled, and the laundry unfolded. I was so absolutely disgusted that I devoted all of yesterday to cleaning. The case is after the jump.

Continue Reading
unedited cases

Danny Dearest

June 18, 2009
The cathedral in the French Quarter of New Orleans.

I’ve said this before, but the hilarity is in the footnotes.

Today’s case is from my Wills & Trusts class: Succession of Bacot aka, “the gay will contest.”

There’s a noteworthy discussion at the end of whether a man can be a concubine of another man.  “A concubine is as essential to a state of concubinage as a ghost is to Hamlet.”

Fact section after the jump.

Continue Reading
1L summer / unedited cases

Astride the Peter Principle?

June 2, 2009
Books by Patrick Tomasso via Unsplash

Who says summer law classes are boring?

Our first real case for Professional Responsibility is Converse v. Nebraska State Bar Comm’n (In re Converse), 258 Neb. 159 (Neb. 1999).

The case is about a law student who was not admitted to the bar because of his various…uh, indiscretions:
One of the final issues addressed by the Commission in its hearing was that of a T-shirt [the student] produced and marketed on which a nude caricature of [the law school dean] is shown sitting astride what appears to be a large hot dog.

That’s not even the worst of it.

The bulk of the fact section is after the jump:

Continue Reading
Just Sayin / the cases

God says stab?

April 17, 2009

We are covering mental insanity in Crimlaw today.
In today’s case1 the defendant stabbed his wife in the back because she did not support his (and god’s) plan for a sports facility:
Serravo (the defendant) gave the doctor a history of having worked on a plan, inspired by his relationship to God, to establish a multi-million dollar sports complex called Purely Professionals.

This facility, according to Serravo, would enable him to achieve his goal of teaching people the path to perfection. On the night of the stabbing, Serravo, according to the history given to Doctor Seig, was excited because he finally believed that he had received some positive encouragement in his endeavor from some King Soopers union members, but he was discouraged by some inner “evil spirits” who kept raising troublesome questions about how he would deal with his wife’s lack of encouragement and support.

…the court of appeals determined that, although there was some evidence indicating that Serravo knew the stabbing of his wife was illegal and contrary to societal standards of morality, there was evidentiary support for the insanity verdict because there was expert testimony that Serravo was inspired by an insane delusion that God had decreed the act.
More of the case after the jump:

Continue Reading
Law School / on the record / the cases

Illinois? Res Ipsa Loquitur…

April 9, 2009

Today in Corporations we covered the Conrad Black scandal.1 Black was a media baron until his fraud conviction for bad behavior1 as head of Hollinger International Inc. The wikipedia entry on Black is here, and a news archive is here.

During the conversation, Professor M took a pot-shot at Chicago:
Professor M: “The outside directors on this board were pretty illustrious, you have Henry Kissinger, former diplomats, and one of the board members was a former governor of Illinois…”
(Class chuckles)
Professor M: “You’re right! Illinois…that’s always a bad sign! Res Ipsa Loquitur!”

Some misdeeds after the jump.

Continue Reading
unedited cases

After the salon…

March 20, 2009

My question is: why did the court mention that she just came back from getting her hair done?
On December 28, 2006, Saldana returned home with her son and a friend after getting her hair done. She and defendant spoke briefly but she could see that he was upset. After the friend left, Saldana placed her son in his crib and they began to argue. Defendant punched her in the face, fracturing her nose, and causing her nose to bleed profusely.

Continue Reading
the cases

Overconfidence can lead to incarceration.

March 19, 2009

This was priceless. I think the court agrees.
Overconfidence can lead to incarceration. Despite being told that he was free to go, Darius Jones agreed to let police search his car. He, apparently, forgot that he was sitting on a bag of crack cocaine.

When police searched him, they found $1660 in his pockets, $3000 in his boots, and more cocaine in a knit pouch that was hidden inside his underwear. After the trial court denied his motion to suppress, Mr. Jones entered a no contest plea, and the trial court convicted him of possession of drugs.

The court later ordered the $4660 that he had at the time of his arrest to be forfeited. This Court affirms because Mr. Jones consented to the search of his car, and there was evidence to suggest that he used the $4660 to facilitate his possession of cocaine.

State v. Jones, 2009-Ohio-670. The full case is here. Emphasis (italics, bolding) is added.

legal humor / unedited cases

Clean house

March 18, 2009

Termination of parental rights cases have the most horrifying fact patterns.1

In the Matter of the Welfare of the Child of: S.K.B. and M.A.R., Parents. 2

On April 4, 2006, before the birth of C.C.R. and D.B., Isanti County Family Services (ICFS) received a report regarding C.R., born November 22, 2004, and D.T.R., born May 14, 2002, stating that the children’s home was “filthy,” that syringes and small baggies commonly used to package drugs were present in the home, and that mother had been heard asking others to obtain Vicodin for her.

ICFS conducted a welfare check of the home and observed that the inside of the home was littered with dirty dishes, old food, sharp knives within the children’s reach, chemicals, tools, and animal feces. D.T.R. was playing in the yard, which was “cluttered with broken glass, chemicals, car parts, and other garbage.”

D.T.R.’s mattress was “extremely dirty” and had no linens other than a blanket. A significant amount of animal feces was in the room. ICFS informed father, who was the only parent home at that time, that D.T.R. would be removed from the home due to the hazards observed, and that appellants must also give C.R. to ICFS.

When appellants turned over custody of C.R., she was afflicted with a sinus infection, a double-ear infection, and a possible throat infection.

1 If you are bored, most local courts have online case archives. Your neighborhood is more akin to a Law & Order episode than you think…

2 The full case is here.

humor / unedited cases

What not to do with a pen.

March 18, 2009

My goodness.
In the Matter of the Civil Commitment of: Robert Arthur Litzau, Alleged Mentally Ill1

Appellant Robert Arthur Litzau challenges the district court order committing him as mentally ill…

Appellant is currently 66 years old. In 1999, he was convicted of fourth-degree criminal sexual conduct. As a result, he is required to register as a predatory offender.

In June of 2003, appellant was charged with possessing an incendiary device and making terroristic threats after he threatened to “blow up” a residence and “kill as many police officers as possible.”

Continue Reading
the cases

Sleep with one eye open

March 11, 2009
Rain on a window by Thanun Buranapong via Unsplash

It’s battered women week in Criminal Law.1

Today’s case2 is State v. Leidholm: wife stabs husband with a butcher knife as he sleeps. The wife then claims self defense (battered woman syndrome).

The fact section for Leidholm after the jump.

Continue Reading
the cases

Peep

March 10, 2009

We have a particularly pervy Civpro case today:1
Upon their return to Baton Rouge after their marriage, appellees rented an apartment from appellant Oliver H. Perry, a citizen of Louisiana. This appeal arises from a final judgment entered on a jury verdict awarding $5,000 to Mr. Mas and $15,000 to Mrs. Mas for damages incurred by them as a result of the discovery that their bedroom and bathroom contained ‘two-way’ mirrors and that they had been watched through them by the appellant during three of the first four months of their marriage.

1 Mas v. Perry, 489 F.2d 1396 (5th Cir. 1974). The appellant is not contesting the verdict, just subject matter jurisdiction.

legal humor / the cases / unedited cases

Upon bizarre facts…

March 6, 2009

This week’s Crimlaw cases are just ridiculous:
May a person who enters the habitat of another at 3 o’clock in the morning for the announced purpose of killing him, and who commences to beat the startled sleeper’s bed with a stick and set fires under him, be entitled to use deadly force in self defense after the intended victim shoots him in the back with an arrow? Upon the basis of these bizarre facts, we hold that he may not, and instead, must suffer the slings and arrows of outrageous fortune (with apologies to William Shakespeare and Hamlet, Act III, sc. 1).

Continue Reading
legal humor / the cases

Snark from Connecticut

March 6, 2009

I love the humor that Judge Kravitz1 injected in his opinion:2
[W]hile this Court does not pretend to be a “rocket docket,” this case has nonetheless proceeded extraordinarily quickly from filing to trial…
“[W]ith all due respect to the Connecticut General Assembly, the statute is not a model of clarity, and, in truth, its words are susceptible to more than one plausible interpretation.
Other than the ability of the legislature to place a comma where one is intended, [The Plaintiff] advances no reason at all, let alone a cogent one, why all reclassifications, reverse stock splits, and recapitalizations should be subject to the supermajority rule no matter whether they increase the holdings of interested shareholders, while mergers, consolidations and share exchanges with a subsidiary-through which exactly the same economic outcome can be achieved-should be excepted from the supermajority provisions if they satisfy the 5% Rule.

1 Hon. Mark R. Kravitz (according to Westlaw) This was part of today’s reading assigment for Corporations.
2 Mason Capital, Ltd. v. Kaman Corp. (On Westlaw: 2005 WL 2850083)

the cases

Have it your way: Snark in the footnotes

February 23, 2009

Professor V just pointed out a funny footnote in a Burger King personal jurisdiction case1.

Complaining that “when Burger King is the plaintiff, you won’t ‘have it your way’ because it sues all franchisees in Miami,” Brief for Appellee 19, Rudzewicz contends that Florida’s interest in providing a convenient forum is negligible given the company’s size and ability to conduct litigation anywhere in the country. We disagree. Absent compelling considerations, a defendant who has purposefully derived commercial benefit from his affiliations in a forum may not defeat jurisdiction there simply because of his adversary’s greater net wealth.

1 Burger King Corp. v. Rudzewicz, 471 U.S. 462 (U.S. 1985)

1 2 3