So I almost spit out my coffee because of this little nugget* (no pun, I swear) from 1928…
Where a petition alleged that the plaintiff was an unmarried white lady, and that while in attendance as a guest of the defendant at a circus performance given by the defendant, and while seated in one of the seats provided by the defendant for the defendant’s guests at the circus, a horse, which was going through a dancing performance immediately in front of where the plaintiff was sitting, was by the defendant’s servant, who was riding upon the horse, caused to back towards the plaintiff, and while in this situation the horse evacuated his bowels into her lap, that this occurred in full view of many people, some of whom were the defendant’s employees, and all of whom laughed at the occurrence, that as a result thereof the plaintiff was caused much embarrassment, mortification, and mental pain and suffering, to her damage in a certain amount, that the damage alleged was due entirely to the defendant’s negligence and without any fault on the part of the plaintiff, the petition set out a cause of action and was good as against a general demurrer.
And yes, that’s one sentence…
*Christy Bros. Circus v. Turnage, 144 S.E. 680, 681 (Ga. Ct. App. 1928)
No Comments
butterflyfish
November 8, 2008 at 6:36 pmRe: comment at my place.
Yep. If you quit the law and open an art gallery, then defraud an art purchaser, you can be disciplined under the rules of professional conduct… in addition to being liable for fraud, of course.
butterflyfish
November 8, 2008 at 8:35 pmRight — think of Bill Clinton. He was threatened with disbarment but ‘voluntarily surrendered’ his law license for three years or something because he committed perjury.
guy fawkes
November 12, 2008 at 1:01 amRE: the sentence…at least the court separated the clauses with commas : /