Seriously – I apologize for all the legal posts lately, but this is really great.
147 F.Supp2d 668
Download 145_f.Supp.2d 668.doc
Just the beginning of the awesomeness of this case –
Before proceeding further, the Court notes that this case involves two extremely likable lawyers, who have together delivered some of the most amateurish pleadings ever to cross the hallowed causeway into Galveston, an effort which leads the Court to surmise but one plausible explanation. Both attorneys have obviously entered into a secret pact-complete with hats, handshakes and cryptic words-to draft their pleadings entirely in crayon on the back sides of gravy-stained paper place mats, in the hope that the Court would be so charmed by their child-like efforts that their utter dearth of legal authorities in their briefing would go unnoticed. Whatever actually occurred, the Court is now faced with the daunting task of deciphering their submissions. With Big Chief tablet readied, thick black pencil in hand, and a devil-may-care laugh in the face of death, life on the razor’s edge sense of exhilaration, the Court begins.
And this is just classic (direct from the case) –
What the ···)?! The Court cannot even begin to comprehend why this case was selected for reference. It is almost as if Plaintiff’s counsel chose the opinion by throwing long range darts at the Federal Reporter (remarkably enough hitting a nonexistent volume!).
HAHAHAHAHAHAHA! LOVE IT. I can’t get enough of this Charlsie. Do you have any idea how much time I spend at work dreaming of writing something like this and having the judge actually sign it? Power to the disgruntled law clerk!
I love it. Have already sent it on to several friends. 🙂
Judge Kent is pretty funny. The following is from another of his opinions. The footnote is the best.
Smith v. Colonial Penn Ins. Co., 943 F. Supp. 782
As to Defendant’s argument that Houston might also be a more convenient forum for Plaintiff, the Court notes that Plaintiff picked Galveston as her forum of choice even though she resides in San Antonio. Defendant argues that flight travel is available between Houston and San Antonio but is not available between Galveston and San Antonio, again because of the absence of a commercial airport. Alas, this Court’s kingdom for a commercial airport! n2 The Court is unpersuaded by this argument because it is not this Court’s concern how Plaintiff gets here, whether it be by plane, train, automobile, horseback, foot, or on the back of a huge Texas jackrabbit, as long as Plaintiff is here at the proper date and time. Thus, HN3the Court declines to disturb the forum chosen by the Plaintiff and introduce the likelihood of delay inherent in any transfer simply to avoid the insignificant inconvenience that Defendant may suffer by litigating this matter in Galveston rather than Houston. See United Sonics, Inc. v. Shock, 661 F. Supp. 681, 683 (W.D. Tex. 1986) (plaintiff’s choice of forum is “most influential and should rarely be disturbed unless the balance is strongly in defendant’s favor”); Dupre, 810 F. Supp. at 828 (a prompt trial “is not without relevance to the convenience of parties and witnesses and the interest of justice”).
– – – – – – – – – – – – – – Footnotes – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
n2 Defendant will again be pleased to know that regular limousine service is available from Hobby Airport, even to the steps of this humble courthouse, which has got lights, indoor plummin’, ‘lectric doors, and all sorts of new stuff, almost like them big courthouses back East.