How about Hannah?

Posted on March 13, 2009 by Jansen

It’s the day before spring break, and the attendance in Corporate law is sparse.1

Professor M: “Okay, well, I’m going to start calling, and we’ll see how this goes…”

I was prepared for a painful reenactment of Statutory Interpretation2, but the first person Professor M called on was actually here!

Professor M: “Hannah Shooty?”
Hannah: “Here. It’s Slew-tee.”
Professor M: “Mooty?”
Hannah: “Slew-tee.”
Professor M: “Su-tee? Smooty?”
Hannah: “Um..”
Professor M: “Shooy? Mooey? Um, how about Hannah! So Hannah, what happened in this case?”

1 A little under 2/3 of the class showed up.
2 Yes, Professor M taught Statutory Interpretation as well. Today’s exchange reminded me a lot of Professor L last semester. But, to be clear, the most ridiculous naming incident is still the JD-baby incident from Contracts…

Filed under: 1L, 1L Spring, humor, legal humor, on the record | Tagged: , | 3 Comments »

Jill’s bloodlust

Posted on March 13, 2009 by Jansen

Another day in the Circus (aka Criminal Law). The topic1 is police power to shoot a fleeing suspect:

Professor R: “Is this an incentive for the suspect to run? Often the suspect is younger, doesn’t have heavy equipment, and hasn’t been to the doughnut shop as much…”
Jill: “There’s a middle ground! You don’t haveta shoot him! You can taser him, or beat him with a baton!”

1 The leading case is Tenn. v. Garner, 471 U.S. 1 (U.S. 1985)

Filed under: legal humor, on the record | Tagged: | Leave a Comment »

The Crash

Posted on March 12, 2009 by Jansen

So I’m in Corporations, reading1 a slide about the Business Judgment Rule. My classmate sitting next to me starts to lean back in his chair and we hear a snap:

A-BOOM-a-noom! Both of us crash down to the floor and hit our heads on the ledge behind our seats…and hilarity ensued.2

Professor M: “Oh my god! Are you guys okay?”
(The entire class laughs, as we scramble back up)
Me: “Yes, but you now have to change your seating chart, ‘cus we’re moving!”
(We dust ourselves off and move our stuff, the laughing intensifies).
Professor M: “Yes! I’ll do that right now actually!”3

Law school is all grace and poise, don’tcha know?

1 Seriously, this is the karma I get for paying attention…
2 Total “But No Thanks” reference.
3 Yes, Professor M actually changed the seating chart as we moved over to non-broken seats. We sat in launch position for the rest of the class lest we repeat the crash scene.

Filed under: 1L Spring, humor, legal humor | Tagged: , | 6 Comments »

Um…what?

Posted on March 12, 2009 by Jansen

Corps just got complicated:1

Professor M: So the corporation says that this doesn’t fit under the Connecticut Business Combination Act § 33-840(4)(A) but the court puts it under § 33-840(4)(E). How do they get there?
Jack (agape): “Um…what?”
Professor M: “Yeah, that’s my reaction too.”

1 Today’s case is Mason Capital, Ltd. v. Kaman Corp., 2005 WL 2850083. I discussed the case here (the snarky judge).

Filed under: 1L Spring, legal humor, on the record | Tagged: , , | Leave a Comment »

Mornin: The big giveaway

Posted on March 12, 2009 by Jansen

This story is hilarious:1

A 16-year-old Rosemount student handed out $100 bills to fellow students Tuesday as if they were jelly beans.

When asked where he got the money — he had given away about $11,000 — he first said it was his allowance. Later, when pressed by a teacher, he admitted he found it in a ditch.

Of course they didn’t believe the boy,who was actually telling the truth:

As it turns out, the teen wasn’t lying.

The student, whose identity has not been disclosed, led another investigator to a highway ditch near Pilot Knob Road and 195th Street in Farmington, where he had found a Cub Foods bag filled with nearly $18,000 in cash.

Nearby was something more sinister: measurement scales and 4 pounds of marijuana.

The teen gave the money to friends and needy acquaintances, including his bus driver. “He said because she needed it. She has kids, and she needed it.”

The police took back all of the money, including the $1,200 given to the bus driver.

Something similar2 happened in Miami, near my old high school.

The school is next to a high I-95 onramp. One day, a money collection truck overturned on the onramp and money3 flowed from the highway throughout the neighborhood.4

This happened before I moved to Miami, but people were still talking about it years later.

1 Via Pioneer Press | TwinCities.com
2 Similar in a “found money” sense, but obviously, in Miami people help themselves.
3 Money, and food stamps apparently. I don’t know what kind of truck carries both… one of my classmates said, “Man, we were using those food stamps for months!”
4 Overtown, one of Miami’s poorest neighborhoods. The story was picked up by the NYT.

Filed under: Mornin | Tagged: , , | Leave a Comment »

Final Deliberations (and the Cake!)

Posted on March 12, 2009 by Jansen

I just finished a marathon 6-hour meeting for the Student Service Fees Committee.

This was the scene in hour 5:

Yes. I think that’s Ben1 sleeping.

The meeting passed my 9pm guestimate, but it was still significantly shorter than last year’s deliberations, which went until 3am. These are the final deliberations for the Student Services Fee Committee. A lot of money is at stake so spirited debate2 ensued…

The debate was interrupted by a laughing fit in my corner of the conference table because of The Amazing:

I realize that the cake looks less-than-amazing in that picture, but it was a Dairy Queen ice cream cake before I demolished it. And it was amazing. Seriously. Angels sung. It was the kind of cake that changes lives. The cake was good enough to promote world peace. That cake could even make Chris Brown stop beating Rihanna.3

A committee member caught me casting amorous looks at my leftover cake and started laughing. And of course, I started giggling too.4

Committee Chair (annoyed, on 3 hours of sleep): “What is going on down there?”
Me (flustered): “Sorry, I’m going through things. This cake is so good.”
Committee member: “Yeah, he’s like in love with it.”
Another Committee member (Ben): “You should blog about it!”

I pull out my camera, and the Committee Chair rolls her eyes in disgust.5

We started around 5pm, and ended after 11pm. I’m tired, goofy, and still gitty from that cake.

1 For the record Ben’s not actually sleeping, although we did catch him not paying attention during one resolution. Hm hm hm. Pesky laptops! Ben is also the person who suggested I take a picture of The Amazing.
2 Who caught the Pelosi quote? (She’s been using the phrase for a while.)
3 Yeah, I went there.
4 I realize this sounds grossly unprofessional, but it’s not. I swear. This is a relaxed student committee. To put this in context, the entire committee had all just finished watching David After Dentist and Scarlet Takes a Tumble about 5 minutes before. Classy, I know. But it was a 6-hour meeting and we needed breaks.
5 Yes, you did!

Filed under: 1L Spring | Tagged: , , | Leave a Comment »

Ungainly dirt clods.

Posted on March 12, 2009 by Jansen

Riddle v. Harmon1 made my day. The case is about a woman who tried to disinherit her husband… Read more »

Filed under: the cases | Tagged: , , , | 3 Comments »

Freshness on a budget

Posted on March 12, 2009 by Jansen

I have noticed a drastic improvement of the quality of generic Wal-Mart products. I wasted $17 at Target diffuser.1 It’s the one on the left:

I bought the smaller diffuser on the right for $6 at Wal-Mart, and I’m overwhelmed with freshness every time I enter my room.2 I just keep the Target diffuser around for decoration now.

The quality of all Wal-Mart groceries has improved as well and my wallet are all about it. Viva la Wal-Mart!

1 It only diffused the money from my wallet.
2 So, for full disclosure, it helps when you accidentally knock over said diffuser and spill the scented oil everywhere – BUT – the diffuser was also very powerful before the spill.

Filed under: me me me, unsolicited advice | Tagged: , , , | 2 Comments »

Incompetence

Posted on March 11, 2009 by Jansen

Professor P didn’t think highly of the lawyers in today’s case.1

Professor P: “This is a classic example of a badly drafted document. When you use a form, make sure you are the master of the form. Do not use words that you don’t understand.”

Professor P: “So what did the lawyer do in this case?”
Jill: “Well, he didn’t know how to draft the will so he called up a lawyer buddy of his, and that’s where the ambiguous language came from…”
Professor P: “Thereby proving that two bad lawyers are not better than one bad lawyer!”

1 Camp v. Camp, 220 Va. 595 (Va. 1979) The lawyer confused tenancy in common with a joint tenancy. (An explanation is here).

The specific clause in the contract is “as tenants in common with the right of survivorship.” The problem is that tenants in common have no right of survivorship.

Filed under: legal humor, on the record | Tagged: , , , | Leave a Comment »

Sleep with one eye open

Posted on March 11, 2009 by Jansen

It’s battered women week in Criminal Law.1

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

I don’t buy the battered woman syndrome and the learned helplessness theories advanced in class. I think there are usually signs that something is amiss, and that people choose abusive spouses at their peril.

The fact section for Leidholm after the jump.

Read more »

Filed under: the cases | Tagged: , | Leave a Comment »

Boomkat list for March 1-7

Posted on March 11, 2009 by Jansen

This week’s boomkat list. Read more »

Filed under: Boomkat List | Tagged: , , , , , , , , | 2 Comments »

Peep

Posted on March 10, 2009 by Jansen

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.

Filed under: the cases | Tagged: , , , | 2 Comments »

Lumps from the sky

Posted on March 10, 2009 by Jansen

Filed under: me me me | Tagged: , , , | Leave a Comment »

When Charity Fails

Posted on March 9, 2009 by Jansen

Filed under: humor, legal humor | Tagged: , , | 7 Comments »

Professor P on the Rule of Against Perpetuities

Posted on March 9, 2009 by Jansen

The rule is ruthless:

Professor P: “And the rule against perpetuities doesn’t care if the child’s interest ends by a child getting the property, or if the interest ends with the child getting hit by a bus and not getting the property. Either way the rule is happy.”

Filed under: on the record | Tagged: , | Leave a Comment »

Next Page »