Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

The Velveteen Ocelot

(131,989 posts)
28. Here's the full opinion - short but sweet.
Thu May 7, 2015, 05:24 PM
May 2015
http://abovethelaw.com/2015/05/surprisingly-lawsuit-against-all-homosexuals-summarily-dismissed/2/

And for another good chuckle, have a look at Mayo v. Satan, cited in the Driskell opinion. http://kevinunderhill.typepad.com/Documents/Mayo_v_Satan.pdf

My all-time favorite, though, is Searight v. New Jersey, 412 F. Supp. 413 (D. N.J. 1976): http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=14840990769950902726&q=412+f+supp+413&hl=en&as_sdt=2006 which was the subject of great hilarity when I was in law school. In that case the plaintiff claimed the State of New Jersey "unlawfully injected him in the left eye with a radium electric beam. As a result, he claims that someone now talks to him on the inside of his brain." The court dismissed the case, but offered some helpful suggestions:

The allegations, of course, are of facts which, if they exist, are not yet known to man. Just as Mr. Houdini has so far failed to establish communication from the spirit world (See E. L. Doctorow, "Ragtime", pp. 166-169, Random House, 1974), so the decades of scientific experiments and statistical analysis have failed to establish the existence of "extrasensory perception" (ESP). But, taking the facts as pleaded, and assuming them to be true, they show a case of presumably unlicensed radio communication, a matter which comes within the sole jurisdiction of the Federal Communications Commission, 47 U.S.C. § 151, et seq. And even aside from that, Searight could have blocked the broadcast to the antenna in his brain simply by grounding it. See, for example, Ghirardi, "Modern Radio Servicing", First Edition, p. 572, ff. (Radio & Technical Publishing Co., New York, 1935). Just as delivery trucks for oil and gasoline are "grounded" against the accumulation of charges of static electricity, so on the same principle Searight might have pinned to the back of a trouser leg a short chain of paper clips so that the end would touch the ground and prevent anyone from talking to him inside his brain.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

That really WAS quick! hamsterjill May 2015 #1
Rats. I wanted to see them try to serve process on all the defendants. KamaAina May 2015 #2
HAAAAAAA! 7962 May 2015 #10
Great quote! Elmer S. E. Dump May 2015 #3
tell that to Hobby Lobby... Volaris May 2015 #16
No Hobby Lobby in my area. And if there was, I wouldn't set foot in the place. Elmer S. E. Dump May 2015 #18
More like tell that to Scalia d_legendary1 May 2015 #34
That was fairly fast Gothmog May 2015 #4
Yeah, the batshit wasn't even dry yet! Fritz Walter May 2015 #20
In ALL seriousness, this was a way for this particular insane person to vent. NoJusticeNoPeace May 2015 #5
How nice of you to take this chance to insult anyone who believes in God 7962 May 2015 #11
Personally, I don't know for certain that mindwalker_i May 2015 #22
next time i go on about my belief in unicorns and people laugh at me. i'll use your line. nt La Lioness Priyanka May 2015 #31
Seriously? lisby May 2015 #24
Went out of may to NOT lump all in, that you choose to ignore that is not my problem NoJusticeNoPeace May 2015 #25
you lump all of those who believe passionately or even think a God or gods is possible, AlbertCat May 2015 #32
i dont think religious people have mental issues, i do think fundamentalists do. nt La Lioness Priyanka May 2015 #33
Now now SwankyXomb May 2015 #35
LOL...and me, of all people. Born again, catholic school etc NoJusticeNoPeace May 2015 #36
Can't see how she has standing, anyway. malthaussen May 2015 #6
BUT BUT she's an Ambassador for God & Jesus!!!!!! LiberalElite May 2015 #38
She's being oppressed!! progressoid May 2015 #7
Bloody Peasant. Liberalagogo May 2015 #9
An all-timer classic! Moostache May 2015 #21
Brilliant William Seger May 2015 #48
Too bad... Liberalagogo May 2015 #8
Good for that judge. Frivolous. 7962 May 2015 #12
Pro se litigants are invariably unbalanced. Manifestor_of_Light May 2015 #13
I was once an appellate court clerk, The Velveteen Ocelot May 2015 #26
I work in a law firm - LiberalElite May 2015 #37
Kiddies, can you say "frivolous and vexatious litigation"? Manifestor_of_Light May 2015 #44
There are some exceptions, and some courts are good about helping them. Jim Lane May 2015 #46
I would have loved to see it go forward... iandhr May 2015 #14
Did her a favor central scrutinizer May 2015 #15
She'll take it to Supreme Crazy Court! n/t Bossy Monkey May 2015 #17
These activist judges... catbyte May 2015 #19
Had I been the judge, my opinion would have said: The Velveteen Ocelot May 2015 #23
... catbyte May 2015 #27
Her answer would be, "Is there anyone else I can talk to?" Spitfire of ATJ May 2015 #29
Here's the full opinion - short but sweet. The Velveteen Ocelot May 2015 #28
!!!!! LiberalElite May 2015 #39
Good AlbertCat May 2015 #30
thanks to the judge :) allan01 May 2015 #40
Darn! I wanted to see God and Jesus, called to take the oath and testify. SoapBox May 2015 #41
Well, John Denver did! Archae May 2015 #42
Well, thank God for that . . . markpkessinger May 2015 #43
The judge was not amused by the plaintiff Gothmog May 2015 #45
Well, that's a shame. I was so looking forward to God testifying. Vinca May 2015 #47
And this is really the attitude of the entire "religious right" William Seger May 2015 #49
Latest Discussions»Latest Breaking News»Federal judge dismisses N...»Reply #28