Judicial Review

A blog dedicated to the wildest statements written by real judges, published in real opinions. Submissions are open for cited excerpts (bluebook not required).

[judicial-review]

"Much of plaintiff's testimony concerned her psychic activities and her inability to practice these activities following the CT scan. To read an aura, according to plaintiff, it is necessary to go into an altered state, a state of deep concentration. However, subsequent to the CT scan, whenever plaintiff entered this altered state she developed excruciating headaches. Consequently, she stopped reading auras. Because she no longer could read auras, she closed her office in Delaware and stopped assisting law enforcement officers."

Haimes v. Temple Univ. Hosp., 39 Pa. D. & C.3d 381 (Pa. Com. Pl. 1986).

[judicial-review]

"PepsiCo Defendants argue that Plaintiff's Motion to Intervene under Rule 24(a) is improper because he filed his Motion in an action in which he is already a party. Though it may be unusual for a party to request intervention, Rule 24 does, in fact, permit 'anyone' to intervene."

Kamdem-Ouaffo v. Pepsico, Inc., 314 F.R.D. 130, 134 n.5 (S.D.N.Y. 2016)

[judicial-review]

"Bad writing does not normally warrant sanctions, but we draw the line at gibberish."

McCurry v. Kenco Logistics Services, LLC, No. 18-3206, 2019 WL 5797184 (7th Cir. Nov. 7, 2019)

[judicial-review]

"Sadly, when human beings are let loose with computers and internet access, their work product does not necessarily compare favourably to the aforementioned monkeys with typewriters...Mr. Duncan provided me with an “affidavit of truth”, a rather substantial volume that appeared to me to be the result of somebody doing a Google search for terms like “jurisdiction” and the like and then cobbling them together in such a way that it makes James Joyce’s Ulysses look like an easy read. This hodgepodge of irrelevancies relied upon by Mr. Duncan was one of the misbegotten fruits of the internet. Finding it was a waste of Mr. Duncan’s time; printing it was a waste of trees and my reading it was a waste of my time and public money."

R. v. Duncan (Ontario Ct. Justice 2013)

[judicial-review]

“In support of this allegation petitioner cites counsel's testimony that he is a mystic, that he is clairvoyant and a prophet, that he hears voices and responds to them, and that he possesses the paranormal power to ‘sparkle’ and to send ‘blue beams of energy.’

It is not unfair to characterize trial counsel's behavior cited above as eccentric and unorthodox. There has been no showing and there is no evidence, however, that this behavior interfered with or adversely affected counsel's representation of petitioner, and without a nexus between such beliefs and practices to his trial preparation or performance, they provide no basis for finding that his performance was deficient or his assistance ineffective."

Neelley v. State, 642 So. 2d 494 (Ala. Crim. App. 1993).

[judicial-review]

"Defendants incorrectly cite to Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(b)(1), which does not exist."

Eckl v. Lauderdale Cnty. Bd. of Educ., No. 3:17-CV-0051-AKK, 2017 WL 3066664, at *2 n.2 (N.D. Ala. 2017)

[judicial-review]

Comity is a set of legal rules, but it is also a mood.

Apenyo v. Apenyo, 202 Md. App. 401 (2011)

[judicial-review]

[T]he Court found it very helpful that the parties' ediscovery vendors were present and spoke at the court hearings where the ESI Protocol was discussed. (At ediscovery programs, this is sometimes jokingly referred to as 'bring your geek to court day.')

Moore v. Publicis Groupe, 287 F.R.D. 182 (S.D.N.Y. 2012)

[judicial-review]

There was a defendant named Rex. With a minuscule organ for sex. When jailed for exposure. He said with composure, De minimis non curat lex.

U.S. v. Irving, No. 76-151 (E.D. Cal. 1977).

[judicial-review]

It is undoubtedly arguable that many people in the country regard the choice of shampoo as just as important as who may be elected to local, state, or national political office...

Virginia State Pharmacy Board v. Virginia Citizens Consumer Council, 425 U.S. 748 (1976) (Rehnquist, J., dissenting)

[judicial-review]

The court departed downward from the recommendation of life imprisonment and ultimately sentenced Hebert to 92 years (1,104 months) of imprisonment, followed by three years of supervised release.

United States v. Hebert, 813 F.3d 551 (5th Cir. 2015)

[judicial-review]

[I]f your husband comes home at 1:00 a.m. every Friday (after having left work at 5:00 p.m. the day before as usual), never reveals where he has been, won't look you in the eye on Fridays, and puts Thursday's shirts in the hamper bearing lipstick stains, your friends will agree that you "know" he is having an affair even if you refuse to seek confirmation.

U.S. v. Heredia, 483 F.3d 913 (9th Cir. 2007) (Graber dissent)

[judicial-review]

No reasonably prudent customer, accustomed to shopping online or not, would assume that a book entitled 'The Moses Expedition' is a type of MTM watch.

Multi Time Machine, Inc. v. Amazon.com, Inc., 804 F.3d 930 (9th Cir. 2015)

[judicial-review]

Socrates received more due process than the Tequila Roadhouse.

Club Misty, Inc. v. Laski, 208 F.3d 615 (7th Cir. 2000)

[judicial-review]

It is true that Alexander and his partner are not giants towering above local buildings; they cannot run to a client’s house so quickly that they appear as blurs; and they do not actually provide legal assistance to space aliens.

Alexander v. Cahill, 598 F.3d 79 (2d Cir. 2010)

[judicial-review]

As a matter of common sense, we find that depicting a lawyer trying a case conveys the idea that the lawyer tries cases.

Matter of Zang, 741 P.2d 267 (Ariz. 1987) 

[judicial-review]

We therefore conclude that Yagman's 'drunk on the bench' statement could reasonably be interpreted as suggesting that Judge Keller had actually, on at least one occasion, taken the bench while intoxicated.

Standing Committee on Discipline v. Yagman, 55 F.3d 1430 (9th Cir. 1995)