For a timely chuckle,

[asterroc]

Stambovsky v. Ackley (NY 1991)

Plaintiff sues defendant for selling him a house without disclosing the existence of a poltergeist on the premises. Whether the ghost actually exists or not is only briefly mentioned, and only in the dissent. The decision is full of bad puns (in addition to the obligatory legalese I don't entirely get).

(Thanks to "Foxtrot" for the link.)

Comments

[sammka.livejournal.com]

We read that decision in Property class.

I checked Foxtrot but can't find where they talk about it, or the page links to it. I wanna see!

[zandperl.livejournal.com]

Ah no, not Foxtrot comic. Mr. Foxtrot who told me he was emailing it to you too, and was dressed like some anime character for Halloween. tacotortoise coined the nickname for him this past summer at CTY. Sorry for the disappointing confusion!

[sammka.livejournal.com]

haha, oh, ok!
He sent me that link too, I at first assumed that he got it from your journal or something.

I think it would be amusing if by some roundabout path, he'd heard it from me, since I told a bunch of people when I first read it...

[zandperl.livejournal.com]

Yeah, he told me about it and we thought you'd appreciate it, so I gave him your e-addy. Then I decided to post it here and it wasn't until after it occurred to me that you'd see it here too. """Foxtrot""" doesn't do LJ unfortunately, not even reading it. Oh well.

[l0stmyrel1g10n.livejournal.com]

i'm not overly familiar with judicial decision documents and such...do they often quote Shakespeare?