Writing Matters

• Publication year: 2015
• Pages: 0052
• Citation: Vol. 20 No. 5 Pg. 0052

Writing Matters Vol. 20 No. 5 Pg. 52 Georgia Bar Journal February, 2015

Writing Matters: Judges Use Humor, but Should You?

by Karen J. Sneddon and David Hricik, J.

We thought we'd do two things in this column. First, we want to lighten up the dark days of winter with some judicial humor, and second, we want to discuss the conventional wisdom on whether it is ever proper, or effective, to use humor in persuasive writing. Hopefully this installment of "Writing Matters" will both make you laugh and become a little bit more deliberate as a writer.

Judicial Humor

There are some classic opinions that most attorneys know—such as the one where the judge dismissed Mr. Mayo's suit against Satan for lack of personal jurisdiction,^[1] or the one where the judge told the plaintiff to run a string of paper clips down his pant legs to ground, so as to prevent the government from using signals to interfere with his brain.^[2] The excerpts we share here are a little more obscure. If you want more, there's a law review article analyzing humor. Be warned: it's not funny.^[3] With apologies to William Shakespeare, we think the opinions show that some judges are born funny, some achieve humor and still others have humor thrust upon them.

Discovery disputes have often led judges to use humor, probably out of exasperation. In one case, the parties could not agree on where to hold a deposition.

The judge provided a decision-making mechanism

[T]he Court will fashion a new form of alternative dispute resolution, to wit: at 4 p.m. on Friday, June 30, 2006, counsel shall convene at a neutral site agreeable to both parties. If counsel cannot agree on a neutral site, they shall meet on the front steps of t he [Courthouse]. Each lawyer shall be entitled to be accompanied by one paralegal who shall act as an attendant and witness. At that time and location, counsel shall engage in one (1) game of 'rock, paper, scissors.' The winner of this engagement shall be entitled to select the location for the 30(b)(6) deposition to be held somewhere in Hillsborough County during the period July 11-12, 2006.^[4]

Humor was clearly thrust upon Fifth Circuit Judge Gee and one of our own Georgia federal judges and then the 11th Circuit. Judge Gee was the author of an opinion with odd facts. A company had made a video for a public television station containing Mardi Gras-style footage to help raise funds for a nonprofit entity that helped children. After the show was aired, another entity asked the company that had made the film for some generic Mardi Gras style clips. The company forwarded the video footage it had filmed, not bothering to ask what it was to be used for. It turned out that it was for an adult film, "Candy the Stripper." The nonprofit was not pleased to discover the clip appeared in the adult film and brought a copyright suit. Judge Gee could not resist commenting:

Thus, this most delightful of case names: Easter Seal Society for Crippled Children v. Playboy Enterprises; seriously rivaled, in our judgment, only by United States v. 11 1/4 Dozen Packages of Articles Labeled in Part Mrs. Moffat's Shoo Ply Powders for Drunkenness, 40...