Humor in the Courts

We all know that the practice of law is a serious matter. But, every now and then something happens that makes us stand back and reconsider … just a little.

Here are some cases for you to check out that demonstrate the lighter side of the law:

United States ex rel. Gerald Mayo v. Satan and His Staff, 54 F.R.D. 282 (1971)— At a time when the federal judiciary is increasingly called upon to settle disputes that bear on religious issues, the case of United States ex rel. Gerald Mayo v. Satan and his Staff, 54 F.R.D. 282 (W.D. Pa. 1971), seems particularly apropos. In this case, Mr. Mayo, the plaintiff, sought leave from the court to proceed forma pauperis in filing a complaint against Satan and his staff for violations of Mr. Mayo’s constitutional rights.

Chemical Specialties Manufacturers Association v. Clark, 482 F.2d 325 (1973)—This play on words was written by John R. Brown, Chief Judge of the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, in his concurring opinion in, a case dealing with regulation of the detergent industry. Worked into the opinion you’ll find brand names of quite a few soaps and detergents.

United States v. Syufy Enterprises, 903 F.2d 659 (1990)—This a 9th Federal Circuit case dealt with alleged violations of the Sherman Act by Raymond Syufy, the owner of a chain of movie theaters in Las Vegas, Nevada. Given that the case dealt with the film industry, Judge Kozinski attempted to make some references to individual movies, which are cleverly worked into the text of this well known opinion. In fact, a group of editors at the Brigham Young Law Review parsed the opinion and claim to have found the names of more than 200 individual films.

Ganulin v. United States, 71 F. Supp. 2d 824 (S.D. Ohio 1999)—This decision from the Southern District of Ohio, involves a case in which the plaintiff sued the Federal Government, alleging the statute making Christmas Day a legal public holiday violated the Establishment Clause of the U.S. Constitution, impinged on his freedom of association, and violated principles of equal protection. Even though it was a serious topic and her decision was later affirmed by the 6th Circuit Court of Appeals, Judge Susan Dlott used the opportunity to add a little Christmas humor to her opinion (with apologies to Dr. Seuss).

Miles v. City Council of Augusta, 551 F. Supp. 349 (1982)—People have often attributed a range of human characteristics to animals. One of the more intriguing questions over the years concerns the ability of animals to talk. In this instance, more commonly know as the case of “Blackie the Talking Cat,” this notion was put to the test in court.

Miles was the owner of Blackie, a black cat which Miles claimed could talk. In fact, he and his wife made their living from exploiting Blackie’s rare ability. When ordered by the city of Augusta, Georgia to secure a business license, he took the city to court, resulting in a somewhat unusual opinion.