« September 23, 2004 | Main | September 25, 2004 »
September 24, 2004
A Horse Is A Vehicle Of Course
You've probably seen this story about Pennsylvania Supreme Court Justice Michael Eakin's rhyming dissent in a recent case deciding whether the state's drunk driving law could be applied to a man on a horse. The majority said a horse was not a vehicle, but Justice Eakin disagreed to the tune of the theme song of “Mr. Ed”:“A horse is a horse, of course, of course, but the Vehicle Code does not divorce its application from, perforce, a steed as my colleagues said. ”'It's not vague,' I'll say until I'm hoarse, and whether a car, a truck or horse this law applies with equal force, and I'd reverse instead.“We need more judges like Justice Eakin. Then again, maybe one is enough.
Posted 09:02 AM | Comments (2) | law general
Criminal Duct Tape
“Every criminal uses duct tape for something. Matter of fact, that's the sine qua non of being a criminal. Every time I pick up some duct tape I start to worry.” —Professor Evidence, speaking of U.S. v. Trenkler, 61 F.3d 45 (1st Cir. 1995) (where the court found that the fact that two bombs were both constructed with duct tape was evidence suggesting that they were made by the same person). Other comments of note from recent classes:- Random hypo comment from Prof. Evidence: “I met him at Denny's. Good place for a drug deal.”
- “There's kind of a King Learish quality to this case” — Prof. Corporations speaking of Francis v. United Jersey Bank, 432 A.2d 814 (1981) (in which two scumbag sons are also officers and directors of the family corporation from which they're stealing millions; mom was a drunk, daddy's dead).
- “You don't send a man to jail just because he's done some bad acts in the past. Gosh, if that was true, we'd all be in jail—especially the prosecutor.” —Prof. Evidence when discussing the O.J. Simpson case and FRE 413-415, but he's not necessarily referring to this case or the prosecutor in this case.
Posted 08:02 AM | Comments (2) | 2L law school