So… after my sweated labour at 3.00 am this morning, actually attempting to write something sensible (infra), I return to more pleasurable pursuits and mark my return to normal service with…
US Judge does a master class in judicial disdain
Hat Tip to Rollonfriday News for covering the story inspiring me on to more detailed research on Wikipedia, Google and reading, for the first time in some years, a US law report.
Chief Judge Dennis Jacobs of the Second Circuit Court of Appeals in the United States delivered a dissenting judgment in a case involving a student election at the College of Staten Island. The full report may be read here (The dissent is from p.45)
Last week I commented on the curious Da Vinci judge case where the judge was given a mauling by the Master of the Rolls.
This week a US judge shows how to do disdain at world class levels. The case involves a student election. This is what he had to say…
He kicked off with this: “I concede that this short opinion of mine does not consider or take into account the majority opinion. So I should disclose at the outset that I have not read it“
Chief Judge Jacobs moved across to land this… “this is not a case that should occupy the mind of a person who has anything consequential to do.”
“This is a case about nothing.”
And, rather like a boxer, waiting to land a left hook, he follows up with this: “With due respect to my colleagues in the majority, and to whatever compulsion they feel to expend substantial energies on this case, I fear that the majority opinion (44 pages of typescript) will only feed the plaintiffs’ fantasy of oppression: that plutocrats are trying to stifle an upsurge of Pol-Potism on Staten Island. Contrary to the impression created by the majority’s lengthy formal opinion, this case is not a cause célèbre; it is a slow-motion tantrum by children spending their graduate years trying to humiliate the school that conferred on them a costly education from which they evidently derived small benefit. “
And.. the coup de grace: “If this case ends with a verdict for the plaintiffs (anything is possible with a jury), the district court will have the opportunity to consider whether the exercise merits an award of attorney’s fees in excess of one-third of two dollars.”
Excellent stuff… It is worth reading the dissent. Chief Judge Jacobs provides an extract from the student magazine. He states (p 46) “A selection from the illiterate piffle in the disputed issue of The College Voice is set out in the margin for the reader’s fun.”
The full report may be read here (The dissent is from p.45)