A legal joke for a nightcap
A Legal joke
The blogger Smalltalk sent Sakmongkol a joke.
It ran something like this.
A prominent politician went to see a doctor for a brain scan. The doctor told the politician- your brain is divided into two parts- left and right.
The left part has nothing right in it.
The right part, has nothing left in it.
Now, Smalltalk is a lawyer by profession. Because one good measure deserves another, sakmongkol wants to share with him a legal joke. Sakmongkol got this sometime in 1991. He has kept it in an old file. It goes something like this.
One evening, after attending the theater, two gentlemen were walking down the avenue when they observed a rather well dressed and attractive young lady walking ahead of them. One of them turned to the other and remarked, "I'd give
$50.00 to spend the night with that woman." Much to their surprise, the young lady overheard the remark, turned around, and replied, "I'll take you up on that." She had a neat appearance and a pleasant voice, so after bidding his
companion good night, the man accompanied the young lady to her apartment. The following morning, the man presented her with $25. 00 as he prepared to leave.
She demanded the rest of the money, stating: "If you don't give me the other $25.00, I'll sue you for it." He laughed, saying: "I'd like to see you get it on these grounds."
The next day he was surprised when he received a summons ordering his presence in court as a defendant in a lawsuit. He hurried to his lawyer and explained the details of the case. His lawyer said: "She can't possibly get a judgment against you on such grounds, but it will be interesting to see how her case will be presented."
After the usual preliminaries, the lady's lawyer addressed the court as follows: "Your honor, my client, this lady, is the owner of a piece of property, a garden spot, surrounded by a profuse growth of shrubbery, which property she agreed to rent to the defendant for a specified length of time for the sum of $50.00. The defendant took possession of the property, used it extensively for the purpose for which it was rented, but upon evacuating the premises, he paid only $25.00, one-half the amount agreed upon. The rent was not excessive, since
it is restricted property, and we ask judgment be granted against the defendant to assure payment of the balance." The defendant's lawyer was impressed and amused by the way his opponent had presented the case. His defense, therefore,
was somewhat different from the way he originally planned to present it.
"Your honor," he said, "My client agrees that the lady has a fine piece of property, that he did rent such property for a time, and a degree of pleasure was derived from the transaction. However, my client found a well on the property around which he placed his own stones, sunk a shaft, and erected a pump, all labor
performed personally by him. We claim these improvements to the property were sufficient to offset the unpaid amount, and that the plaintiff was adequately compensated for rental of said property. We, therefore, ask that judgment not be granted." The young lady's lawyer answered thusly: "Your honor, my client
agrees that the defendant did find a well on her property. However, had the defendant not known that the well existed, he would never have rented the property. Also, upon evacuating the premises, the defendant removed the stones,
pulled out the shaft, and took the pump with him. In doing so, he not only dragged the equipment through the shrubbery, but left the hole much larger than it was prior to his occupancy, making the property much less desirable to others. We, therefore, ask that judgment be granted." And it was. She won the case...
6 comments:
LOL. Nothing like a nice chuckle on a Monday morning.
Thanks!
hope that is not copyright-ed..
The defendant filed an appeal. His lawyer contended that despite strong seismic activity in the vicinity of the well, it had turned out dry. He added that his client had also suffered damage to his drill bit after trying to fulfill his part of the bargain by drilling the second hole.
The lawyer for the plaintiff leapt up and retorted. He said that the defendant was accorded the best well detection technology available. Namely a pair of highly sensitive floating points. That he didn't take advantage to synchronize them with his own pair of pendulous bobs must be entirely due to his own fault, perhaps from poor maintenance of his asset that had resulted in their being too diminished in size to support the drilling shaft which consequently resulted in its bit head damaged by his own desperate attempts. He commented that such poor drilling skills are not contributive to better environmental control in the prevailing climate of fuel shortage of this planet, especially when his client had already hinted to the defendant that from A to G, he had to locate only the last spot in order to extricate fruit for his labour. He added that the defendant failed to take advantage of wiser counsel only because his mind was bent on only such personal satisfaction as would be sought by philistines.
The learned judge bent down under his bench and took another sip of his JW, then looked up and peered at the defendant and his lawyer from the rim of his specs. He adjudged to the defendant's lawyer:
'I find this appeal frivolous and vexatious. Your client has not only taken advantage of the drilling right so temporarily provided but also tried to cheat the owner of the land by drilling at another place. Blaming the equipment for the fault of the machinist is hardly a fair excuse and if perpetuated as a right may even bring down the competitiveness of the Empire. Not only am i throwing this appeal out of court, I shall also weigh the severity of your client's misdeed by calling upon my court's administration to execute an anton piller order on the warehouse of your client. Since your client is of dubious nature, i shall also institute a mareva injunction to prevent him from reusing his assets in the next forty months. And because your client has taken advantage of the defendant, i now hereby award additional damages to the defendant to the sum of $5,005,000. Lastly,i also order the defendant not to be within one mile radius of any plastic explosives. If he cannot even drill a hole properly with a shaft, one trembles what he would be doing with plastic explosives. Court adjourned.'
That evening, the defendant gave a titillating lecture to the judge in his chambers on the risks and rewards of oil drilling. The session would have cost a total of $5,000 if she had decided to charge for it. Hefty? Inflation, you know.
Great joke and great addenda from walla.
Keem em cumming mate.
Got this one,
At a government affair, the wives of four world
leaders are chatting about how people refer to a
penis in their countries.
The wife of Tony Blair says in England people
call it a gentleman, because it stands up when
women are entering.
The wife of Boris Yeltsin says in Russia you call
it a patriot, because you never know if it will
hit you on the front or on the back side.
The wife of Chirac says in France you call it a
curtain, because it goes down after the act.
With great resignation, the wife of Clinton says
in the USA you call it a rumor, because it
goes from mouth to mouth...
The impending global slowdown in the form of a recession or depression (depending on which economic forecast you're reading) is actually a blessing in disguise because it will postpone the other impending matter: the depletion of our most important natural resource, crude oil.
Read more at http://awko.blogspot.com
Post a Comment