I feel sorry for the judge anyway because he is a Browns fan
January 25, 2017 6:14 AM   Subscribe

Defending a case in Ohio, a lawyer argued that the complaint should be thrown out as excessively verbose and containing run-on sentences. Plaintiff's counsel responded with a two-page answer consisting of a single sentence.
posted by mama casserole (19 comments total) 9 users marked this as a favorite
 
The lawyer argues the complaint is "excessively verbose"? There's a word for that. One word, prolix.
posted by StickyCarpet at 6:21 AM on January 25, 2017 [9 favorites]


Hizzoner: "Deny the Defandant's complaint? Yes I said yes I will Yes."
posted by Capt. Renault at 6:34 AM on January 25, 2017 [10 favorites]


Ha, amateurs.

Also, that's a bunch of sentences, just with missing punctuation.
posted by kleinsteradikaleminderheit at 6:46 AM on January 25, 2017 [8 favorites]


Also, that's a bunch of sentences, just with missing punctuation.

That's the very definition of a run-on sentence.
posted by mama casserole at 6:50 AM on January 25, 2017 [4 favorites]


Luckily, run-on sentences are totally under your control.

Indeed. As are choices of football teams like the Browns. Ugh.
posted by strelitzia at 6:56 AM on January 25, 2017


Not only is it a run-on sentence, but there is a date error at the get go. Also, I hope these two weren't billing by the hour here.
posted by AugustWest at 7:04 AM on January 25, 2017


In the true Browns tradition, the judge should've responded with "I feel that you should be aware that some asshole is signing your name to stupid sentences."
posted by delfin at 7:16 AM on January 25, 2017 [13 favorites]


I was really hoping it was an intricately crafted single sentence, with dependent clauses, parenthetical asides, and complex structure such that it was not a run-on sentence, but just a really long-ass sentence.
posted by Rock Steady at 7:20 AM on January 25, 2017 [18 favorites]


I hope these two weren't billing by the hour here.

Friend of mine recounts how her law school professors (Columbia, as it happens) advised the students on how to pad the hours, and how they, as lawyers, could combat this if they themselves ever needed to hire counsel.

No one suggested that this was morally reprehensible.

(NB also that every court case is being tried on tax payer supported time.)
posted by BWA at 7:23 AM on January 25, 2017


It's not actually a run-on sentence, or mostly not. A run-on sentence requires independent clauses to be joined without punctuation or conjunction, and while it's true that there's not a lot of punctuation happening in that piece, there are a lot of conjunctions -- the clauses are mostly joined with and or but.
posted by jacquilynne at 7:35 AM on January 25, 2017 [1 favorite]


José Saramago is alive and practising law in the States. Seems to have lost his touch, though.

And yes, it's not a run-on sentence. The lack of commas is the giveaway.
posted by mushhushshu at 7:58 AM on January 25, 2017 [1 favorite]


That is fun!

On the pedant train, I think there are at least two places in there where independent clauses are joined without punctuation or conjunction - bottom page 2, "but I suppose we will never know Brian Wildemuth of that office is an excellent lawyer", and top page 3, "or use run-on sentences he probably thinks he is really cool." But otherwise, well done this guy, very readable for being a long-ass sentence.
posted by LobsterMitten at 8:09 AM on January 25, 2017 [3 favorites]


Sorry, everyone. I was trying to offer a lighthearted counterpart to all the wearying (but obviously important) political stuff on the site lately and I misjudged (and misframed). Please enjoy this video of a cat kneading its housemate.
posted by mama casserole at 8:11 AM on January 25, 2017 [3 favorites]


José Saramago is alive and practising law in the States.

Jose's long-ass sentences require hierarchical tree structures to understand them, but you come out the other side forever changed.
posted by waving at 8:13 AM on January 25, 2017 [1 favorite]


No, no! Don't feel bad. Arguing about grammar is a perfectly lovely alternative to agreeing about Trump.
posted by jacquilynne at 8:17 AM on January 25, 2017 [18 favorites]


but you come out the other side forever changed.

In the 'life-changing injuries' sense?

But seriously: I'd love to like Saramago, and perhaps trying to read The Stone Raft while on holiday was an unwise combination, but I'm fond of paragraph breaks. I have the same problem with Proust.
posted by mushhushshu at 8:24 AM on January 25, 2017 [1 favorite]


That attached paper, aside from problems with bias in the citations (where it cannot be coincidental that all authors seem to be "birds of a feather"), insists on us counting as premises ideas which are so far from hatching, they don't even have a shell yet.
posted by maxwelton at 9:08 AM on January 25, 2017


Friend of mine recounts how her law school professors (Columbia, as it happens) advised the students on how to pad the hours, and how they, as lawyers, could combat this if they themselves ever needed to hire counsel.

No one suggested that this was morally reprehensible.


That is because bar grievances for such get no reprimand.

Too bad no one has video of such lectures to share with the general public.
posted by rough ashlar at 11:55 AM on January 25, 2017


José Saramago is alive and practising law in the States.

See, Thomas Bernhard was going to be my go-to here, just like Thomas Bernhard I was going to say, keep it up you'll have a Bernhard in no-time, just a little more it isn't Bernhard, easy to start but Bernhard to love, you know ...
posted by octobersurprise at 12:02 PM on January 25, 2017 [2 favorites]


« Older Version control ain't easy   |   Up your hole productions presents Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments