Friday, June 20, 2008

labyrinthian prolixities

Labyrinth As we've noted earlier, West's Headnote of the Day provides subscribers with something to think about--or chuckle over. Today's headnote is attributed to Thomson v. Olson, 866 F. Supp. 1267 (D.N.D. 1994):

Dismissal is appropriate where complaint is labyrinthian prolixity of unrelated and vituperative charges that defies comprehension and amended complaint fails to cure prolixity and incomprehensibility.

The headnote is based on a quotation in the opinion, which itself comes from another case, Prezzi v. Schelter, 469 F.2d 691, 692 (2d Cir.1972) (per curiam). Too bad it's per curiam, as we consequently cannot pinpoint and laud the judicial author who penned that marvelous bit of sarcasm. (The culprit would have been one of the three judges serving on the panel, sadly all now deceased: the Honorables Walter Roe Mansfield, James L. Oakes, and William Homer Timbers. If anyone knows for sure who wrote it, let us know.)

To subscribe to Headnote of the Day (it's free), click here.

(cmb)

http://lawprofessors.typepad.com/legalwriting/2008/06/labyrinthian-pr.html

| Permalink

TrackBack URL for this entry:

http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8341bfae553ef00e5537e41fd8834

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference labyrinthian prolixities:

Comments

Post a comment