Stunning Court Renovation

Stunning Court Renovation

With the Wollongong Court House closing down, we wonder if we will be graced with a result that is as beautiful as this renovation completed in Miami? Stull Woodworks were responsible for this achievement and their website has this to say:

“We are privileged to be a part of many restorations that include historical courthouses. This particular project, the Miami County Courthouse located in Troy, Ohio, was an incredibly fun challenge. Our task was to build different pieces from the courtroom and make them match the judges bench. Each piece included hand-carved moldings, wood-veneered panels, and a particular eye to match the original quality. As you can see, our finished product was very similar to the original masterpiece. Since this project, Stull Woodworks has been commissioned to produce other pieces of furniture throughout the courthouse to facilitate the county’s judicial system.”

More Fascinating Court Rooms

More Fascinating Court Rooms

This one, a court “yard” is found in Ambarita and called is Huta Siallagan. The ancient court yard is where the once-local king sat as court of justice and when found guilty, the offenders were decapitated right after the session, on a stone table.

Found on Samosir Island, Lake Toba, Sumatra, Indonesia.

Minimalism in Courts…

Bradshaw v. Unity Marine Corp.
147 F.Supp.2d 668, 670 (S.D. Texas 2001)

     Now, Now Children.  The plaintiff filed suit after allegedly sustaining injuries during his employment as a shiphand on a tug boat. Defendant filed a motion for summary judgment to dismiss the case. After submitting written briefs and having oral argument, the court handed down its written ruling, as follows:

     “Defendant begins the decent into Alice’s Wonderland by submitting a Motion that relies upon only one legal authority … Plaintiff responds to this deft, yet minimalist analytical wizardry with an equally gossamer wisp of an argument, … naturally Plaintiff also neglects to provide any analysis whatsoever …. Instead, Plaintiff ‘cites’ to a single case from the Fourth Circuit. Plaintiff’s citation, however, points to a nonexistent Volume ‘1886’ of the Federal Reporter … and neglects to provide a pinpoint citation for what, after being located, turned out to be a forty-page decision. (What the …)?! The Court cannot even begin to comprehend why this case was selected for reference. It is almost as if Plaintiff’s counsel chose the opinion by throwing long range darts at the Federal Reporter (remarkably enough hitting a nonexistent volume!) … Despite the continued shortcomings of Plaintiff’s supplemental submission, the Court commends Plaintiff for his vastly improved choice of crayon — Brick Red is much easier on the eyes than Goldenrod, and stands out much better amidst the mustard splotched about Plaintiff’s briefing …

     It is well known around these parts that [Plaintiff’s] lawyer is equally likable and has been writing crisply in ink since the second grade. Some old timers even spin yarns of an ability to type. The Court cannot speak to the veracity of such loose talk, but out of an abundance of caution, the Court suggests that Plaintiff’s lovable counsel has best upgrade to a nice shiny No. 2 pencil or at least sharpen what’s left of the stubs of his crayons for what remains of this heart-stopping, spine-tingling action … In either case, the Court cautions Plaintiff’s counsel not to run with a sharpened writing utensil in hand — he could put his eye out.”

     Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment was Granted. Case dismissed.


More here:

Strange but True – Rock Paper Scissors…

Avista Management v. Wausau Underwriters Insurance
U.S. Dist. Court Mid. Dist. Fla. (June 6, 2006)


     Rock, Paper, Scissors – I Win!  In a case where a hotel investment firm sued an insurance company for allegedly not paying an insurance claim fast enough after Hurricane Charley, attorneys for the parties seemed at odds with each other from the get-go. When it came down to where to depose a witness, the attorneys would do no better. Not being able to select a location between themselves, the court was asked to intervene. U.S. District Judge Gregory A. Presnell was not amused. After chastising the attorneys for not being able to agree on even the most simplest of things, Judge Presnell issued his written ruling:

     “[T]he Court will fashion a new form of alternative dispute resolution, to wit: at 4:00 P.M. on Friday, June 30, 2006, counsel shall convene at a neutral site agreeable to both parties. If counsel cannot agree on a neutral site, they shall meet on the front steps of the [Courthouse]. Each lawyer shall be entitled to be accompanied by one paralegal who shall act as an attendant and witness. At that time and location, counsel shall engage in one (1) game of ‘rock, paper, scissors.’ The winner of this engagement shall be entitled to select the location for the 30(b)(6) deposition to be held somewhere in Hillsborough County during the period July 11-12, 2006.”

    ** The two lawyers met on June 7, 2006, a day later, and agreed to the location for the deposition, making the game unnecessary. For fear of being held in contempt of court, defense counsel filed a motion asking the judge to call the game off. Plaintiff’s counsel joined in the motion. The judge vacated his previous ruling with the following, “With civility restored (at least for now), it is ordered that the motion is granted.”


See more craziness that this is taken from at: