Engineering an appearance in court?

[EnolaStraight]

Since this topic is about Courts and the Legal System, I felt it belonged in this forum.

Now, I’n not asking if the following is a legal undertaking (pretty sure it is illegal) …

BUT…

…are there interested parties…meant to be adversaries…who conspire to manufacture a situation for the purpose of a remedy in the courts? Decided by a Judge in order to create New Law?

I figure, anti-collusion laws are in effect despite if the outcome is to establish legal precedent.

[alphaboi867]

IANAL, but this was extremely common in the days before no-fault divorce. If a couple both wanted a divorce their lawyers would arrange for the husband to check into a hotel with a young woman hired for the occasion and then a private defective hired by the wife would conveniently burst in to photograph them in bed (no actual sex was involved). The wife would then file for divorce on the grounds of adultery, the husband admitted guilt and didn’t present a defense. Both spouses, the detective, and “other woman” would all commit perjury. All of this was illegal, but since most of the couples involved tended to be wealthy and/or connected the authorities usually turned a blind eye (though I think England at one point had a court officer who was supposed to scrutinize cases for evidence of collision.)

[Max_S]

@EnolaStraight

…are there interested parties…meant to be adversaries…who conspire to manufacture a situation for the purpose of a remedy in the courts?

The famous Scopes trial was one such “test” case. ETA: The law against teaching evolution was not being enforced when the ACLU, Scopes, and state prosecutors agreed to arrest Scopes and fine him a nominal fee just to get before a judge in court.

~Max

[crowmanyclouds]

Scopes trial | Dayton, Tennessee

[Northern_Piper]

@alphaboi867

(though I think England at one point had a court officer who was supposed to scrutinize case-paras for evidence of collision.)

Still does. See Wikipedia article with a sub-para about the “King’s/Queen’s Proctor”:

Proctor

[Joey_P]

Rosa Parks, I think, is a perfect example of this.
From wiki:

Parks was not the first person to resist bus segregation, but the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) believed that she was the best candidate for seeing through a court challenge after her arrest…

[doreen]

@Joey_P

Rosa Parks

i think that’s a little different than what the OP is talking about - Rosa Parks may have been chosen because she was the best candidate but she really did refuse to give up her seat and really was arrested as a result and it was spontaneous - no one decided that more white passengers would enter the bus , causing the bus driver to move the sign. I think the OP is talking about a staging , where it was arranged in advance that the bus driver would tell her to move , that she would refuse, that she would be arrested , etc.

[EnolaStraight]

Ah, good examples.

But were the Plaintiff/Prosecution and the Defense in cahoots to get Scopes and Rosa Parks to break specific laws in order to challenge those laws?

[Maserschmidt]

@alphaboi867

IANAL, but this was extremely common in the days before no-fault divorce. If a couple both wanted a divorce their lawyers would arrange for the husband to check into a hotel with a young woman hired for the occasion and then a private defective hired by the wife would conveniently burst in to photograph them in bed (no actual sex was involved). The wife would then file for divorce on the grounds of adultery, the husband admitted guilt and didn’t present a defense. Both spouses, the detective, and “other woman” would all commit perjury. All of this was illegal, but since most of the couples involved tended to be wealthy and/or connected the authorities usually turned a blind eye

Ah yes, the plot of The Gay Divorcee! A very fun film.

The Gay Divorcee

[EnolaStraight]

Huh.

Never saw the movie, but it seems to more-than-adequately illuminate my OP.

Thanks.

[hogarth]

@EnolaStraight

…are there interested parties…meant to be adversaries…who conspire to manufacture a situation for the purpose of a remedy in the courts? Decided by a Judge in order to create New Law?

I’m sure I read on this board a case where two companies mutually agreed to go to court in order to clarify a government regulation. My search ability is failing me, though.

[Northern_Piper]

@hogarth

I’m sure I read on this board a case where two companies mutually agreed to go to court in order to clarify a government regulation. My search ability is failing me, though.

Are you thinking of the High Trees case? It concerned a rent control reg from WWII, and after the end of hostilities, the two companies couldn’t agree on how to resolve the dispute. One was a subsidiary of the other, but because of shareholder fiduciary liability, they needed to go to court to get a ruling.

Lord Denning used it to try to revitalise the law of estoppel.

I mentioned it in a thread a year or two ago, about “Friendly litigation”

Central London Property Trust Ltd v High Trees House Ltd

[hogarth]

@Northern_Piper

I mentioned it in a thread a year or two ago, about “Friendly litigation”

I’m pretty sure it was that thread I was thinking about, but maybe the other case you mentioned:

Is the phrase 'friendly litigation' used by GOP Senator Josh Hawley a standard phrase?

I just happened to come across a case which is an example of this type of litigation: Hydro-Electric Power Commission of Ontario v. The Coniagas Reduction Company, Limited, [1933] UKPC 44, on appeal from the Ontario Supreme Court to the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council in London. At issue was an agreement between two companies that apparently had a good working relationship, but they could not determine if the agreement (which they had inherited from their predecessors) was perpetual i…

[Max_S]

@EnolaStraight

But were the Plaintiff/Prosecution and the Defense in cahoots to get Scopes and Rosa Parks to break specific laws in order to challenge those laws?

For Rosa Parks, to the best of my knowledge, no.

For the Scopes trial, yes. The ACLU solicited Scopes to break the law on purpose, going so far as to commission a newspaper advertisement for teachers willing to break the law. At trial, the defense asked the jury to find the defendant guilty because they wanted to challenge the law before an appeals court. The prosecutor, William Jennings Bryan, offered to help pay Scopes’s fine if he were to be found guilty.

~Max

[Odesio]

@doreen

i think that’s a little different than what the OP is talking about - Rosa Parks may have been chosen because she was the best candidate but she really did refuse to give up her seat and really was arrested as a result and it was spontaneous - no one decided that more white passengers would enter the bus , causing the bus driver to move the sign.

When I climb into a tree stand with a rifle and bag myself a deer it can hardly be called spontaneous just because I had to wait for it to cross my path. Parks’ actions were a deliberate effort to create a case to stand before a court of law. While this doesn’t match the OP’s example of defendant and plaintiff engineering to get into court, Parks’ is an excellent example of at least one party engineering to get into court.