The 'Faxing Poltergeist' and other amusing comments in legal judgments

[Malthus]

You must read this case, paying special attention to the footnotes - a judge lets it all hang out re: a defendant’s credibility in a civil case.

http://www.canlii.org/eliisa/highlight.do?text=pirbhai&language=en&searchTitle=Ontario&path=/en/on/onsc/doc/2010/2010onsc2446/2010onsc2446.html

Some choice tidbits:

Indeed, by the end of the trial, if Singh were to have testified that the world was round, I immediately would have sought membership in the Flat Earth Society.

There is no suggestion that Singh was the victim of a rogue employee or that there was a faxing poltergeist bumping about Brampton Auto.

I feel somewhat responsible for this as I must have done or said something during the trial that caused Singh to believe that I was dim-witted.

This may have been the first and only truthful molecule of evidence tendered by the defence in the trial.

This is one of those rare cases in which punitive damages were awarded in Ontario for a contract dispute, so we can reasonably hope for the pleasure of having the Court of Appeal examine the matter.

[SevenOfTeemingMillions]

lol. Thank you, Malthus. I thoroughly enjoyed reading that.

[Larry_Mudd]

That was more entertaining than a civil judgement has any right to be. Thanks, Malthus.

[The_Lurker_Above]

Hehe. As a non-lawyer I have very little reason to read judgements other than to cure insomnia.

Would it be against ethical rules for the Honourable Mr. Quinn to accept a beer for writing something so funny? It’s not like St. Catherines is that far a drive for me.

[Bricker]

When funny opinions come up, I always turn to the inestimable Clyde Kuehn, of Illinois, who was for a time a judge on the state’s court of appeals.

People v. Lefler, 689 N.E.2d 1209, 294 Ill. App.3d 305 (1998), raised two issues: the admission of “bloodhound” evidence, in this case testimony of police dog Cain’s actions in tracking a suspect’s scent; and ineffective assistance of counsel, namely the failure of defendant’s lawyer to object to the detailed descriptions by Cain’s trainer of what Cain was thinking and feeling as he tracked the scent.

Justice Kuehn’s opening sentence:

This case features the mark of Cain and questions whether counsel was able.

After having noted that, unlike some jurisdictions, Illinois does not permit dog tracking evidence at all, he describes the courtroom testimony, with some rather clear commentary about the defense counsel’s failures:

A brief passage from Sabalo’s testimony, however, exemplifies an abstruse adversarial silence that marks these proceedings. As previously noted, proper objection would have prevented Sabalo’s testimony in its entirety. See Cruz, 162 Ill.2d at 370, 205 Ill.Dec. at 371, 643 N.E.2d at 662. Beyond such failure, counsel allows the testimony to ensue in rather remarkable fashion. It exceeds anything admitted in those jurisdictions that deem dog-tracking evidence reliable. Sabalo critiques Cain’s performance:

"Q. How did Cain do?

A. Extremely well.

Q. Why do you say that?

* * * * * *

1214*1214 A. On this occasion he never raised his head up. His head was completely down, his nose was probably one or two inches off the ground the whole time. And he pulled extremely hard and continuously.

* * * * * *

Q. Did the dog end up finding anybody or stopping?

A. He didn't find a subject or a suspect. He got to Manning, which is approximately a block and a half, two blocks away. He went half way down Manning, and he just stopped. And he is looking around at me like, okay. Usually when he gets to an area where the track has ended, especially on a training track, there is a reward * * *. He is looking at me to find out, hey, there is nothing here, and I know I tracked something here.

* * * * * *

Q. Did the dog show any confusion or hesitation whatsoever?

A. None whatsoever.

Q. Okay. And what did that indicate to you?

A. This was actually one of his best tracks he had done." (Emphasis added.)

It is difficult to discern the strategy underlying counsel’s silent observation of Sabalo’s translation of a German shepherd’s look into the spoken word, particularly where that gaze spoke to Sabalo out of court and assured the jury of Cain’s confidence in his own tracking ability. Further, counsel accepts without challenge Sabalo’s ability to observe Cain’s demeanor and from it weigh the comparative strength of the occasion’s performance. Sabalo removes confusion and hesitation from Cain’s manner and uses his perception of its absence to opine that Cain had a peak day.

Counsel was apparently at a loss, unaware of what a prosecutor can properly do or legitimately prove. A reasonably effective attorney would never have tolerated the admission of this evidence. In spite of the strong presumption favoring professional assistance, counsel’s performance here falls below objective reasonableness.

[ShadowFacts]

I nominate Singh for Douchenozzle of the Year.

[Duke]

My decision in this case does not require a finding that Singh is a smart man.

And we’re all grateful for that. This trial might never have ended!

[Big_Norse]

If lies were clothes, Singh would have been considerably overdressed for the trial.

Ha!

[Big_Norse]

Another one:

At that point in the trial, Singh’s credibility had immolated and the court was up to its sash in falsehoods.

[Hypno-Toad]

I didn’t realize that a judge was permitted such…lively…commentary.

[The_Lurker_Above]

@Hypno-Toad

I didn’t realize that a judge was permitted such…lively…commentary.

I didn’t think so either, but I guess ‘the judge thought I was a moronic liar’ isn’t grounds for appeal. And at least one blogger seems to think this is fairly normal for this judge. http://www.jacksnewswatch.com/2010/06/08/the-used-car-dealer-vs-the-quick-witted-judge/

The only other pages a quick Google turns up is a Robert Frost reference in a fence dispute. Breaking News - Headlines & Top Stories | The Star

I’m assuming there’s a better method that Google to look up judgments in Ontario. Would a non-lawschool university library help? I still have access to UW’s libraries and if there are more out there like this from this judge it may be worth a look.

[MichaelEmouse]

@The_Lurker_Above

I’m assuming there’s a better method that Google to look up judgments in Ontario.

http://www.canlii.org/en/on/

It’s not Quicklaw but it’s free.

[Northern_Piper]

unfortunately, canlii doesn’t allow you to search by the judge’s name.

[MichaelEmouse]

@Northern_Piper

unfortunately, canlii doesn’t allow you to search by the judge’s name.

I got several cases by or in appeal of J. W. Quinn by putting his name in quotations marks in the “Full text” space. Not perfect but it helps.

[Rick]

That was a classic!

[Spoons]

Great case, Malthus!

My contribution: assorted tidbits from Master Funduk, Canada’s “Master with an Attitude.” Among my favourites in the collection is the following:

@Master Funduk

I do not overrule decisions of a judge of this Court. The judicial pecking order does not permit little peckers to overrule big peckers. It is the other way around.

[Oakminster]

The corporate veil here was more of a bandit’s mask.