|
January 07, 2009
May 1999 - The "By Golly Objection" This contribution was sent to me by James M. Ziegler, Ph.D., of Houston (Ncompass Research, Inc.) James, who is an expert in "biomechanics and injury causation analysis," found this rather unique objection made in a deposition by his client, an attorney who "had hoped to never be quoted in [the et cetera] of the Texas Bar Journal. Q. I'm going to hand you what's been marked as Exhibit No. 4. This is an aerial photograph. Actually, it's a satellite photograph of the accident scene. I'll represent to you this street is Braeswood and this street is Gessner. Why don't I go ahead and mark these as my representation. Mr. Hopeful: I'll object to that. I don't know why, but I will. It's not your deposition for one thing. Mr. Miller: Yes, it is. It's not yours. Mr. Hopeful: It's your testimony. Mr. Miller: I understand. Mr. Hopeful: I don't know what the proper objection for that is under the new Rules, but I object, by golly. It's the by golly objection. Let's go off the record for a second. - posted by texasbar @ 1/07/2009  
January 06, 2009
May 1998 - The Closing Argument Joseph A. Esparza of San Antonio (Joseph is an assistant criminal district attorney) submits a truly classic closing argument made by his former partner, Ellen Wheeler-Walter, during a misdemeanor trial. Ellen's argument, which was promptly followed by a verdict for the State, was simply: "She did it." [dramatic pause] "I proved it" [dramatic pause] "Find her guilty." - posted by texasbar @ 1/06/2009
January 05, 2009
July 1999 - Classic Typos From Lillie Knight of Houston (Lillie is an assistant city attorney), this typo in a letter she received from a property tax consultant: Dear Ms. Knight: ... Thank you for your business, and please send your fiends our way. Please return before May 31st. _____ From Michael R. Ross of Houston, this typo he discovered in a business record affidavit executed by a record custodian and "competent computer operator" for an insurance company: ... "I am a competent computer operator, able to retrieve this information and the payments were checked for accuracy prior to the information being imputed." - posted by texasbar @ 1/05/2009
January 02, 2009
May 1999 - Written in Blood From Mikal S. Lambert of Wichita Falls (Fillmore & Purtle), this excerpt from a deposition in a death case where a motorist had run over a pedestrian. Mikal is cross-examining the DPS trooper who had supervised the drawing of blood from the decedent for a blood-alcohol test. Q. Is there any minimum volume of blood that you're attempting to extract or that you attempt to fill up? A. They have told us in the years that I've been working that we need more than an inch of blood in the tube. Now, that's not "written in blood" anywhere in the manual, that's just the way we were told. And they say if we want to do a blood alcohol or drug screen on it, we need it just as full as you can get it. And then they've always told us when we get the blood in it, to shake it up real good to mix that white powdery substance. And I'm sure they've told me what that was, but, hey, I'm no chemist. I've got enough problems trying to remember what I did yesterday. - posted by texasbar @ 1/02/2009
December 31, 2008
October 1989 - I'm Glad We Cleared that Up Theodore A. Hargrove, III of San Angelo sends this story about the Very First Divorce Client of Judge Royal Hart (51st Judicial District, Tom Green County): His client, the wife "lived on a ranch and apparently got none of the benefits of grocery shopping. When going through the list of required questions to have the divorce granted, Judge Hart realized he had never inquired of his client as to why she wished to get a divorce." Q. Tell the Court why you want this divorce. A. Well, I just can't eat any more deer meat. The divorce, of course, was granted. - posted by texasbar @ 12/31/2008
|
 |
