bowlinger qua bowlinger

The Wisconsin supreme court denied cert in State v. Hathaway last Friday, August 1. It’s a real shame that the crummy appellate opinion (previously) is going to be allowed to stand.

Aquaslide-N-Dive went bankrupt, and the Grzybowskis followed them to court with their claim:

On or about July 14, 1984, David Grzybowski, appellant, was severely injured as a result of sliding down a slide into his swimming pool. It is alleged that the slide in question was manufactured by the debtor, Aquaslide. Neither the briefs nor excerpts of record describe the accident, except to say that he hit his head on the bottom of the pool and was rendered quadriplegic. On or about October 7, 1985, David M. and Marjorie Grzybowski filed a personal injury and products liability claim in Milwaukee County in the state of Wisconsin against numerous parties, one of whom was Aquaslide. It was asserted that Aquaslide was negligent and designed, manufactured and sold an unreasonably dangerous product. Prior to that date, Aquaslide had filed a Chapter 11 petition in the United States Bankruptcy Court.

Mr. Grzybowski bought his slide in the spring of 1977 at the residential home of a man who had advertised his wares in the classified advertisements of Mr. Grzybowski’s local newspaper. The slide was in a box which Mr. Grzybowski had not saved. In his deposition, he testified that he thought the box said “Slide ‘N’ Dive.” He also testified that he can no longer find the home of the man from whom he purchased the slide.

The slide in question contained no identification, no serial number, no manufacturer’s name or other identifying marks which would designate a specific manufacturer. The Grzybowski’s filed a proof of claim against Aquaslide in the amount of $27,000,000. Carl Meyer, President of Aquaslide and designer of the Aquaslide Duke Curve Slide, inspected the slide in question and compared it in minute detail to the slide manufactured by Aquaslide. In his declaration he states unequivocably that Aquaslide did not design, manufacture, sell, or distribute the slide in question.

Aquaslide filed an objection to the allowance of the claim of the Grzybowskis contending that there was no basis in law or fact for the claim. After reading the affidavits submitted by the parties and deposition of Mr. Grzybowski, the court disallowed the claim. The Grzybowskis appealed.
In re Aquaslide ‘N’ Dive Corp., 85 B.R. 545, 546 (B.A.P. 9th Cir. Cal. 1987)

Bonus Audio!
collapse

SCOTUS denied cert. today in Cavel International, Inc., v. Madigan (previously, Posner). The civil right to slaughter horses for human consumption continues to be denied in Illinois.

Tucked into the comments section of a Crooked Timber post on book indexes is a great idea:

I know of a group of people who used to bowl together. In the first book each one of them wrote, there is an index entry for each of the other people in the group. The page reference provided in each case is that person’s bowling average.

I strongly feel that something similar should be worked up here, Bowlingers.

Appellant transferred an automobile to appellee in exchange for her promise to pay him $100 and a specified number of sexual favors. In his complaint, appellant alleges breach of contract and asks for money damages. The justice of the peace court dismissed the action, ruling that the contract was illegal and unenforceable. The district court affirmed the dismissal. The issue is whether or not appellant is entitled to any relief under the contract.We will affirm.

The essence of the agreement between the parties was that appellant would transfer a 1970 Pontiac automobile to appellee in consideration for her paying $100 and additionally bestowing upon him 100 sexual favors. The agreement was in writing and undated. It contained some ambiguous and unfamiliar terms which were sufficiently clarified at trial. Appellant brought an action against appellee in the small claims court and in his complaint alleged breach of contract and demanded money damages.

The uncontroverted testimony at trial was that appellee had not paid the $100 and had only partially otherwise performed. The agreement provided that appellee would get the car when she had performed 50 sexual acts; however, for some reason not disclosed, there was a premature transfer of the automobile.

Hamburg v. Hansen, 683 P.2d 662 (Wyo. 1984)

Turns out that contracts like this are void for being against public policy. At least in Wyoming.

This lack of substantive distinction is more clearly seen in the light of the following hypothetical situation. Assuming, for instance, that an individual stops at a neighborhood tavern to purchase a six-pack of beer to take out and, while there, also decides to purchase a 12-ounce bottle of beer to drink at the bar. Under the provisions of the ordinance before us, when he receives his total bill, he will be charged no tax for the six cans of beer but will be required to pay 6 cents tax for the bottle of beer.

North Sheffield, Inc. v. Chicago, 144 Ill. App. 3d 913, 919-920 (Ill. App. Ct. 1st Dist. 1986)

“No sense at all. No sense at all. Like I say, it’s just a criminal mind”
- Cheatham County Sheriff John Holder

From MSNBC. First the hilarious parts of the story:

ASHLAND CITY, Tenn. - Police said someone frustrated at gas prices left a dead deer and a sign at a Cheatham County gas station.

Rising gas prices are weighing heavily on everyone, and Moe Patel said he does his best to keep matters light with his customers.

It was at Patel’s station last week that Patel’s wife found a dead pregnant deer with a note attached to it that said, “Lower gas prices. Humans are taking it out on us.”

“My wife and I, we’re both dumbfounded. It doesn’t make sense,” Patel said.

“They have a right to be frustrated,” Patel said.

Patel said he understands the anger but said that people should aim higher with their complaints because sinking to the level of killing an innocent animal doesn’t help anyone.

“My and my wife run this small business. If they really want to make a change and give a message, you know, for example, take it in front of the White House lawn. If you have problem with the gas prices, do something about it. What am I going to do about it? I can’t do anything about it, you know. I’m just the messenger,” he said.

Now the legal aspects:

Detectives and officials with the Tennessee Wildlife Resources Agency are investigating who killed and dumped the deer and why.

Whoever is responsible could face animal cruelty charges, police said.

Officials said it is possible that the deer could be road kill because they haven’t determined the cause of its death. A report said only that the deer had trauma to the back part of its body.

Holder said however it died, tying it up and moving it to the gas station was the act of more than one person.

Cruelty to animals in Tennessee is TN Code 39-14-202. (a)(1) is “torture” and (a)(3) is unreasonable abandonment. I don’t think either of these apply, even if the deer were killed just for the protest. 39-14-212, “aggravated cruelty to animals” only applies to “companion animals,” i.e. pets. Not sure if abuse of an animal corpse would fit into this section. I’d search the case law, but I’m afraid to do so with my work Westlaw account.

I do think there’s a clear violation of 70-4-116(d)(1) - killing or posessing a deer without properly tagging the animal.

While I was poking around in the Tennessee Criminal Code, I checked out the “no-sex-with-animals” statute. It is 39-14-219, which not only criminalizes (a)(1) - engaging in “any sexual activity with an animal,” but also (a)(2) - causing, aiding or abetting it. And even (a)(3) - permitting it “to be conducted on any premises under the person’s charge or control”. Naturally, there had to be an exception (d) - for “accepted animal husbandry practices”.

I’m not sure “husbandry” would be the word I would have chosen.

So, there’s an update in the case of the two guys who wheeled their dead buddy down to the currency exchange in an office chair, hoping to cash his disability check. They’re going free!

The prosecutor acknowledged Tuesday that it cannot be proven beyond a reasonable doubt when the man actually died, making it difficult to bring a case against the men. Manhattan Criminal Court Judge Evelyn LaPorte agreed and dismissed the charges.

Also, Senate Bill 247 in Wisconsin failed to pass this year. Having sex with (human) corpses is still legal in Wisconsin, so long as you didn’t participate in the death.

The radical, bowling-oriented splinter wing of Gutter v. Bowlinger finished the season last week. Though we took home no trophies, we stood our ground until the bitter end, and beyond. Did it resemble the Battle of Thermopylae? Yes.

So, the semester has ground to a close, and the Bowlingers are about to fling themselves centrifugally across the country and the world. But first, finals. And the disturbing transpirations of May Day. Next fall, the diaspora will continue, but every successful plan for world domination begins that way.

Good Luck, and God Speed, Bowlingerians.

These two are about to get it on, aren’t they?  It’s not just in my mind?