favorite case names

The Editor:

Warner Bros., Inc. v. Gay Toys, Inc., 724 F.2d 327 (2d Cir. 1983)
Strange Music, Inc. v. Strange Music, Inc., 326 F. Supp. 2d 481 (S.D.N.Y 2004)
Interstellar Starship Services, Ltd. v. EPIX, Inc., 304 F.3d 936 (9th Cir. 2002)
Eastern Microwave, Inc. v. Doubleday Sports, Inc., 691 F.2d 125 (2d Cir. 1982)

I’m imagining someone tried to quickly cook a football.

In Re Yarn Processing Patent Litigation, 177 U.S.P.Q. 514 (S.D.Fla.1973)
State v. Twenty-Five Packages of Liquor, 38 Vt. 387, 1866 WL 1857 (Vt. 1866)

“I then by virtue of this warrant to me directed, entered the within-named premises, and there made diligent search for intoxicating liquor, and there found one barrel with card on it marked ‘Old Medford, 1860,’ supposed to contain about twelve gallons; and one barrel, diamond T, supposed to contain about twenty gallons; one barrel marked ‘Old Bourbon,’ supposed to contain about twenty-five gallons; also one barrel marked ‘Rye Whiskey;’ one case, supposed to contain three or four gallons; three kegs; two demijohns; one jug; thirteen decanters, and two square bottles;-all containing and being part full of different kinds of intoxicating liquors”

United States v. Articles of Drugs Consisting of 203 Paper Bags, 818 F.2d 569

Maya:

Katsenelenbogen v. Katsenelenbogen, 365 Md. 122, 775 A.2d 1249.

This is actually a very sad domestic violence case, but the last name is incredible.

United States v. Thirty-seven Photographs, 402 U.S. 363 (1971)
A Quantity of Books v. Kansas, 378 U.S. 205 (1964)
Marcus v. Search Warrant, 367 U.S. 717 (1961)

“A state is not free to adopt whatever procedures it pleases for dealing with obscenity.”

dm:

Schmuck v. United States, 489 U.S. 705 (1989)

maybe someone could tell me what this is about.

townie wannabe:

U.S. v. $ 557,933.89, more or less, in US Funds, 287 F.3d 66 (2d Cir. 2002).

4 Comments »

  1. towniewannabe said,

    July 12, 2007 @ 7:04 am

    I don’t know how to make my name show up in green like everyone else’s names, but I really wanted to share this case name. Someone is going to have to either tell me how to fix this or edit it themselves, okay?

  2. the editor said,

    July 14, 2007 @ 7:23 pm

    Taken care of. This is why we have an editor, I guess. Who gets to write these captions? Is this a job I can get straight out of law school?

  3. towniewannabe said,

    July 16, 2007 @ 4:05 pm

    Thanks, editor. I am sure you can get some sort of label-making job straight out of school. If you need any references, feel free to ask me.

  4. maya said,

    March 6, 2008 @ 10:12 pm

    I was trying to add new cases but can’t seem to do it correctly. I think obscenity cases are especially good for random and weird case names. There’s one really good one and I’m spending my Thursday night scouring my 1A coursepacks for it…

    Anyway, maybe the editor can add my 1A obscenity cases:

    United States v. Thirty-seven Photographs, 402 U.S. 363 (1971)
    A Quantity of Books v. Kansas, 378 U.S. 205 (1964)
    Marcus v. Search Warrant, 367 U.S. 717 (1961) - “A state is not free to adopt whatever procedures it pleases for dealing with obscenity.”

    [ed: taken care of]

RSS feed for comments on this post · TrackBack URI

Leave a Comment