Jeremy's Weblog

I recently graduated from Harvard Law School. This is my weblog. It tries to be funny. E-mail me if you like it. For an index of what's lurking in the archives, sorted by category, click here.

Sunday, November 03, 2002

Law School Mad Libs! Fun for the whole family!

Without peeking at the story below, choose each the following:
(Celebrity Last Name #1)
(Celebrity Last Name #2)
(State)
(Adjective)
(Person you dislike)
(Place you don't want to go)
(Date)
(Deviant Activity #1)
(Deviant Activity #2)
(Celebrity Last Name #3)
(Celebrity Last Name #4)
(Deviant Activity #3)
(Number)
(Plural Noun)
(Activity)
(Celebrity Last Name #5)
(Celebrity Last Name #6)
(Deviant Activity #4)
(Action, present tense - ex: bake cookies, run up the stairs)
(Adjective)
(Another adjective)
(Another plural noun)
(Number)
(a family member)
(Deviant Activity #5)
(Deviant Activity #6)

Now insert the words in the story below:

This is the case of (Celebrity Last Name #1) v. (Celebrity Last Name #2) in the (State) (Adjective) Court, on appeal from Judge (Person you dislike)'s court in (Place you don't want to go). On (Date), the Plaintiff alleges that he/she entered into a contract with the Defendant. The plaintiff promised to (Deviant Activity #1) in exchange for the defendant promising to (Deviant Activity #2). The question before the court is whether (Deviant Activity #2) served as sufficient consideration to create a binding contract.

In the case of (Celebrity Last Name #3) v. (Celebrity Last Name #4), the court ruled that the plaintiff's promise to (Deviant Activity #3) was in fact sufficient consideration to support a payment by the defendant of (Number) dollars and three (Plural Noun). However, the judge insisted that because of unequal (Activity) skills, the contract was void on public policy grounds. Conversely, in the case of (Celebrity Last Name #5) v. (Celebrity Last Name #6), the court ruled that the plaintiff's promise to (Deviant Activity #4) was made in bad faith, and could not support the defendant's promise to (Action, present tense) every day for the rest of his life.

In the case before us, we hold that the contract is (adjective), but unfortunately is in violation of the (Another adjective) Evidence rule and the Statute of (Another plural noun). Our judgment is supported by the (Number) restatement on contracts, written by (a family member) while (Deviant Activity #5). Case dismissed. Time for Justices to (Deviant Activity #6).