HUMOR
The Judge’s Daughter: Pleasantries About Lawyers
Written by Pamela Buchmeyer
The Kilgore College Rangerettes danced for Richard Nixon eight days
before his election as vice president. Nixon and his wife, Pat, made a
quick campaign stop in Gregg County. I know this because I found my
father’s 1953 yearbook from Kilgore College. The things you discover
when cleaning out old boxes of books during the pandemic!
My father also had a book by Rosey Grier, the legendary defensive tackle for the New York Giants and the Los Angeles Rams in the 1950s and 1960s, who wrote about his favorite hobby—needlepoint—in Rosey Grier’s Needlepoint for Men. Dad, the late Judge Jerry L. Buchmeyer, was known for his eclectic sense of humor. He wrote a legal humor column for 28 years for the Texas Bar Journal.
But were lawyers funny in 1867? Yes, I have learned from another unpacked tome. Judge Charles Edwards, of New York, published Pleasantries About Courts and Lawyers of the State of New York in 1867 and its 500-plus pages are packed full of amusing anecdotes, poetics pleadings, and practical jokes among lawyers.
It’s my pleasure to share below a few lightly edited highlights from Judge Edwards’ book. Thank you for all the encouraging emails. It’s a delight to receive them at Pambuchmeyer@gmail.com.
Oyez! Oyez! Oyez!
Judge Edwards wrote fondly about a certain court crier in the New York
Sessions Court who lacked the hoped-for gravitas for his job. The crier
once announced to a rowdy courtroom:
“Sirs! You really must make silence in the court. We have got many prisoners yet to try. We have already convicted six, without having heard a word of testimony against them.”
The court crier often dozed off during court proceedings and one time
when his slumber was interrupted by a peal of thunder, he jumped up and
ordered the almighty: “Silence!”
Another time, the court crier was snoring so loudly that witnesses and counsel could not be heard. The crier’s junior gave him a pointed nudge, “Sir, someone’s snoring.” The court crier sprang to his feet and shouted with his full senatorian lungs:
“There will be no snoring in this court [glaring furiously at the assembly]! Your honor, the court recorder can go on now, without further interruption.”
This reminds me of one of my father’s favorite stories from his own
courtroom. A witness for the U.S. Attorney’s Office left the stand and
confidently made his exit through a side court door. Long minutes passed
as the entire assembly waited, tittering, for the poor man had not
walked into the hallway but into an adjoining closet. He later said that
after realizing his mistake, he’d hoped to stay hidden until court
adjourned for the day.
Misc. Chuckles 1867
Evidently some things haven’t changed in 150 years—the long-winded
lawyer, the imperious judge, the woefully ill-prepared candidate for the
bar—as these vignettes from Judge Edwards’ book show.
Counsel [after a long address]: I trust, your honor, I have been tediously clear.
Judge: I’m not sure how far that might be, but you’ve been clearly tedious.
One judge was tenacious about the punctuality of jurymen. He fined any
man tardy when the jury panel was called promptly at 10. One poor fellow
was fined, and then a few days later, the judge himself was delayed for
court.
Juror: If I may be so free, Judge. It’s thirty minutes past the hour. You yourself are late, and so it only seems fitting that my fine receive a refund.
Judge [emphatically]: I desire the jury, and this juryman in particular, to understand, that it is not ten o’clock until the judge reaches the bench.
Thus, proving that for some judges even time stands still. Here’s an
anecdote from a bar exam, which according to the custom of the day, was
done on verbal questions. On the subject of domestic relations:
Examiner: If a wife, knowing the infidelity of her husband, subsequently voluntarily cohabits with him, can she bring an action for divorce?
Law Student [nervously]: By infidelity, sir, do I understand you to mean a disbelief in the existence of the Supreme Being?
Poetic Pleadings and the One Cent Case
Judge Edwards provided an entire chapter of 1800s court pleadings
written entirely in verse. Were they truly filed documents? Perhaps. The
judge often provided citations, see for example, 27 American Jurist 247.
Remember the very old language of pleadings? The plaintiff files a
narrative or “narr.” The defendant replies by demurrer, asking that the
plaintiff “go forth sans day.” The old-style pleading phrases remind me
of my father when he was a fresh, young lawyer exhausted by repetitive
drafting and I was a toddler with a brand new kitten that Dad promptly
named “Whereas.”
County of Albany, Let Justice all our wrongs redress.
Plaintiff’s Narrative
Be it remembered, while time shall last,
That in the term of February past
Before the aforesaid justices there
By [t]his attorney smooth and fair….
Hill, the plaintiff in this suit,
Complains of Horton, oh the brute…
For that whereas the said defendant,
O’er who the scourge of law is pendent,
Did on the 30th day of May
A certain instrument convey
By which he promised to deliver
Twelve bantam hens, oh, the deceiver! …
Defendant’s Demurrer
And the said Horton’s ready here
To verify and make it clear
That the narr of the aforesaid Peter
Is bad in substance and in feature; …
First. In every narr, in every case,
You must allege a year and place.
But Hill’s said narr containeth neither
And, therefore is not worth a feather…
And if ’tis damages you claim,
The wished amount you there must name
The narr aforesaid hath this flaw,
And, therefore, it is bad in law.
Appearance and Judgement
At which said term the judges meet,
And one another kindly greet.
And Utica’s the favored place,
Where Justice shows her solemn face;
And Hill and Horton too appear,
Both trembling now and pale with fear.
It is considered, that said narr
And all its matters near and far,
Are both in terms and rhymes too rough;
And in the law not strong enough
For Hill one moment to maintain
The cause for which he doth complain…
And the said court do furthermore
Adjudge, upon the grievous score
Of costs by Horton fully paid
In the defense which he has made
That he therein shall be requited
(At which his heart must be delighted)
And, for the same, award one cent
(Which has his free and full assent)
And do award him execution
Of this most ample retribution.
In other words, the defendant was wrongly accused but his fair
recompense is only one penny.
On a closing note, Judge Edwards explains humor among lawyers thusly:
“...it is certain that the world at large laugh and ... enjoy the poking
fun at others. And it is also true that lawyers, with all their seeming
soberness, are, as to jokes, but children of a larger growth.” Even for
lawyers, we are all a child at heart.TBJ
PAMELA BUCHMEYER
is an attorney and award-winning writer who lives in Dallas and
Jupiter, Florida. Her work-in-progress is a humorous murder mystery,
The Judge’s Daughter. She can be contacted at pambuchmeyer@gmail.com.