home
***
CD-ROM
|
disk
|
FTP
|
other
***
search
/
TPUG - Toronto PET Users Group
/
TPUG Users Group CD
/
TPUG Users Group CD.iso
/
AMIGA
/
(A)TA
/
(A)TAG.ADF
/
Text_Files
/
judge.txt
< prev
next >
Wrap
Text File
|
1986-11-06
|
3KB
|
110 lines
One evening after attending the theater
two gentlemen were walking down the
street when they observed a well
dressed, attractive young lady walking
just ahead of them. One turned to the
other and said, "I'd give 50 bucks to
spend the night with that woman." To
their suprise, the woman turned and
said, "I'll take you up on that." She
had a neat appearance and a pleasent
voice, so after bidding his
friend goodnight the man accompanied
the lady to her apartment, where they
immidiately went to bed.
The following morning the man
presented her with 25 dollars as he
prepared to leave. She demanded the
rest of the money stating, "If you
don't give me the other 25 I'll sue
you for it." He laughed, saying,
"I'd like to see you get it on these
grounds."
The next day he was suprised when he
was served with a summons ordering his
presence in court as defendant...
He hurried to his lawyer and explained
the details of the case. His lawyer
said, "She can't possibly get a
judgment against you on such ground,but
it will be interesting to see how her
case will be presented."
After the usual preliminaries, the
lady's lawyer addressed the court
as follows:
"Your Honor, my client is the owner
of a piece of property, a garden spot
surrounded by a profuse growth of
shrubbery, which property she agreed to
rent to the defendant for a specified
length of time for the sum of $50.
The defendant took possesion of the
property, used it extensively for the
purpose for which it was rented, but
upon evacuating the premises he paid
only $25. The rent is not excessive
since it was restricted property, and
we ask judgment to be granted against
the defendant to assure payment of the
balance."
The defendant's lawyer was impressed
and amused at the way the case had been
presented. His defense was therefore
somewhat altered from what he had
planned.....
This is what he said:
"Your Honor, my client agrees the
young lady has a fine piece of
property, for a degree of pleasure was
derived from the transaction. However
my client found a well on the property,
around which he placed his own stones;
sunk a shaft and erected a pump, all
labour being personally performed by
him. We claim these improvements to the
property are sufficient to offset the
unpaid balance, and that the plaintiff
was adequately compensated for the
rental of the said property. We
therefore ask that the judgment not be
granted."
The young lady's lawyer's comeback was
like this..
"Your Honor, my client agrees that the
defendant did find a well on the
property, and he did make improvements
such as described by my opponent,
however, had the defendant not known the
well existed, he would have never have
rented the property; also, on evacuating
the premises, the defendant moved the
stones, pulled out the shaft and took
the pump with him. In so doing he not
only dragged his equipment through the
shrubbery, but left the hole much large
than it was prior to his occupancy,
making it easily accessible to little
children. We therefore ask judgment be
granted."
She got it.....