Legal Poetry

In Fisher v. Lowe, 122 Mich. App. 418 (1982), plaintiff brought action in tort against defendants for damage to his “beautiful oak tree” caused when defendant crashed into it with a car. Plaintiff appealed and the following opinion was delivered by Justice Gillis, with whom Justices Bronson and Brennan concur.

“We thought that we would never see

A suit to compensate a tree.

A suit whose claim in tort is prest

Upon a mangled tree’s behest;

A tree whose battered trunk was prest

Against a Chevy’s crumpled crest;

A tree that faces each new day

With bark and limb in disarray;

A tree that may forever bear

A lasting need for tender care.

Flora lovers though we three,

We must uphold the court’s decree.

Affirmed.”

While I can find no discernible poetic pattern, except an exaggerated attempt at end word rhyme, I applaud the court’s effort. The above “poetry” exemplifies an apparent disconnect between legal and creative writing.

Related posts:

1. Legal Humor: “Party On” in State Court Going with my recent fascination with humorous court opinions, I...
2. A Brief History of Legal Dress in England You may be interested to know that up until recently,...
3. Can you sue yourself? Well, apparently you can try. In Lodi v. Lodi, plaintiff...

Tags: Humor, Legal Issues

This entry was posted on Sunday, November 22nd, 2009 at 4:25 pm and is filed under Humor, Legal Issues. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.