An interesting tidbit I just read, in an article on oral argument by the late California Supreme Court Justice Stanley Mosk:
A small community in California passed a local ordinance prohibiting fortune telling within its city limits. A fortuneteller named Fatima Stevens brought a lawsuit seeking an injunction against enforcement of the ordinance. Obviously there were serious First Amendment problems with the ordinance, which was a total prohibition — not a regulation or a licensing — of the activity. However, the fortuneteller lost in the courts below, and our Supreme Court granted a hearing.
As counsel for the fortuneteller rose for oral argument to present her case, Chief Justice Lucas said, “Counsel, you have us at a disadvantage.”
The attorney was perplexed. “Why, Your Honor?”
“Well,” said the Chief Justice, “hasn’t your client told you how this case will ultimately turn out?”
On its face this was an irrelevant joke; but it was, intentionally or not, sending a subtle message that fortune-telling is indeed bunk, and that even the lawyer can’t be taking it seriously — something that would have dovetailed well with the city’s arguments that fortune-telling is fraudulent and should be banned. Dangerous stuff for the lawyer. Here’s how Mosk describes the lawyer’s artful dodge:
I could not have conceived of an appropriate response to that judicial hand grenade. But this attorney was up to the challenge. “No, Your Honor,” he replied. “You must remember I did not consult my client for advice. She consulted me.”
The fortune-teller won.
Comments are closed.