This is satire or parody. I forget which.
Bob Null & Bill Void, Esq.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE STATE OF MARYLAND SOUTHERN COMFORT DIVISION
|Case No: 8675309|
DEFENDANT JOHN HODGEPODGE MOTION TO DISMISS FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM, ARGUMENT OR TORT BY PLAINTIFF RELATING TO ANY ACTIVITY OR MATERIAL WHICH MAKES ANY SENSE AT ALL
Comes now John Hodgepodge and moves this court to dismisse the above mentioned claim for reasons which will be described herein, and further that Plaintiff be required to explain above action to court, especially page 12, which appears to be part of an email to “email@example.com”. The defendant and attorneys have no clue what he’s talking about most of the time, and when we catch a shred of sanity within the Plaintiff’s claim, it appears to be inadvertent.
PLAINTIFF’S ALLEGATIONS SEEM TO RELATE TO THE PREMIER EPISODE IN THE THIRD SEASON OF MATLOCK WHEN BEN HAD TO GO TO ENGLAND AND DEFEND THE SONS OF A GUY WHO WAS KILLED
While this was a gripping episode, one which featured the first appearance of dazzling actress Nancy Stafford, it has little or nothing to do with the Defendant. The claims are irrelevant, the torts alleged could not have happened, and Mr. Hodgepodge does not own a stately English Estate. Additionally, case references within the complaint are either Canadian, or as in the case of Plessy v. Ferguson, are not on point. Plaintiff continues to refer to opposing council as “Lieutenant Kaffee” or alternately as “You, Weinberg?”
PLAINTIFF’s CHARGES ARE BARRED BY RES JUDICATA, DELPHINUM NATARE DOCES AND VENI VIDO VICI
The Plaintiff’s arguments have been recycled from previous cases which were already decided by previous courts, and in one instance (Speedway v. Speedway) the trial judge noted that “butthurt, while uncomfortable, is not actually a tort, and since you are suing yourself for destroying your reputation pre factum, or before the fact, you can’t actually collect.” In short, Brett Speedway. You can just assume that that was a typo.
PLAINTIFF SEEKS TO DISMISS COMPLAINT AS SECOND ALLEGATION CONSISTS OF A SINGLE “NANCY” COMIC PANEL FROM 1963.
We don’t get it either, your honor.
Dated this 4th day of September, 2015
Bob Null, Bill Void, Attorneys at Law