Well excuse me!

A frequently (if sometimes inaccurately) used legal expression is “justice delayed is justice denied” — the notion that if someone has to wait for a day in court, that in itself works an injustice. Of course, it assumes that, once in court, someone will get “justice” — which often turns out not to be the case.

Still, no one does a better job of throwing sand in the wheels of justice than those laborers in the legal vineyard — lawyers. Herewith is a sampling of the legal equivalent of “the dog ate my homework” from folks trying to delay the day of reckoning:

• Actually, one of these has already appeared in this space. In our annual review of the year’s legal quirks about a decade ago was the story of a judge (and of course, all judges start out as lawyers) who rescheduled a pending New Orleans jury trial in February 2010 . . . because the New Orleans Saints were in the Super Bowl.

The judge explained, “Considering the historic victory of the New Orleans Saints the Court finds that the trial will not be able to proceed as originally scheduled . . . . Saintsmania permeates the City of New Orleans. Many prospective jurors for the Parish of Orleans, several attorneys involved in this litigation and Court personnel plan on traveling to the promised land — the Super Bowl in Miami, Florida. The Court recognizes that this pilgrimage enhances the chances of the Who Dat Nation to acquire the long sought after Holy Grail — the Vince Lombardi trophy.”

So: not ready for trial — but Ready for Some Football!

• And there is even precedent for this — and from another Louisiana court, too. In December 2007, an attorney named Stephen Babcock filed an “Unopposed Motion to Continue Trial Due to Conflict with LSU Tigers’ National Championship Game.” (LSU, of course, is Louisiana State University.) LSU and Ohio State were scheduled to play in the Sugar Bowl the following January. Babcock summarized the history of the two teams’ rivalry; noted that the two teams were ranked number 1 and number 2 in college football; and added that as all opposing counsel were “selfprofessed LSU fans,” they didn’t mind the continuance either.

No word, of course, about how their respective clients felt about this. But the judge granted the continuance anyway.

• In 2006, an attorney named John Wesley Hall, Jr. sought to continue a pending criminal trial involving a former bail bondsman named Bobby Junior Cox. This definitely wasn’t a case of trying to hide slovenly preparation, though — if anything, Hall might be characterized as a bit too thorough.

As Hall forthrightly explained, “Defendant Cox moves for a continuance of the November 8th trial date because of deer season.” His motion then goes on for a page and-a-half, with references from the Arkansas Game and Fish Commission about when the deer hunting will transpire in various places around Arkansas (ranging from November 11 through December 28).

Hall also cited the Commission’s statistics showing that the previous year nearly 275,000 hunting licenses had been issued in Arkansas — arguing that if the trial went ahead, about 10% of the prospective jurors would try to duck out of serving on the case because they’d be tromping around in the woods wearing red and orange. (Hall even suggested that “Some will be direct and admit it, but others will not. It will show up in other excuses from jury duty or they will just refuse to show up.”)

Sadly, the available records don’t show whether Cox got his continuance or not — but even if he did, it didn’t help. What one can find is Cox’ appeal to the Arkansas Supreme Court — following his conviction.

• Finally, in the spirit of 2020 and 2021 having had two of the worst hurricane seasons of all time, there was a another motion in August, 2006 from attorney Susan Rosenblatt, who practiced law in (of course) Miami, Florida. She only wanted more time to oppose a motion brought by the other side. She also noted that Tropical Storm Ernesto was bearing down on South Florida, causing the closing of schools and courthouses (anyway).

But just to take a belt-and-suspenders approach, Ms. Rosenblatt added that her preparation for the possible hurricane had been thrown into disarray because “undersigned counsel has seven puppies (born to her King Charles Cavalier) that are dependent upon her.”

Yes — impending hurricanes are one thing . . . but if your dog just had puppies, now THAT’S a crisis! She asked for an additional week to file her papers.

Not exactly “the dog ate my homework” — but close.