When Comedy is Necessary for Your Case

By: Libby Goodknight, Krieg DeVault LLP

It’s been said that comedy is a serious business. And whether to incorporate humor into one’s legal advocacy can be an especially serious dilemma for litigators and appellate practitioners. As the U.S. Supreme Court warns in its Guide for Counsel, “Attempts at humor usually fall flat.” Advancing arguments with a comedic flair runs the risk of offending the judge (especially if your joke is not that funny), disrespecting the parties, undermining the seriousness of the issues, and distracting from the merits of the case. But if there were ever an exception to the general rule, a case involving parody would be it.
 
On October 3, 2022, the Onion filed an amicus brief in support of an Ohio man who was arrested and prosecuted for creating a Facebook page parodying the page of his local police department. The jury found him not guilty, and he subsequently brought a civil rights action alleging violation of his First and Fourth Amendment rights. The Onion’s amicus brief is written in its well-recognized satirical style, opening with the rhetorical question: “Americans can be put in jail for poking fun at the government? This was a surprise to America’s Finest News Source and an uncomfortable learning experience for its editorial team.”
 
Here is NPR’s interview with the author of the Onion’s amicus brief, discussing the collaboration between the newspaper and its lawyers.
 
Speaking of amicus, how do you pronounce the word? IndyBar Appellate Practice Section Executive Committee members Josh Tatum and Ruth Johnson share their friendly dispute and observations on how others pronounce the word here.