Professor Bainbridge...on law, politics, religion, culture & food

A conversation in my office of interest for civil procedure students

A more or less true story:

Colleague: Are you related to the "one Bainbridge" of Pennsylvania Railroad v. Chamberlain [Ed: 288 U.S. 333 (1933)]?

Me: Yes [Ed.: Looking sheepish].

Colleague: Did you know that Learned Hand said "one Bainbridge's" testimony was "not only 'somewhat suspicious in itself, but its contradiction ... so manifold as to leave little doubt"?

Me: Yes [Ed.: Becoming annoyed].

Colleague: Did you know that the Supreme Court of these United States said: "Not only is Bainbridge's testimony considered as a whole suspicious, insubstantial, and insufficient, but his statement ... is simply incredible"?

Me: Yes, [Ed.: expletive deleted], I did, you [Ed.: very offensive expletive deleted].

Colleague: Well, there's no need to get all huffy about it.

Me: [Ed.: A completely uncalled for string of great obscenities deleted.]